DOI: 10.25136/2409-8728.2023.5.40857

EDN: QBLJUF

Abstract: The subject of the study is the characteristic of the essence of the social phenomenon "consumer society" through the prism of the views of foreign thinkers of the second half of the XX-early XXI centuries. The philosophical and socio-humanitarian theories of the "consumer society" proposed by European thinkers are considered in detail, their classification is carried out and the conceptual apparatus is characterized. The author substantiates the thesis that, representing a dynamic and self-developing system, the "consumer society" invariably finds its reflection in various, often contradictory conceptual models. These contradictions serve as the basis for the development of alternative philosophical methods and approaches to the development of modern societies and the resolution of problems related to consumption. It is shown that modern theories of "consumer society" make it possible to comprehend not only consumer behavior itself, but also the diverse problems of society fixed by this concept, such as manipulation of consciousness, identity construction, the functioning of mass communication media, the socio-cultural significance of social reality. The author analyzed the evolution of the concept of "consumption" using socio-cultural, socio-economic, socio-philosophical approaches. An attempt is being made to define terms such as "consumer society" and "consumerism" more clearly and to trace the interaction of these terms within the boundaries of socio-economic transformations taking place in the modern world. It is important to conclude that modern concepts of "consumer society" make it possible to comprehend not only consumer behavior itself, but also the variety of social problems that are fixed with the help of this concept: manipulation of consciousness, identity construction, socio-cultural significance of social reality, the functioning of mass communication media, and others.

DOI: 10.25136/2409-8728.2023.5.39624

EDN: MKXAFU

Abstract: Specific character of subject-object relations in humanities is analysed. The article gives the critique of naturalist approaches, which demand to determine social events on the basis of external observational features. It is proved that it is impossible to fix social events without taking into account agents’ motives and without references to the meaning which events has to them. Meaning is the most important concept in humanities, so it is impossible to describe social reality ignoring the world of meanings. Social reality is not independent from our ways of understanding and interpreting meanings. Moreover, our representations of social reality are the most important part of this reality. From the other side, man as a subject of humanities is formed by society and culture which he tries to study. He cannot regard them from outside as an usual external object. We cannot exactly calculate in what degree our thought is determined by socio-cultural factors in order to deactivate those determinations on the way to objective knowledge. Socio-humanitarian knowledge has transcendental status. Discussing how socio-class interests or language effect our knowledge we concern fundamental conditions of cognitive experience as such. Because of that natural sciences’ (technological) model of knowledge cannot be applied in humanities. Here we do not investigate some outer object for the sake of manipulation. We make our self-understanding deeper. Double mutual penetration of subject and object in humanities constitutes its fundamental difference from natural sciences.

DOI: 10.25136/2409-8728.2023.5.39550

EDN: RKBMTW

Abstract: The article is devoted to transrationality as a methodological principle of cognition associated with the study of the issues of metaphysics and the irrational in the philosophical concepts of Russian thinkers S. L. Frank and N. O. Lossky. The author turns to the study of ideas related to the theory of being and the theory of knowledge of thinkers, divine and human existence, namely, the essence of man and his significance in social and internal existence. In the proposed article, the author explores the religious views of thinkers within the framework of the metaphysical tradition, in which philosophers built their worldview through the prism of transrationality and metalogicality as principles of cognition, construction and formation of nature, both Absolute Being in general and its aspects in particular. The essence of the Supercosmic principle and the Incomprehensible, shown by N. O. Lossky and S. L. Frank in the framework of their worldview systems, is also considered, attempts to overcome the objective world and comprehend the super-logical, super-rational through rationality are considered. Along with this, the author touches upon the issues of faith and its role and significance in the comprehension of the Incomprehensible and Supercosmic principles, and also pays attention to antinomian cognition as the principle of cognition of the mysterious - hidden and experienced - reality. By means of which both thinkers build complex philosophical and theological systems that are significant for the entire philosophy of Russia in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. And also refers to the unity and interconnection of the philosophical concepts of thinkers to religious beliefs within the framework of Holy Scripture.

DOI: 10.25136/2409-8728.2023.5.40550

EDN: LWMEFI

Abstract: In the present work the concept of social progress in the works of historian M. N. Petrov is considered from the positions of comparativist method, system-historical aspect of systematic approach and B. Russell's principle of individuality. The work describes the theoretical and methodological basis of the concept, its application to the study of historical process and moral education of man. In the work it is pointed out that in spite of the originality of his approach the historian does not go beyond the general problems of Russian philosophical thought on social development, referring to the ethical comparison of the progress of man and humanity, as well as the question of justification of violence for the benefit of the future. The article analyzes similarities and differences with the views of such prominent contemporary historians as V. I. Herier, N. I. Kareev, M. M. Kovalevsky, and I. V. Luchitsky. According to the conclusions of the article, the evolution of historiosophic knowledge in the Russian historical science led to a rapid transition from empirical and metaphysical views to empirical and ethical ones and fading of interest to the concept of M. N. Petrov. The paper proves that the criteria of social progress, developed by the scientist of Kharkov University, formed the basis for the study of progress by Russian religious philosophy and Eurasianism.

DOI: 10.25136/2409-8728.2023.5.39123

EDN: LYJWYN

Abstract: This paper examines the philosophical and religious creativity of the Great Russian writer and thinker Leo Tolstoy as a founder of national culture of the Silver Age. The author of this article argues that Tolstoy's works, both artistic and figurative, as well as his journalistic works, were imbued with religious content, which constituted the generic specificity of the culture of the Silver Age. For Tolstoy culture is based on spiritual and moral principles, which are inseparable from the Christian and religious foundation, which was the subject of this study. The aim of the paper was to identify and analyze such fundamental categories of Tolstoy's philosophy as Christian love and social nonviolence. Love according to Tolstoy is an emblematic fragment of the religious worldview, and non-resistance to evil by violence acts as a social and moral component, which is the only way to break the vicious circle of social and individual evil in human society. To prove his philosophical generalizations, Tolstoy makes extensive use of historical-cultural methodology and, as a rational thinker, uses the Cartesian paradigm of the priority of rationality and evidence. Tolstoy's unconditional faith is deeply rationalistic in character, as well illustrated by his commitment to moral utilitarianism or moral pragmatism. The problems and content of the article are relevant in light of the challenges that have become deeply pressing today in the upbringing of the younger generations. The conclusions of the work are significant not only in historical and philosophical terms, but they contribute to the substantiation of the idea of the importance of religious consciousness for contemporary Russian society.