DOI: 10.25136/2409-8728.2023.9.43767

EDN: WISYBN

Abstract: The subject of this work is methodological approaches to the study of religiosity in posttraditional conditions. Posttraditionality is a "fluid modernity", an "elusive world" is an era of mobile and indefinite cultural forms. In the conditions of posttraditionality, social reality is filled with a multitude of phenomena of indeterminate religiosity – quasi-religions, pseudo-religions, crypto-religions, etc., which cannot even be uniquely identified as religious within the framework of classical approaches, but to neglect their religious elements would mean incompleteness of their study. The purpose of this study is to propose a methodological approach to the study of religion and religiosity in a post–traditional society, which allows explicating its borderline, hidden and implicit forms. This goal requires and implies the formation of an appropriate understanding of religion and religiosity, this approach is foundational. The study proposes a methodological approach based on the synthesis of phenomenological, structural-analytical, hermeneutic approaches. Its basis is the distinction between religiosity as a function of internal experience and religion as institutionalized practices and ideas. Religiosity is a constant function of a person's connection with the subjective ultimate foundations of his existence, which serves as the foundation of a person's sense-setting and goal-setting, conditioning his self in those components that are connected with reality inaccessible to experience and reason. Religiosity expressed externally of a person collides with the totality of objective and objectified structures of reality, and the intentions of other people. The interaction of specific living conditions of people and their intentions generated by religiosity lead to the construction of practices that, through their habitualization, signification and institutionalization, form religion as a social institution. The intended result of the proposed approach can be described as a project of "cartography" of infinitely diverse phenomena of the religious life of modernity in its hidden, shadow forms – where the religious is implicit, borderline – but at the same time functional from the point of view of ultimate goal-setting.

DOI: 10.25136/2409-8728.2023.9.41051

EDN: VGYEKE

Abstract: A development of ethical thought by Neo-Hindu philosophers in Nineteenth– early Twentieth century Bengal is depicted in the article based on hermeneutic readings of the texts by Bankimchandra Chattopaddhyay, Swami Vivekananda, Aurobindo Ghosh. From the one hand, Neo-Hindu philosophers continue Rammohun Roy’s line of criticism of Indian society’s moral condition, consciousness and conduct. From the other hand, they formed their own ethical conceptions to present Hindu normative ethics. The research demonstrated for the first time the becoming of Modern Indian ethics in the conceptions of Bengal Neo-Hindu thinkers who are the real founders of ethics as philosophical discipline in India. Growing up from indigenous ancient tradition of exegesis of scriptures, Neo-Hindu conceptions of ethics are the new adogmatic interpretation of the native religious ethics in broad context of Modernity. The Bengal Renaissance thinkers had made an intellectual breakthrough in Indian philosophy. The result of intellectual works are following: 1) bringing morality to the fore in dharma to differentiate ethical issue-area as meaningful in thought and practice; 2) definition of universality of Hinduism’ s moral consciousness in the core; 3) normative ethics along with its imperatives and rules had presented as established and fixed in ancient Hindu scriptures; 4) the ethical ideal was found in images of sages and epic heroes as well as in their teachings; 5) ethical norms and ideal are practically oriented for the criticism of society’s morals and future development.

DOI: 10.25136/2409-8728.2023.9.43649

EDN: XTKBNA

Abstract: The article analyzes the ways of expressing the methodological message of P. Feyerabend, implemented by modern digital reality. The object of the study is the specifics of digital reality, and the subject is the forms of implementation of P. Feyerabend's methodological message in it. Using hypothetical-deductive and hermeneutic approaches, the author correlates the positions of P. Feyerabend's epistemological anarchism with the features of modern cyberphysical reality. The comparison of the first "counter-rule" – the principle of proliferation is carried out in relation to the understanding of hybrid society and the metaverse. The principle of incommensurability, understood by Feyerabend as a condition for the absence of criteria for assessing the truth of the theory, is compared with the heterogeneity of the digital environment. The main conclusions of the study are the highlighted parallels between the principle of proliferation and the constant transformation of the actors of the digital society, evaluated from the standpoint of expanding the possibilities of creativity. The principle of incommensurability is compared with the constant generation of new conventions by the digital environment, the presence of heterogeneous modalities. The modern way of thinking is positioned in the discourse of the given "counter-rules" as the implementation of complex network thinking. Feyerabend's premise for the perception of archaic man correlates with the idea of cybernetic animism. The scientific novelty of the work consists in fixing the parallels of Feyerabend's theoretical premises and the reality of the modern hybrid world with its ways of thinking, revealing the internal contradiction of Feyerabend's position and the ambiguity of the embodiment of his methodological guidelines in a modern hybrid society.

DOI: 10.25136/2409-8728.2023.9.43826

EDN: XTTJZH

Abstract: The article deals with the views of S. L. Frank on the problem of the creation of the world, their critical assessment is given, made by V. V. Zenkovsky in his History of Russian Philosophy. The difference in the understanding of this problem by thinkers is stated. S. L. Frank accepted the pantheistic concept of the emanation of the Absolute. Accordingly, he made a conclusion about the essential connection between God and creation, V. V. Zenkovsky fundamentally rejected pantheism, insisting on the essential difference between God and creation. During the study, methods of comparative analysis were used, which involve a reasoned and consistent identification of similarities and differences in the philosophical positions of S. L. Frank and V. V. Zenkovsky. Hermeneutic methods were also used to better understand the semantic content of texts. It is argued that "antinomian panentheism", which S. L. Frank adhered to, is a modification of the pantheistic worldview. Therefore, his ideological position was rightly criticized by V. V. Zenkovsky from a Christian theistic point of view. The author makes an assumption that the reason why the philosopher, realizing the vulnerability of his views, nevertheless did not leave them, was the prevalence of the psychology of the Christian religion over its ontology in his religious experience. For S. L. Frank, the personal connection between God and man was extremely important, but he believed that church authority rejected its necessity. The author of the article considers this opinion of the philosopher to be inadequate, since at the Palamite Councils in Christian dogmatics a definition was developed on the synergistic interaction of God and man. This opened up for the latter the possibility of deification by grace.

DOI: 10.25136/2409-8728.2023.9.39702

EDN: XUXELV

Abstract: The object of this study is the archetypal scenarios of the future proposed by the American researcher Jim Dator. The subject of the study is the images of the future of modern Russian cinema. The main purpose of the article is to correlate the models of "continued growth", "collapse", "discipline", "transformation" of the Dator with modern Russian films containing social expectations of society regarding the future and ideas about it. To date, the images of the future in general and the images of the future captured in the domestic cinema, in particular, have been little studied, which is the relevance of this study. The image of the future is understood as a holistic picture of the future that exists in a certain society at a certain period of its development. The novelty of the presented material lies in the correlation of archetypal scenarios with modern Russian films devoted to various versions of the future. The article applied its own methodology for the study of feature films, which allowed us to consider not only the content of films, but also their visual and sound series of films. The main conclusion of the study is that the selected J. Yes, archetypal scenarios are reflected to varying degrees in modern Russian films. The most common archetype is "Discipline", more saturated in visual terms, but a less common variant is the "Collapse" scenario, the third most common is the "Transformation" archetype, and the least present in Russian cinema is the "Continued Growth" scenario.

DOI: 10.25136/2409-8728.2023.9.40562

EDN: XVAJQQ

Abstract: Cultural heritage is a special phenomenon of human culture. There are definitions of heritage as a substratum of identity, evidence of the development of civilization, an artifact connecting the present and the past, etc. The actualization of cultural heritage, its return to spiritual and economic circulation can serve ideological tasks. Heritage can act as a symbol of the ideological foundations of society, demonstrate strategic priorities that are of particular importance for modernity. Cultural heritage, being a product of creative activity of generations, is formed by a unique combination of circumstances, and, as a result, is unique and non-renewable. All these factors demonstrate the special potential of the heritage, which should be recognized as practically inexhaustible. For this set of reasons, there is a difficulty in interpreting the concept of an object of cultural heritage. This field of scientific search remains an exclusively debatable space with many options for interpreting the key concept. The purpose of the study is to consider the interpretations of the concept of cultural heritage and to determine the specifics of its nature. Simultaneous reference to related concepts allows us to expand the idea of cultural heritage as a collective historical memory expressed in tangible and intangible artifacts. The interdisciplinary methodology based on the comparative method is designed to determine the most concise and capacious definition of heritage, which will reveal the features of its potential actualization in the interests of the state and society.

DOI: 10.25136/2409-8728.2023.9.43571

EDN: XVJEQJ

Abstract: Literary criticism was an important part of Western literary theory in the 20th century and has not lost its importance to this day. Criticism has an active influence on the literary process, as well as directly on the formation of public consciousness. This article discusses two important approaches, the principle of literary criticism. The archetypal literary criticism and the theory of intertextuality. Archetypal literary criticism is a theory that interprets a text by focusing on mythological motifs and archetypes in narrative, symbols, imagery, and character types that recur in different literary works. Analysis of the inclusions of intertext in the text of a work of art gives reason to consider them as one of the most important devices in the writer's stylistic system. The ability to integrate elements of another text into one's own work and introduce one's own text into the public consciousness is called "intertextualization" within the framework of this theory. Intertextuality is a common property of texts, expressed in the presence of links between them, due to which texts (or parts of them) can explicitly or implicitly refer to each other in a variety of ways. It is worth noting that the archetypal literary criticism and the theory of intertextuality have deep internal theoretical connections, which boil down to three main points: these are literary repetitions, general views on literature, and the consideration of literature as a repository of memory. Although these theories arose in the era of different cultural and historical paradigms - structuralism and post-structuralism, they have much in common in terms of connotation. Being different theoretical systems of literary criticism, archetypal criticism and intertextuality are closely connected by the presence of an element of psychological criticality in both. This article searches for similarities between the two indicated systems in these three aspects and substantiates their theoretical connection, which proves the complementary nature of these two theories.