Каталог статей из сборников научных конференций и научных журналов- Cultural space in the era of globalization: revisiting the transformation problem

V. N. Goncharov, Doctor of Law, assistant professor

North Caucasus Federal University,

Stavropol, Russia

Strengthening of interaction and interpenetration of cultures and civilizations, homogenizing influence of western mass culture, isolationism, revival of ancient cultural and religious traditions, formation of transnational network cultures – all these diverse, including multidirectional and even resisting each other processes developing at the same timeб give the grounds for the most different estimates of the events and scenarios of the future [7, p. 123–128].

No matter how the rapprochement of cultures was strong, their codes remain so far. The West hasn't turned into the East, and the East – into the West, cultural and civilization distinctions still remain accurate. However changes in the cultural worlds are very considerable, and the result is not only the unification affecting, as a rule, certain spheres of culture, but also unprecedented strengthening of heterogeneity [6, p. 18–22]. This fact was already repeatedly noted in scientific literature, and it is more often referred to explosion of polymorphism, nonsystem excess variety, disordered set or congestions of various cultural forms, each of which defends its peculiarity and importance [9, p. 29–31].

Special attention should be paid to the fact that in the formed post-nonclassical paradigm nearly the major role is played by the idea of organic inclusiveness of the person in the natural universum marking refusal of anthropocentrism and return, at the new level, to temporarily substituted  cosmocentric or antropocosmocentric attitude [16, p. 241]. Awareness of exhaustion of many values and installations inherent, first of all, in the modern western society is the cornerstone of this process: individualism and rationalism, opposition of the person to the nature and socio-cultural to biological, the active and converting pragmatic relation to the nature, orientation to continuous unlimited growth and innovative activity [15, p. 82–89]. The paradigm of previous civilization development in general is exposed to critical reconsideration up to the ideas (in deep ecology) about need of curtailment of civilization activity itself [11, p. 396–402].

The problem of development of the cosmocentric consciousness demanding the relevant theoretical base allows much room for updating characteristic of the East, space model (archaic on genesis), in which there are three main components: person, society, nature, they are interdependent and form uniform system [8, p. 37–40]. At the same time the keen interest wakens. The appeal to not western traditions, and first of all to natural cosmocentric religions, is submitted in this situation quite natural. According to V. S. Stepin today when the mankind has faced a problem of the choice of new strategy of survival, many ideas developed in the traditional east doctrines are coordinated with the new values and world outlook meanings arising in the subsoil of technogenic culture of the XX century.

At the same time high value is got to east religious philosophical doctrines by the principles of interaction of the person and space: orientation not on redoing of the world, but on self-restriction and self-education, on enclosure in circulation of the space organism and ability to coordinate the activity with natural imperatives and rhythms [2, p. 142–145].

The worldview concept of the modern scientific paradigm is much closer to sources, than to directly previous scientific paradigm [1, p. 83–86]. Therefore the most considerable, revolutionary changes promoting really creative development are now made in science. Though extent of its rationalization and modernization in this sphere is very high, it is not about a game with separate images and motives of east philosophical and religious traditions, but it concerns attempts to create on their basis new vision of the world [14, p. 39–44]. Thanks to scientific revolution so called different is an integral part of cultural life of the West, and it is incorporated in the new scientific epistema which will define spiritual life of postmodern era.

Nowadays very deep conversion is carried out in the western culture. So far it is difficult to define what will represent result of East and West mix, eastern or after all western beginning significantly transformed, but which remains true to itself, will take the dominating positions. Formation and statement of the new worldview paradigm is not finished yet though its impact on public consciousness is already noticeable [3, p. 80–85]. In some directions of post-nonclassical science installation on a dialog with east cultural traditions is declared: the transpersonal psychology, synergetrics proclaiming basic relationship of synergy thinking with Taoism and Hinduism, partly coevolution approach [10, p. 17–20]. However it must be admitted that hybrid forms, generally parascientific or pseudo-scientific character are still most actively produced by periphery, and first of all by powerful movements of the western and east spiritual and metaphysical traditions and their synthesis with the modern quantum physics, psychology, biology and ecology is the main point of the program of formation of holistic worldview [13, p. 73–78].

It is very soon to speak about results of the dialogue of West and East which is developed beneath our eyes which has (using the words of Y. Heyzing) to be filtered into culture and to enter public consciousness [4, p. 118–124]. But it may happen that these revolutionary shifts give wide opportunities for distribution in the West of special model of hybridization in which values of east cultures will come to the forefront, that is so called different will prevail over  or, at least, qualitatively  transform [12, p. 282–284]. Anyway formation of a new paradigm and expansion of the sphere of its influence, most likely, will promote increase in number of hybrid forms and will play, eventually, a constructive role in difficult process of completion of the western culture: through return to basic cosmocentric cultural programs and at the same time - through their revaluation, reconsideration and development of the new forms adequate to the new historical condition of society which gave place  to the transitional era and new formed subject [5, p. 139–144].

Bibliography

1. Бакланов И. С. Социокультурное и коммуникативное наполнение понятия рациональности в современной социальной философии // Вестник Северо-Кавказского федерального университета. – 2011. – № 5. – С. 83–86.

2. Бакланова О. А Методологические измерения социальности в современной социально-теоретической рефлексии // Вестник Северо-Осетинского государственного университета имени Коста Левановича Хетагурова. – 2013. – № 2. – С. 142–145.

3. Болховской А. Л., Говердовская Е. В., Ивченко А. В. Образование в глобализирующемся мире: философский взгляд // Экономические и гуманитарные исследования регионов. – 2013. – № 5. – С. 80–85.

4. Говердовская Е. В., Добычина Н. В. Взаимные референции между реальным и виртуальным пространством: новая коммуникационная среда // Социально-гуманитарные знания. – 2014. – № 7. – С. 118–124.

5. Деркачев Г. И., Бакланов И. С. Проблемы и истоки легитимации власти в современной России // Социально-гуманитарные знания. – 2009. – № 9. – С. 139–144.

6. Ерохин А. М. Религиозное сознание в контексте общественных отношений // Гуманитарные и социально-экономические науки. – 2015. – № 2 (81). – С. 18–22.

7. Ерохин А. М. Научно-информационный аспект исследования социокультурного развития общества в области культуры и искусства // Экономические и гуманитарные исследования регионов. – 2015. – № 2. – С. 123–128.

8. Камалова О. Н., Джиоева Д. А. Перспективы развития сенсорных технологий и проблема расширения чувственных возможностей человека // Северо-Восточный научный журнал. – 2011. – № 1. – С. 37–40.

9. Камалова О. Н. «Созерцание» в философско-культурологических построениях И. Ильина // Гуманитарные и социально-экономические науки. – 2012. – № 6. – С. 29–31. 

10. Колосова О. Ю. Синергетические аспекты развития современного общества // Гуманитарные и социально-экономические науки. – 2012. – № 4. – С. 17–20.

11. Колосова О. Ю. Информация в системе управления: социальный аспект // European Social Science Journal. – 2013. – № 12-2 (39). – С. 396–402.

12. Лобейко Ю. А. Социальная активность личности в обществе: социально-педагогические аспекты формирования // European Social Science Journal. – 2014. – № 7-2 (46). – С. 282–284.

13. Лобейко Ю. А. Социально-психологические проблемы общения в контексте межличностных общественных отношений // Экономические и гуманитарные исследования регионов. – 2015. – № 4. – С. 73–78.

14. Матяш Т. П., Несмеянов Е. Е. Православный тип культуры: идея и реальность // Гуманитарные и социально-экономические науки. – 2015. – № 3 (82). – С. 39–44.

15. Месхи Б. Ч., Несмеянов Е. Е. Теология или лженаука: что на самом деле разрушает отечественное образование // Гуманитарные и социальные науки. – 2014. – № 4. – С. 82–89.

16. Микеева О. А. Анализ методологии и направлений исследований современной социальной реальности // Социально-гуманитарные знания. –2009. – № 9. – С. 241.