tradition

Introduction. This article examines the role of memory in communication between people, as well as in such a process as recognition. No communication is feasible without the primary recognition of one subject by the other. Recognition is a way of holding a subject in memory through the connection of the less significant with the more significant. Accordingly, recognition becomes social not when it has occurred, but after it has been fixed. Theoretical analysis.

In the recent years the real storm of interest to the concept of «identity» is observed. The problem of identity became strained when the society had lost the contact to power of nature and tradition and faced the necessity to make self-dependent decisions. Psychoanalysts considered identification as one of defense mechanism. Tradition and memory play the key role in every problem of identity. 

The article discusses the problem of the worldview foundations of intercultural dialogue between Russia and China at the turn of XXI century. The author analyzes the dynamic of development of philosophical processes in Russia and China at the beginning of XXI century. The article is focused at the omnidirectional vectors of various trends that appear in the continuum of philosophical cultures of these countries.

The article is devoted to the philosophical analysis of the social memory with the comparative historical method of genealogy, which allows to consider a person in its entirety with the world, that means in the unity of the cultural and social links between generations. The possibility of using a philosophical genealogy method to the phenomenon of the social memory is revealed through the categorical comparison of the source of social life and customs.

Article discusses the phenomenon of the «creative class», which formation leads to a transformation in the structure of society. Representatives of the new class are considered from the social,  economic, personal and professional positions. Modern concept of creativity plays different from the traditional form of thinking. This makes it possible to increase the level of innovation development of society. Compares traditional and creative types of communities are considered their positive and negative features. Creative class is analyzed in the field of domestic social space.

The article is devoted to the philosophical, religious and world views of A. S. Khomyakov and I. V. Kireevsky. Based on the analysis of the authors’ creative and epistolary heritage, the authors show the ambiguity of their judgment from the point of view of Orthodox theology. The hermeneutic method allowed the author to analyze the primary sources of A. S. Khomyakov and I. V. Kireevsky, their contemporaries and followers from the point of view of Orthodox theology to determine the degree of their compliance with Orthodox doctrine.

The article considers the mental foundations of the cultural specificity of the Eastern Christian civilization based on the cultural-historical method. The purpose of the article is to clarify the historical model which formed the mental differences between Western European and Russian cultures. It is shown that the roots of the civilizational division of Europe into Western and Eastern ones are largely determined by the special way in which “barbarian” ethnic groups were attached to the Christian and ancient traditions.

The reader is presented with the manifesto of the phenomenological substantialism of the Nizhny Novgorod philosopher V. A. Kutyrev, published in the form of his new monograph. The departure to machine and digital immortality is criticized by the Volga thinker as yet another seduction of a technocratic civilization, digital self-deception. Kutyrev Vladimir Aleksandrovich is known as a social philosopher, a leftist conservative, a supporter of controlled progress. His papers and books are an event for the Russian intellectual life.