Banber Erevani hamalsarani. P'ilisop'ayut'yun, hogebanut'yun.
| E - ISSN | : | 2738-2621 |
| P - ISSN | : | 1829-4553 |
In current postindustrial societies after some civilizational, political and anthropological transformations specific social-cultural space is formed, where conducive conditions for distribution of the lifestyle of nonparticipation occurred. In the article the social-cultural lifestyle of nonparticipation is viewed as a special form of sociality, which dictates such standards of the life, which are in contradiction to the vital activity of the citizen. But the social-cultural lifestyle of nonparticipation is peculiar for the transformational societies, where specific conditions for the distribution of the lifestyle of nonparticipation exist. But if the social-cultural lifestyle of nonparticipation in the postindustrial societies shows the stability and the solidity of social system, the social-cultural lifestyle of nonparticipation in the transformational societies may lead to the unpredictable and uncertain results.
This article analyzes the conception of circular determinism which has been suggested at the end of 20th century. Besides that, the differences of straightline determinism and circular determinism (the latter contains correspondence determinism, indeterminism and probable determinism) are also examined in this article. If, by means of the straightline determinism, cannot be explained why the concrete element “cooperates” with the other concrete element but not with any element, then by means of circular determinism synergy can explain the reasons of "cooperation" of elements. The place and meaning of circular determinism in the context of the synergetic aspect of the world are also examined in the article.
The article is an attempt to comprehend Fihte’s humanism (1762-1814). The gist and the specific features of Fihte’s humanism, which determine the special place of his humanism in the evolution of both German classic humanism and the world humanistic legacy as a whole are analyzed. We also underscore that some of Fihte’s fundamental humanistic principles and ideas have not lost their freshness and are no less valid and actual today than in the days of the great German thinker and humanist.
Социальная память как система сохранения и передачи коллективного опыта приобретает особое значение в условиях социальной трансформации. Помимо всего прочего, она являет собой совокупность программ развития общества. Успех или неудача общественных реформ отчасти зависит oт соответствия зафиксированной в социальной памяти информации качеству его восприятия. В переходном обществе крайне важен адекватный анализ направлений и возможных проблем информационного воздействия.

The author draws parallels between white/black magic and positive/negative social influence. It is shown, that for protection against the impact, the awareness of the aims and intentions of the subject of influence are central. This determines the freedom to accept or reject content of the influence. In other words, the motivation component of social influence is more important than its information and communication parties.
In some scientific paradigms had repeatedly taken steps to build multi-tier schemes for explaining the perception by knowing subject. In all these schemes always lacked one link through which psychologically was argued a direct contact with the knowing object, as it is not able to properly consider the objectivity of the knowing object. Rather, it is accepted only subject to their multilevel ordinary cognitive processes and functions. As a result, it’s find difficulty in defining the notions about object properties, psychic reality, the outer and inner world of man, the cognition boundaries between object and subject, etc. Offered an explanatory model of the cognitive act on sensory- perceptual- cognitive order, within which is examined the relationship between subject and object of knowledge as immediate appearance. The basic point of this concept is as follows: for understanding the laws and mechanisms of the cognitive act, to access the object of knowledge are psychologically (and logically) inappropriated to dismember the subjective reality on intermediates. Subject-object relationship should not include any intermediate carrying agent, because the argumentation that cognition is repeatedly mediated by various phenomenons outside the subject, as well as by products of previous cognitive processes are methodologically nonviable. In consequence of this view, the object of knowledge looks like gradually moved away from the observer. This article theoretically affirms the possibility of direct perception and comprehension of the objective reality by knowing subject, thanks to the system of separated cognitive functions. Due to this the world, as an information, is given to knower simultaneously (synchronously) over a range of cognitive system, respectively distributed among proper functions of the cognitive range.
In the second half of the XX century the studies on philosophy of science showed that the science is based on certain metaphysical assumptions. We can therefore assume that psychology, as a science, in some way must also be connected with the metaphysical postulates and principles determining the origin and development of the psychic. This fact is in contradiction with the point that in the methodology of modern psychology, as we know, there was no place for the metaphysical approach after the methodological transformation of L. S. Vigotsky. However, in XIX and early in XX centuries the situation was quite different. Among European psychologists, such as I. Herbart, V. Wundt, W. James and K. Jaspers, in particular, turned to metaphysics. By the end of the XIX century the interest towards metaphysics increased in Russia, too. The significant role of metaphysical ideas in the study of psychic was recognized by V. Soloviev, S. Troubetzkoy, N. Grot, S. Frank, P. Florensky, G. Chelpanov and others. However, as mentioned above, after Marxism had been attracted in psychology by L. S. Vigotsky as its methodological basis, metaphysics was banished from psychology as a field of idealistic knowledge. It was only late in XX century that such scholars as V. M. Allakhverdov, V. P. Zinchenko, A. I Mirakyan, A. V. Petrovsky and M. G. Yaroshevski again demonstrated the possibility and necessity of application metaphysical ideas and concepts in psychology.