Abstract: The goal of this work is to establish the specificity of the “diffusion of values” in modern global world on the example of the phenomenon that received conventional name of “mythologization of law”. The subject of this research is the transformation process of value foundation of legal consciousness, substantiated on the one hand, by gradual increase of the role of custom in law enforcement practice, and on the other – by emergence of the model of “global law” that ensures humanity with a set of unified norms, which unlike the norms of international law, feature enforcement sustained by the power of the state. The research method became the philosophical comparativism, which allows analyzing heterogenic occurrences within the framework of the general frames of the myth (custom and/or mythologem of “global law”) and logos (positive law), basing on the positions of acknowledgement of cultural diversity and irreducibility to each other. The scientific novelty consists in clarification of the “paradoxes of law enforcement” in terms of “mythological” interpretations of the law of two types – custom law and universal norm of law; as well as in substantiation of interrelation between the legal “universalities” of global world and national legal systems. A hypothesis is verified, according to which the value “negatives” of law manifest depending on the historically specific sociocultural foundations, and on the institutional mechanism sustaining their action. A huge role continues to play the national state, with the developed system of mechanisms for ensuring functionality of its legal system comparing to other agents of law (network actors, international nongovernmental organizations, etc.). The drawn conclusions lie in clarification of the specificity of “mythologization of law” in modern society, which allows determining the boundaries of permissible interpretations of the “universal human values” and “custom norms” as aligned with the boundaries of the established national legal systems.

Keywords: law pluralism, universal global law, positive law, common law, customs, mytholodisation of law, diffusion of valuables, sociocultural transformation, philosophy of culture, enforcement paradoxes

Abstract: This article examines the metaphysical nature of Samkhya and the concept of subject within it; then the author refers to the polemics between Buddhists and Samkhyaks as it is described in the passage Atmapariksha from Shantarakshita's Tattvasamgraha (VIII century) with the commentary "Panjika” of Shri Kamalashila. The subject of this research is the concept of subject within the philosophical system of Samkhya as it is given in Samkhya Karika and section on the polemics with Samkhya of the chapter Atmapariksha from Shantarakshita's Tattvasamgraha with the commentary "Panjika” of Shri Kamalashila. The object of this research is the Samkhya Karika and Shantarakshita's Tattvasamgraha. The key research method is the classical historical-philosophical method suggesting the combination of several methodological approaches. Genetic approach, comprehended as a method of studying philosophical concepts and notions, is based on the analysis of their origin and development. It implies consideration of the objects in evolutionary perspective, in dynamics of their historical development, therefore requires the establishment of initial conditions, key stage, main trends and strategies of development. The main goal of such research lies in identification of connection between the objects in time, studying of transitions from the historically older forms of philosophical (or even pre-philosophical) reflection towards the historically more recent. The author’s special contribution consists in conducting the first even research in Russia and in Russian language of the chapter “Discussion with the representatives of Samkhya on Atman” of the passage Atmapariksha from Shantarakshita's Tattvasamgraha with the commentary "Panjika” of Shri Kamalashila based on the original translation from Sanskrit.

Keywords: Samkhya, non-self, self, Tattvasamgraha, Kamalashila, Shantarakshita, subject, anatman, Purusha, buddhi

Abstract: Scientific knowledge traditionally qualifies for objectivity, regardless of what manifested as the object of cognition – nature or society. Are there crucial differences in this regard between the natural and humanitarian sciences? Is anything changing, when a human and the society he lives in become the object of cognition? The subject of this research is the peculiarities of articulation of the problem of objectivity applicable for the sciences on human and society, as well as differences in interpretation of this problem in classical and nonclassical philosophy. The research is conducted on the basis of analysis and interpretation of texts and ideas of the representatives of classical philosophy along with the philosophers and sociologists of the past two centuries. The author claims that the law of the sociology of knowledge, which proves the fundamental dependence of social knowledge from social interests, should be applied not only for debunking the ideological illusions of the others, but also for analyzing the own ideas. The principles of objective scientific analysis in sociology require that the researcher’s personal ideological position would not affect his works; in order to achieve this, he must be aware of the level of its influence upon cognitive activity. However, it is merely impossible to fully apprehend the historical, social and cultural determination of our understanding. Therefore, the objectivity of natural scientific type in socio-humanitarian sciences may not be feasible. Most often, objectivity is being reached through constant attention to the potential ideological substantiation of personal ideas.

Keywords: social determination of knowledge, sociology of knowledge, ideology, social interests, non-classical philosophy, classical philosophy, objectivity of knowledge, social and human sciences, transcendetality, subject-object relations

Abstract: The subject of this research is the focal concept of semiotics – the sign. Traditionally, this concept is viewed from the standpoint of perceiving subject. Such approach untenably complicated and confuses the picture, as well as leads to the emergence of logical contradictions and ambiguities. A number of authors, giving characteristics to the current state of the science of signs, claim that the goal of building an adequate concept of sign is yet to be achieved. If an a century-old work over the concept of “sign” led to such result, it is reasonable to change the approach to the problem. Therefore, the author substitutes the traditional subjective approach with the objective approach, previously unused for the description of signs. Based on the new approach, it is established that the object becomes a sign thanks to the link with meaning, which may be objective. The author suggest a nee w objectivizes definition of sign without a mention of the perceiving subject; reveals how the presented sign substitutes its meaning; develops the idea on the origin, existence and application of the natural and conventional signs. The article also reviews the peculiarities of creation and distribution of conventional signs, creation and juxtaposition of the supposed meanings. The author formulates a hypothesis on evolution of signs from the natural to conventional, as well as presents a new scheme of the links between sign and meaning. The scheme demonstrates that the subject may be used as a sign only if it possesses a mental link between the images of sign and meaning. The approached used in the article allowed eliminating internal conflicts of semiotics, get a new perspective on the essence of sign, clarify the dialectics of signs and meanings, as well as provide a broader and more logical description of a sign.

Keywords: classification of signs, usage of sign, definition of sign, existence of sign, objective approach, mental image, relation, denoter, sign, semiotics

Abstract: The subject of this research is the philosophical practices of existential openness that allow to develop trust to life essential for comprehensive self-enhancement. Existential openness is the ability of an individual to objectively and justly perceive, digest and interpret real events and personal emotions. Objective realization is possible only if an individual gets rid of stereotypes and patterns, overcome disaccord between living and thinking, using meditative practices of Taoism, Buddhism and Zen Buddhism. The study is structured on the basis of comparative analysis of meditative practices in relation to the methods of existential philosophy, phenomenology and humanistic psychology. Meditative practices enhance understanding of openness, acceptance of the world and existence within it. Existential approach helps to identify the profound problems of individual existence associated with realization of unsupportiveness of thinking in a life choice situation. Phenomenological approach contribute to detection of cognitive, speech and behavioral stereotypes of the lifeworld that allow the phenomena to speak for themselves based on their unique meaning. The authors sees the root of the problem in disaccord between living and thinking determined as a “psychological illness” of modern civilization, which main symptom is the desire to assert one’s self in the word, strive for dominance over nature, other people and yourself. Human mind is enslaved by the distorted idea of the due, often implicating a set of social and cultural stereotypes of one or another historical era, rather than philosophical desire to be authentic, open to truth. The article describes the philosophical practices that help to overcome disaccord between living and thinking, which disturbs the objective perception of reality.

Keywords: intuition, being, philosophical practices, existential openness, Buddhism, Taoism, thinking, phenomenology, existentialism, meditation