Abstract: The subject of this research is being and its reproduction in various worldview forms, ant/or its mystification. The research is divided into four key problems. The first one is the combination of being and its mystification on the example of the works of V. A. Kutyrev: recognizing being, he denies the ontological meaning of dialectics which represents a so-called second layer in determination of being, expressing it in the system of universal categories that form an “attributive model of any object”. The second – is an analysis of the attempts of imagining “technologization” (emerging from theory into practice technocratic reasoning) as an exit beyond the boundaries of posing and solution of the main question of philosophy. The third – is the examination of differences in the foundations of mythological, religious, and philosophical beliefs, which determine the specificity of each of the stated forms, predestining their ability or inability towards reproduction of the characteristics of being, in other words their mystification. The fourth one restores the ontological content of procedural categories and their methodological importance. Special attention is given to the principle of unity of the historical and the logical. The author believes that currently the fundamental values of dialectical-materialistic methodology are put behind by the conjuncture circumstances, the applied value of the falling under the authority of the capital and officialdom of knowledge, which becomes a commodity. Scientific novelty is characteristic to all four parts of the article and consists in the following:   The ontological content of dialectics as a second layer in determination of being becomes restored; history of humanity is considered to be the third level of determination of being in its highest form; The philosophical foundations of technologization and technocratic thinking, shifting from the theoretical level into practical level are being defined; An analysis of the qualitative differences within the foundations of mythological, religious, and philosophical outlook is being presented. The connection of technologization with the religious and idealistic beliefs, enclosed in the principle of transcendence, is being revealed.  

Keywords: dialectic of irreversibility, philosophical, religious, mythological, technologization, mystification, being, comparison, transcendental idealism, post-modernism

References:
Khyubner B. Martin Khaydegger – oderzhimyy bytiem. SPb.: Akademiya issledovaniya kul'tury, 2011. 171 s.
Zinov'ev A.A. Ideologiya partii budushchego. M.: Eksmo, 2003. S. 240.
Bekon F. Sochineniya v dvukh tomakh. T. 1. M.: Mysl', 1971. 590 s.
Golosovker E.Ya. Logika mifa. M.: Nauka, 1987. 216 s.
Arnobiy. Protiv yazychnikov. SPb: Izd-vo SPbGU, 2008. 398 s.
Arsen'ev V.K. Izbrannye proizvedeniya. Khabarovsk: Knizhnoe izdatel'stvo, 1997. T. 1. 656 s.
Marks K., Engel's F. Soch. T. 46. Ch. 1. S. 47.
Mamardashvili M.K. Strela poznaniya (nabrosok estestvennoistoricheskoy gnoseologii). M.: Yazyki russkoy kul'tury, 1997. 304 s.
Dionisiy Areopagit. Korpus sochineniy s tolkovaniyami prep. Maksima Ispovednika. SPb, 2010. S. 409-411.
Chanyshev A.N. Kurs lektsiy po drevney filosofii. M.: Vysshaya shkola, 1981. 374 s.
Losev A.F. Estetika Vozrozhdeniya. M.: Mysl', 1978. S. 138-143.
Ortega-i-Gasset Kh. Vokrug Galileya (skhema krizisov) // Ortega-i-Gasset Kh. Izbrannye trudy. M.: Ves' mir, 1997. 233-403 s.
Nikiforov A.L. Chto takoe «postneklassicheskaya nauka»? // Epistemologiya i filosofiya nauki. 2013. T. XXXVI, № 2, s. 63-64.
Losev A.F. Platonovskiy ob'ektivnyy idealizm i ego tragicheskaya sud'ba // Platon i ego epokha. K 2400-letiyu so dnya rozhdeniya. M.: Nauka, 1979. S. 9-57.
Prokhorov M.M. Ekonomizm kak modal'nost' beschelovechnosti // Mirovozzrencheskaya paradigma v filosofii: Modusy i modal'nosti prakticheskie i teoreticheskie: Monografiya / Pod red. prof. M.M. Prokhorova. Nizhniy Novgorod: NF FGBOU VPO MESI, 2014. S. 188-210.
Prokhorov M.M. Obshchestvo – ekonomika – ekonomizm // Filosofskaya mysl'.-2014.-№ 1.-S.113-163. DOI: 10.7256/2306-0174.2014.1. 10630. URL: http://e-notabene.ru/fr/article_10630.html.;
Petrov V.M. Osnovy sotsial'nogo gosudarstva. N. Novgorod: NNGASU, 2012. 551 s.
Kutyrev V.A. O soyuze filosofii s religiey protiv svobody nauchnogo razuma // Kutyrev V.A. Estestvennoe i iskusstvennoe: bor'ba mirov. N. Novgorod: Izd-vo «N. Novgorod», 1994. «Vmesto zaklyucheniya». S. 196-199.
Kutyrev V. A. Poslednee tselovanie. Chelovek kak traditsiya. SPb: Aleteyya, 2015. 312 s.
Engel's F. Lyudvig Feyerbakh i konets klassicheskoy nemetskoy filosofii. M.: Politizdat, 1967. 70 s.
Kuznetsov V.N. Problema znacheniya ponyatiy «materialisty i materializm» v novoevropeyskoy filosofii XVII-XVIII vekov // Istoriko-filosofskiy al'manakh. Vyp. 2. M., 2007. S. 55.
Prokhorov M.M. Istoriya i bytie. Issledovanie filosofskikh osnovaniy. N. Novgorod: NGPU, 2013. S. 180-197.
Gegel' G.V.F. Entsiklopediya filosofskikh nauk. T. 1. Nauka logiki. M.: Izd-vo sotsial'no-ekonomicheskoy literatury, 1974. S. 424.
Kutyrev V. A. Bytie ili nichto. SPb: Aleteyya, 2009. 496 s.
Lenin V.I. Filosofskie tetradi // Lenin V.I. Poln. sobr. soch. T. 29. S. 326.
Delez Zh. Povtorenie i razlichie. SPb: Petropolis, 1998. 384 s.
Mezhuev V.M. Istoricheskaya teoriya Marksa i sovremennost' // Filosofskoe soznanie: dramatizm obnovleniya. M.: Politizdat, 1991. S. 279-305.
Golenkov S.I. Kontseptsiya razlichiya Zh. Deleza // Konev V.A. Transtsendental'nyy empirizm Zhilya Deleza. Samara: Samarskiy universitet, 2001. S.26-33.
Materialisticheskaya dialektika: v 5 tt. T. 1. Ob'ektivnaya dialektika. M.: Mysl', 1981. S. 96-99.
V.A. Kutyrev. Kul'tura i tekhnologiya: bor'ba mirov. M.: Progress-Traditsiya, 2001. 240 s.
Prokhorov M.M. Paradoksy deyatel'nosti // Vestnik Rossiyskogo filosofskogo obshchestva. № 1 (25), 2003. S. 23-29.
Gryaznova E.V. Filosofskiy analiz kontseptsiy virtual'noy real'nosti // Filosofskaya mysl'. - 2013. - 4. - C. 53 - 82. DOI: 10.7256/2409-8728.2013.4.278. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/fr/article_278.html
Prokhorov M.M. Smysly i tsennost' modeli otnosheniya cheloveka s mirom // Filosofskaya mysl'. - 2013. - 7. - C. 136 - 240. DOI: 10.7256/2409-8728.2013.7.369. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/fr/article_369.html
Gurevich P.S. Igra kak odna iz graney chelovecheskogo bytiya // Psikhologiya i Psikhotekhnika. - 2014. - 8. - C. 789 - 792. DOI: 10.7256/2070-8955.2014.8.12501.
Gadamer Kh.-G. Istina i metod. Osnovy filosofskoy germenevtiki. M.: Progres, 1988. 704.
E.A. Popov Konstitutsii mira – tsennosti tsivilizatsii // Pravo i politika. - 2013. - 2. - C. 162 - 168. DOI: 10.7256/1811-9018.2013.02.1.

References (transliteration):
Khyubner B. Martin Khaydegger – oderzhimyy bytiem. SPb.: Akademiya issledovaniya kul'tury, 2011. 171 s.
Zinov'ev A.A. Ideologiya partii budushchego. M.: Eksmo, 2003. S. 240.
Bekon F. Sochineniya v dvukh tomakh. T. 1. M.: Mysl', 1971. 590 s.
Golosovker E.Ya. Logika mifa. M.: Nauka, 1987. 216 s.
Arnobiy. Protiv yazychnikov. SPb: Izd-vo SPbGU, 2008. 398 s.
Arsen'ev V.K. Izbrannye proizvedeniya. Khabarovsk: Knizhnoe izdatel'stvo, 1997. T. 1. 656 s.
Marks K., Engel's F. Soch. T. 46. Ch. 1. S. 47.
Mamardashvili M.K. Strela poznaniya (nabrosok estestvennoistoricheskoy gnoseologii). M.: Yazyki russkoy kul'tury, 1997. 304 s.
Dionisiy Areopagit. Korpus sochineniy s tolkovaniyami prep. Maksima Ispovednika. SPb, 2010. S. 409-411.
Chanyshev A.N. Kurs lektsiy po drevney filosofii. M.: Vysshaya shkola, 1981. 374 s.
Losev A.F. Estetika Vozrozhdeniya. M.: Mysl', 1978. S. 138-143.
Ortega-i-Gasset Kh. Vokrug Galileya (skhema krizisov) // Ortega-i-Gasset Kh. Izbrannye trudy. M.: Ves' mir, 1997. 233-403 s.
Nikiforov A.L. Chto takoe «postneklassicheskaya nauka»? // Epistemologiya i filosofiya nauki. 2013. T. XXXVI, № 2, s. 63-64.
Losev A.F. Platonovskiy ob'ektivnyy idealizm i ego tragicheskaya sud'ba // Platon i ego epokha. K 2400-letiyu so dnya rozhdeniya. M.: Nauka, 1979. S. 9-57.
Prokhorov M.M. Ekonomizm kak modal'nost' beschelovechnosti // Mirovozzrencheskaya paradigma v filosofii: Modusy i modal'nosti prakticheskie i teoreticheskie: Monografiya / Pod red. prof. M.M. Prokhorova. Nizhniy Novgorod: NF FGBOU VPO MESI, 2014. S. 188-210.
Prokhorov M.M. Obshchestvo – ekonomika – ekonomizm // Filosofskaya mysl'.-2014.-№ 1.-S.113-163. DOI: 10.7256/2306-0174.2014.1. 10630. URL: http://e-notabene.ru/fr/article_10630.html.;
Petrov V.M. Osnovy sotsial'nogo gosudarstva. N. Novgorod: NNGASU, 2012. 551 s.
Kutyrev V.A. O soyuze filosofii s religiey protiv svobody nauchnogo razuma // Kutyrev V.A. Estestvennoe i iskusstvennoe: bor'ba mirov. N. Novgorod: Izd-vo «N. Novgorod», 1994. «Vmesto zaklyucheniya». S. 196-199.
Kutyrev V. A. Poslednee tselovanie. Chelovek kak traditsiya. SPb: Aleteyya, 2015. 312 s.
Engel's F. Lyudvig Feyerbakh i konets klassicheskoy nemetskoy filosofii. M.: Politizdat, 1967. 70 s.
Kuznetsov V.N. Problema znacheniya ponyatiy «materialisty i materializm» v novoevropeyskoy filosofii XVII-XVIII vekov // Istoriko-filosofskiy al'manakh. Vyp. 2. M., 2007. S. 55.
Prokhorov M.M. Istoriya i bytie. Issledovanie filosofskikh osnovaniy. N. Novgorod: NGPU, 2013. S. 180-197.
Gegel' G.V.F. Entsiklopediya filosofskikh nauk. T. 1. Nauka logiki. M.: Izd-vo sotsial'no-ekonomicheskoy literatury, 1974. S. 424.
Kutyrev V. A. Bytie ili nichto. SPb: Aleteyya, 2009. 496 s.
Lenin V.I. Filosofskie tetradi // Lenin V.I. Poln. sobr. soch. T. 29. S. 326.
Delez Zh. Povtorenie i razlichie. SPb: Petropolis, 1998. 384 s.
Mezhuev V.M. Istoricheskaya teoriya Marksa i sovremennost' // Filosofskoe soznanie: dramatizm obnovleniya. M.: Politizdat, 1991. S. 279-305.
Golenkov S.I. Kontseptsiya razlichiya Zh. Deleza // Konev V.A. Transtsendental'nyy empirizm Zhilya Deleza. Samara: Samarskiy universitet, 2001. S.26-33.
Materialisticheskaya dialektika: v 5 tt. T. 1. Ob'ektivnaya dialektika. M.: Mysl', 1981. S. 96-99.
V.A. Kutyrev. Kul'tura i tekhnologiya: bor'ba mirov. M.: Progress-Traditsiya, 2001. 240 s.
Prokhorov M.M. Paradoksy deyatel'nosti // Vestnik Rossiyskogo filosofskogo obshchestva. № 1 (25), 2003. S. 23-29.
Gryaznova E.V. Filosofskiy analiz kontseptsiy virtual'noy real'nosti // Filosofskaya mysl'. - 2013. - 4. - C. 53 - 82. DOI: 10.7256/2409-8728.2013.4.278. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/fr/article_278.html
Prokhorov M.M. Smysly i tsennost' modeli otnosheniya cheloveka s mirom // Filosofskaya mysl'. - 2013. - 7. - C. 136 - 240. DOI: 10.7256/2409-8728.2013.7.369. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/fr/article_369.html
Gurevich P.S. Igra kak odna iz graney chelovecheskogo bytiya // Psikhologiya i Psikhotekhnika. - 2014. - 8. - C. 789 - 792. DOI: 10.7256/2070-8955.2014.8.12501.
Gadamer Kh.-G. Istina i metod. Osnovy filosofskoy germenevtiki. M.: Progres, 1988. 704.
E.A. Popov Konstitutsii mira – tsennosti tsivilizatsii // Pravo i politika. - 2013. - 2. - C. 162 - 168. DOI: 10.7256/1811-9018.2013.02.1.

Abstract: The subject of the research is the mechanisms of structuring images of science within implementation of the phenomenological program of researches first founded by Edmund Husserl in the first third of the XXth century. The relevance and importance of the topic is caused by the two facts. Firstly, the relevance is caused by the great value which phenomenological development in modern philosophy has. The phenomenological program of researches is realized in the field of art, policy and culture in general. Secondly, researches that are based on the phenomenological approach to structuring images of science possesses the heuristic potential to overcome manipulative strategy revealing in the process of demystification (more precisely, demythologization) pf procedures for creating scientific knowledge. The methodology of the research includes the comparative analysis and hermeneutic reconstruction which allow to compare phenomenology with other options of understanding of science images and to reveal complete sense of phenomenology. The novelty of the research is caused by the special turn of philosophical thought which was required to be executed in order to understand the object under research, i.e. the image of science. The author comes to the conclusion that within phenomenology reviving some ideals of antiquity in modern culture, images of science are structured within the general denaturalization of knowledge which, however, doesn't coincide with historical forms of knowledge. From the phenomenological point of view, scientific activity is a process of creation of knowledge which implies procedures of justification and description as part of the cognitive mind. Such understanding of science images allows to understand their ineradicable plurality in modern culture and to explain the reasons of this plurality. 

Keywords: historicism, naturalism, methodology of philosophical research, phenomenology, ancient legacy, science images, demystification of discoveries, ideal, horizon, world of science

References:
Fedotova V.G., Yakovleva A.F. Nauka kak fenomen moderna (Stat'ya vtoraya) // Filosofiya i kul'tura. 2013. 9. C. 1299-1306. DOI: 10.7256/1999-2793.2013.9.9239.
Ursul A.D., Ursul T.A. Nauka i obrazovanie v global'no-noosfernoy perspektive // Sotsiodinamika. 2013. 2. C. 161-222. DOI: 10.7256/2409-7144.2013.2.439. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/pr/article_439.html.
Gartman N. K osnovopolozheniyu ontologii. SPb., 2003.
Gartman N. Estetika. Kiev, 2004.
Gusserl' E. Idei k chistoy fenomenologii i fenomenologicheskoy filosofii. Kniga pervaya. M., 2009.
Sheler M. Izbrannye proizvedeniya. M., 1994.
Merlo-Ponti M. Vidimoe i nevidimoe. Mn., 2006.
Gusserl' E. Logicheskie issledovaniya. Kartezianskie razmyshleniya. Minsk, M., 2000.
Kulikov S.B. Osobennosti fenomenologicheskoy rekonstruktsii protsessov transformatsii v kul'ture filosofskikh obrazov nauki: naturalizm vs istoritsizm // Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta. 2014. № 7 (148). S. 25-32.
Kulikov S.B. Protsessy transformatsii filosofskikh obrazov nauki. Tomsk, 2012.
Kulikov S.B. Fenomenologicheskiy podkhod – klyuch k ponimaniyu prichin transformatsii filosofskikh obrazov nauki // Horizon. Fenomenologicheskie issledovaniya. 2013.T. 2 (2). S. 61-74.
Kulikov S.B. Kritika E.Gusserlem osnovaniy fiziko-matematicheskogo estestvoznaniya: relyativistskie sledstviya // Filosofiya nauki. 2005. № 4 (27). S. 3-13.
Kulikov S.B. Osnovy filosofskogo analiza nauki: metodologiya, smysl i tsel'. Tomsk, 2005.
Baksanskiy O.E. Mirovozzrenie budushchego: konvergentsiya kak fundamental'nyy printsip. // Pedagogika i prosveshchenie. 2014. 3. C. 17-29. DOI: 10.7256/2306-434X.2014.3.13521
Bruzina R. Husserl’s “Naturalism” and Genetic Phenomenology // New Yearbook for Phenomenology & Phenomenology Philosophy. 2010. V. 10. No. 1. P. 91-125.
Bast R.A. Der Wissenschaftsbegriff Martin Heideggers im Zusammenhang seiner Philosophie. Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt, 1986.
Shtreker E. Gusserlevskaya ideya fenomenologii kak obosnovyvayushchey teorii nauki // Sovremennaya filosofiya nauki. M., 1996.
Kopnin P.V. Gnoseologicheskie i logicheskie osnovy nauki. M., 1974.
Gegel' G.V.F. Entsiklopediya filosofskikh nauk: V 3kh tt. M., 1974-77. T. 1.
Barthes R. Mythologies. Paris, 1957..
Sartr Zh.-P. Voobrazhaemoe. Fenomenologicheskaya psikhologiya vospriyatiya. SPb., 2001.

References (transliteration):
Fedotova V.G., Yakovleva A.F. Nauka kak fenomen moderna (Stat'ya vtoraya) // Filosofiya i kul'tura. 2013. 9. C. 1299-1306. DOI: 10.7256/1999-2793.2013.9.9239.
Ursul A.D., Ursul T.A. Nauka i obrazovanie v global'no-noosfernoy perspektive // Sotsiodinamika. 2013. 2. C. 161-222. DOI: 10.7256/2409-7144.2013.2.439. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/pr/article_439.html.
Gartman N. K osnovopolozheniyu ontologii. SPb., 2003.
Gartman N. Estetika. Kiev, 2004.
Gusserl' E. Idei k chistoy fenomenologii i fenomenologicheskoy filosofii. Kniga pervaya. M., 2009.
Sheler M. Izbrannye proizvedeniya. M., 1994.
Merlo-Ponti M. Vidimoe i nevidimoe. Mn., 2006.
Gusserl' E. Logicheskie issledovaniya. Kartezianskie razmyshleniya. Minsk, M., 2000.
Kulikov S.B. Osobennosti fenomenologicheskoy rekonstruktsii protsessov transformatsii v kul'ture filosofskikh obrazov nauki: naturalizm vs istoritsizm // Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta. 2014. № 7 (148). S. 25-32.
Kulikov S.B. Protsessy transformatsii filosofskikh obrazov nauki. Tomsk, 2012.
Kulikov S.B. Fenomenologicheskiy podkhod – klyuch k ponimaniyu prichin transformatsii filosofskikh obrazov nauki // Horizon. Fenomenologicheskie issledovaniya. 2013.T. 2 (2). S. 61-74.
Kulikov S.B. Kritika E.Gusserlem osnovaniy fiziko-matematicheskogo estestvoznaniya: relyativistskie sledstviya // Filosofiya nauki. 2005. № 4 (27). S. 3-13.
Kulikov S.B. Osnovy filosofskogo analiza nauki: metodologiya, smysl i tsel'. Tomsk, 2005.
Baksanskiy O.E. Mirovozzrenie budushchego: konvergentsiya kak fundamental'nyy printsip. // Pedagogika i prosveshchenie. 2014. 3. C. 17-29. DOI: 10.7256/2306-434X.2014.3.13521
Bruzina R. Husserl’s “Naturalism” and Genetic Phenomenology // New Yearbook for Phenomenology & Phenomenology Philosophy. 2010. V. 10. No. 1. P. 91-125.
Bast R.A. Der Wissenschaftsbegriff Martin Heideggers im Zusammenhang seiner Philosophie. Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt, 1986.
Shtreker E. Gusserlevskaya ideya fenomenologii kak obosnovyvayushchey teorii nauki // Sovremennaya filosofiya nauki. M., 1996.
Kopnin P.V. Gnoseologicheskie i logicheskie osnovy nauki. M., 1974.
Gegel' G.V.F. Entsiklopediya filosofskikh nauk: V 3kh tt. M., 1974-77. T. 1.
Barthes R. Mythologies. Paris, 1957..
Sartr Zh.-P. Voobrazhaemoe. Fenomenologicheskaya psikhologiya vospriyatiya. SPb., 2001.

Abstract: The subject of the present research article is the structure and performance features of the scientific theological method. Modern discussions often involve diametrically opposite views on whether it is possible to speak of a specific method for obtaining new knowledge in terms of theology or we should better deal with the problem of applying scientific methods to theological reserches. In his article Polskov demonstrates that this situation is mostly created by the fact that participants of discussions usually have a different understanding of the term 'method'. The author of the present article keeps to the broad definition of method as the mean to achieve a result. The author shows that such an approach consistutes the specific features of the theological method. In his research Polskov analyzes the structure of the theological method. He demonstrates that a scientist who applies the theological method performs the three interdependent procedures proceeding from the semantic structure analysis of a phenomenon under research to the exegesis of this phenomenon. To describe the procedure that is applied by a theologist at the third stage of his research, the author of the article introduces the term 'theological correlation'. By performing 'theological correlation', a theologist conforms results obtained at previous stages of his research to soteriological ideals that are set forth by the Church authority and fixed in the Holy Tradition. The main research method used by the author in his research is the philosophical analysis of the process of theological research combined with the axiological approach to viewing a theological research as the research with the eschatological orientation and existential meaning for human. The scientific novelty of the research is caused by the fact that the author describes a special nature of dialogueness of the theological method as well as views the theological method not only as the method studying the 'inside' of a theological research but also the method that studies the 'outside' of a theological research including all kinds of cultural phenomena and processes. In conclusion, the author provides a number of practical examples of the research model offered in this article. 

Keywords: onto-gnoseological phenomenon, dialogueness , theological correlation, method in theology, theological method, methodology of science, divinity, theology, science, epistemology

References:
Yakovlev V. Yu. Printsip ob'ektivnosti i tsennosti nauchnogo poznaniya // Izvestiya RGPU im. A.I. Gertsena. 2009. №87.
Shvyrev V.S. Metod // Entsiklopediya epistemologii i filosofii nauki. M.: «Kanon+», ROOI «Reabilitatsiya», 2009.
Florovskiy G., prot. Puti russkogo bogosloviya. Vil'nyus, 1991.
Khondzinskiy Pavel, prot. Laientheologie ili khristianskaya filosofiya // Vestnik PSTGU. Seriya I: Bogoslovie. Filosofiya. 2013. Vyp. 3 (47).
Feyerabend P. Protiv metodologicheskogo prinuzhdeniya // Izbrannye trudy po metodologii nauki. M.: Progress. 1986.
Feyerabend P. Proshchay, razum. M.: AST: Astrel', 2010. 477 s.
Popper K. Logika i rost nauchnogo znaniya. M.: Progress, 1983.
Rikkert G. Nauki o prirode i nauki o kul'ture. M., Respublika 1998.
Tillikh P. Sistematicheskaya teologiya. T. I-II. M.; SPb.: Universitetskaya kniga, 2000.
Lonergan B. Metod v teologii. M.: Institut filosofii, teologii i istorii sv. Fomy, 2010.
Meyendorf I., prot. Vizantiyskoe nasledie v Pravoslavnoy Tserkvi. K.: Tsentr pravoslavnoy knigi, 2007.
Meyendorf I., prot. Predislovie //Puti russkogo bogosloviya. Vil'nyus, 1991.
Letov O.V. Problema nauchnoy ob'ektivnosti v postpozitivistskoy filosofii nauki : kontseptsii Maykla Polani i Norvuda Khensona : avtoreferat dis. ... doktora filosofskikh nauk. M., 2011.
Burmistrov M.Yu. Teologiya i konets metafiziki // Vestnik PSTGU. Seriya I: Bogoslovie. Filosofiya. 2011. Vyp. 3 (35).
Bakhtin M.M. K metodologii gumanitarnykh nauk // Estetika slovesnogo tvorchestva. M.: Iskusstvo, 1979.
Bakhtin M.M. Problema teksta v lingvistike, filologii i drugikh gumanitarnykh naukakh // Estetika slovesnogo tvorchestva. M.: Iskusstvo, 1986.
Berdyaev N.A. Ortodoksiya i chelovechnost' (Prot. G. Florovskiy. Puti russkogo bogosloviya) // Put'. Vyp 53. Parizh, 1935.
Balthasar H. U. von. Kosmische Liturgie: Das Weltbild Maximus das Bekenners. Einsiedeln; Trier, 1988².
Lonergan Bernard J.F. Philosophy of God and Theology. London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1973.
Agatstsi E. Moral'noe izmerenie nauki i tekhniki. M.: Moskovskiy filosofskiy fond, 1998.
Antonov K.M. Teologiya kak nauchnaya spetsial'nost' // Voprosy filosofii. – 2012. № 6.

References (transliteration):
Yakovlev V. Yu. Printsip ob'ektivnosti i tsennosti nauchnogo poznaniya // Izvestiya RGPU im. A.I. Gertsena. 2009. №87.
Shvyrev V.S. Metod // Entsiklopediya epistemologii i filosofii nauki. M.: «Kanon+», ROOI «Reabilitatsiya», 2009.
Florovskiy G., prot. Puti russkogo bogosloviya. Vil'nyus, 1991.
Khondzinskiy Pavel, prot. Laientheologie ili khristianskaya filosofiya // Vestnik PSTGU. Seriya I: Bogoslovie. Filosofiya. 2013. Vyp. 3 (47).
Feyerabend P. Protiv metodologicheskogo prinuzhdeniya // Izbrannye trudy po metodologii nauki. M.: Progress. 1986.
Feyerabend P. Proshchay, razum. M.: AST: Astrel', 2010. 477 s.
Popper K. Logika i rost nauchnogo znaniya. M.: Progress, 1983.
Rikkert G. Nauki o prirode i nauki o kul'ture. M., Respublika 1998.
Tillikh P. Sistematicheskaya teologiya. T. I-II. M.; SPb.: Universitetskaya kniga, 2000.
Lonergan B. Metod v teologii. M.: Institut filosofii, teologii i istorii sv. Fomy, 2010.
Meyendorf I., prot. Vizantiyskoe nasledie v Pravoslavnoy Tserkvi. K.: Tsentr pravoslavnoy knigi, 2007.
Meyendorf I., prot. Predislovie //Puti russkogo bogosloviya. Vil'nyus, 1991.
Letov O.V. Problema nauchnoy ob'ektivnosti v postpozitivistskoy filosofii nauki : kontseptsii Maykla Polani i Norvuda Khensona : avtoreferat dis. ... doktora filosofskikh nauk. M., 2011.
Burmistrov M.Yu. Teologiya i konets metafiziki // Vestnik PSTGU. Seriya I: Bogoslovie. Filosofiya. 2011. Vyp. 3 (35).
Bakhtin M.M. K metodologii gumanitarnykh nauk // Estetika slovesnogo tvorchestva. M.: Iskusstvo, 1979.
Bakhtin M.M. Problema teksta v lingvistike, filologii i drugikh gumanitarnykh naukakh // Estetika slovesnogo tvorchestva. M.: Iskusstvo, 1986.
Berdyaev N.A. Ortodoksiya i chelovechnost' (Prot. G. Florovskiy. Puti russkogo bogosloviya) // Put'. Vyp 53. Parizh, 1935.
Balthasar H. U. von. Kosmische Liturgie: Das Weltbild Maximus das Bekenners. Einsiedeln; Trier, 1988².
Lonergan Bernard J.F. Philosophy of God and Theology. London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1973.
Agatstsi E. Moral'noe izmerenie nauki i tekhniki. M.: Moskovskiy filosofskiy fond, 1998.
Antonov K.M. Teologiya kak nauchnaya spetsial'nost' // Voprosy filosofii. – 2012. № 6.

Abstract: In their articles Aseeva and Mayakova examine the systems approach and the theory of complexity based on the research 'Complexity and Philosophy' of 2007 conducted by foreign scientists Frencis Heylighen, Paul Cilliers and Carlos Gershenson and published by the British publishing as 'Complexity, Science and Society' (Radcliffe, Oxford). The research was presented in mass media in English and adapted by the authors of the present article. In this article they analyze the prerequisites for creating the systems (interdisciplinary) approach and the theory of complexity and trace back the historical development of the new paradigm of complexity focusing on its philosophical grounds. In their research the authors of the article have used the methodology of postnonclassical science and the theory of complexity as the most universal meta languages used for describing complex self-developing systems. An important element of the methodological tools applied in the article is the analysis of foreign discourses on the theory of complexity and philosophical concept of quality. The main conclusions of the research are the following: the authors defined the grounds for the modern theory of complexity, described the main categories and parameters of the theory of complexity and formulated the central paradigm of this science. Thus, the theory of chaos and quantum mechanics have thrown down a challenge to determinism. Reductionism has been replaced with the systems theory based on scientific holism. Cybernetics and post-modernist social studies have demonstrated that knowledge is subjective. These premises have all been gathered under the title 'science of complexity'. The central paradigm of this science is the system of the multi-agent. Subjectivity and doubts are attributive to agents and their local interactions create the global organization. The novelty of the research is caused by the fact that the authors provide 'qualitative' argumenation of the main provisions of the theory of complexity as well as integration of the ideas of different philosophers, in particular, post-modernists, that create the basis for further assimilation of the paradigm of complexity in philosophy. According to the authors of the article, this would cast light on the existing philosophical issues such as origin of the universe, organization of the society, structuralism of items and phenomena. The research has been supported by the Russian Science Foundation (the project No. 15-18-10013). 

Keywords: holism, emergent, Gershenson Carlos, Cilliers Paul, Heylighen Frencis, category of quality, philosophy of science, chaos theory, complexity, systems approach

References:
I.A. Aseeva Mnogoobrazie i edinstvo prognosticheskogo opyta // Filosofiya i kul'tura. - 2010. - 6. - C. 8 - 13.
Budanov V.G., Kurdyumov V.S., Punda D.I. Upravlenie slozhnost'yu, vozmozhnosti i ogranicheniya v sovremennykh usloviyakh // Ekonomicheskie strategii. 2014. T. 16. № 2 (118). S. 90-97.
Knyazeva E.N. Evolyutsionnoe myshlenie v nauke i filosofii // Filosofiya i kul'tura. - 2013. - 11. - C. 1532 - 1542. DOI: 10.7256/1999-2793.2013.11.9923.
E.N. Knyazeva Liki slozhnogo mira // Filosofiya i kul'tura. - 2010. - 4. - C. 45 - 55.
Loktionov M.V. Filosofsko-metodologicheskie printsipy kriticheskoy teorii i kriticheskogo sistemnogo podkhoda v sovremennykh traktovkakh obshchestvennykh protsessov.
// Filosofskaya mysl'. - 2014. - 10. - C. 48 - 79. DOI: 10.7256/2409-8728.2014.10.13732. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/fr/article_13732.html
Taylor, M. C. The Moment of Complexity: Emerging Network Culture. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.2003.
Arshinov V.I., Budanov V.G. Soznanie i osoznanie v sinergetike // Sinergetika na rubezhe XX-XXI vv. Sb. nauchnykh trudov. Ser. "Problemy filosofii" Tsentr gumanitarnykh nauch.-inform. issledovaniy. Otdel filosofii; Otv. red. Panchenko A.I.. MOSKVA, 2006. S. 55-73.
Mayakova A.V. Stoimost' kachestva predostavleniya konsaltingovykh uslug // Problemy ekonomiki i menedzhmenta. №4 (8). 2012. S. 91-94.
Budanov V.G. Sinergeticheskaya metodologiya forsayta i modelirovaniya slozhnogo // Slozhnost'. Razum. Postneklassika. 2013. № 1. S. 13-24.
Waldrop, M. M. Complexity: The Emerging Science at the Edge of Order and Chaos // London: Viking. 1992.
Heylighen F. & Joslyn C. Cybernetics and Second Order Cybernetics // R.A. Meyers (ed.), Encyclopedia of Physical Science& Technology (3rd ed.), Vol. 4, (Academic Press, New York), 2001. pp. 155-170.
Khodyrevskaya S.V., Mayakova A.V. Upravlenie riskami v sfere uslug // Metody menedzhmenta kachestva. 2013. №2. S. 32-38.
Bunge M Treatise on Basic Philosophy, Volume 4. Ontology II A World of Systems // Dordrecht, Netherlands: D. Reidel. 1979.
Kamenskiy E.G. Ekzistentsial'nye riski innovatsionnoy paradigmy postindustrial'nogo razvitiya sotsiuma // Gumanitarnye nauki i obrazovanie. 2012. № 4 (12). S. 78-82.
Mayakova A.V., Mayakov A.S. Realizatsiya trebovaniy standartov ISO serii 9000 // Diskussiya. №9 (27). 2012. S. 59-64.
Gegel' G.V.F. Nauka logiki. SPB.: Nauka, 1997. 800 s.
Mayakova A.V. Genezis i razvitie filosofii kachestva // Aktual'nye problemy gumanitarnykh i estestvennykh nauk. №12 (71) Ch.I 2014. S. 258-260.
Prigogine I. and Stengers I. The end of certainty: time, chaos and the new laws of nature – New York: Free Press. 1997.
Aristotel'. Metafizika. Rostov n/D.: Feniks, 1999. 601s.
Heylighen F., Cilliers P., Gershenson C. Complexity and Philosophy // Complexity, Science and Society (Radcliffe, Oxford), 2007. Pp. 41-71.
Turchin V. Cybernetics and Philosophy, in: The Cybernetics of Complex Systems, F. Geyer (ed.), (Intersystems, Salinas, California). 1990. Pp. 61-74.
Gershenson C., Heylighen F. How can we think the complex? in: Richardson, Kurt (ed.) Managing the Complex Vol. 1: Philosophy // Theory and Application.(Institute for the Study of Coherence and Emergence/Information Age Publishing), 2005.pp.47-62.
Aseeva I.A., Mayakova A.V. Paradigma slozhnosti v proektsii na sovremennuyu filosofiyu // Modern philosophic paradigms: interrelation of traditions and innovative approaches: materials of the II international scientific conference on March 3–4, 2015. Prague: Vědeckovydavatelské centrum "Sociosféra-CZ", pp. 16-19.

References (transliteration):
I.A. Aseeva Mnogoobrazie i edinstvo prognosticheskogo opyta // Filosofiya i kul'tura. - 2010. - 6. - C. 8 - 13.
Budanov V.G., Kurdyumov V.S., Punda D.I. Upravlenie slozhnost'yu, vozmozhnosti i ogranicheniya v sovremennykh usloviyakh // Ekonomicheskie strategii. 2014. T. 16. № 2 (118). S. 90-97.
Knyazeva E.N. Evolyutsionnoe myshlenie v nauke i filosofii // Filosofiya i kul'tura. - 2013. - 11. - C. 1532 - 1542. DOI: 10.7256/1999-2793.2013.11.9923.
E.N. Knyazeva Liki slozhnogo mira // Filosofiya i kul'tura. - 2010. - 4. - C. 45 - 55.
Loktionov M.V. Filosofsko-metodologicheskie printsipy kriticheskoy teorii i kriticheskogo sistemnogo podkhoda v sovremennykh traktovkakh obshchestvennykh protsessov.
// Filosofskaya mysl'. - 2014. - 10. - C. 48 - 79. DOI: 10.7256/2409-8728.2014.10.13732. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/fr/article_13732.html
Taylor, M. C. The Moment of Complexity: Emerging Network Culture. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.2003.
Arshinov V.I., Budanov V.G. Soznanie i osoznanie v sinergetike // Sinergetika na rubezhe XX-XXI vv. Sb. nauchnykh trudov. Ser. "Problemy filosofii" Tsentr gumanitarnykh nauch.-inform. issledovaniy. Otdel filosofii; Otv. red. Panchenko A.I.. MOSKVA, 2006. S. 55-73.
Mayakova A.V. Stoimost' kachestva predostavleniya konsaltingovykh uslug // Problemy ekonomiki i menedzhmenta. №4 (8). 2012. S. 91-94.
Budanov V.G. Sinergeticheskaya metodologiya forsayta i modelirovaniya slozhnogo // Slozhnost'. Razum. Postneklassika. 2013. № 1. S. 13-24.
Waldrop, M. M. Complexity: The Emerging Science at the Edge of Order and Chaos // London: Viking. 1992.
Heylighen F. & Joslyn C. Cybernetics and Second Order Cybernetics // R.A. Meyers (ed.), Encyclopedia of Physical Science& Technology (3rd ed.), Vol. 4, (Academic Press, New York), 2001. pp. 155-170.
Khodyrevskaya S.V., Mayakova A.V. Upravlenie riskami v sfere uslug // Metody menedzhmenta kachestva. 2013. №2. S. 32-38.
Bunge M Treatise on Basic Philosophy, Volume 4. Ontology II A World of Systems // Dordrecht, Netherlands: D. Reidel. 1979.
Kamenskiy E.G. Ekzistentsial'nye riski innovatsionnoy paradigmy postindustrial'nogo razvitiya sotsiuma // Gumanitarnye nauki i obrazovanie. 2012. № 4 (12). S. 78-82.
Mayakova A.V., Mayakov A.S. Realizatsiya trebovaniy standartov ISO serii 9000 // Diskussiya. №9 (27). 2012. S. 59-64.
Gegel' G.V.F. Nauka logiki. SPB.: Nauka, 1997. 800 s.
Mayakova A.V. Genezis i razvitie filosofii kachestva // Aktual'nye problemy gumanitarnykh i estestvennykh nauk. №12 (71) Ch.I 2014. S. 258-260.
Prigogine I. and Stengers I. The end of certainty: time, chaos and the new laws of nature – New York: Free Press. 1997.
Aristotel'. Metafizika. Rostov n/D.: Feniks, 1999. 601s.
Heylighen F., Cilliers P., Gershenson C. Complexity and Philosophy // Complexity, Science and Society (Radcliffe, Oxford), 2007. Pp. 41-71.
Turchin V. Cybernetics and Philosophy, in: The Cybernetics of Complex Systems, F. Geyer (ed.), (Intersystems, Salinas, California). 1990. Pp. 61-74.
Gershenson C., Heylighen F. How can we think the complex? in: Richardson, Kurt (ed.) Managing the Complex Vol. 1: Philosophy // Theory and Application.(Institute for the Study of Coherence and Emergence/Information Age Publishing), 2005.pp.47-62.
Aseeva I.A., Mayakova A.V. Paradigma slozhnosti v proektsii na sovremennuyu filosofiyu // Modern philosophic paradigms: interrelation of traditions and innovative approaches: materials of the II international scientific conference on March 3–4, 2015. Prague: Vědeckovydavatelské centrum "Sociosféra-CZ", pp. 16-19.

Abstract: Philosophy is the central issue in Pitirim Sorikin's book 'Social and Cultural Dynamics' as the main types of cultures - ideational, sensate and idealistic - differentiate based on their philosophical grounds and represent the types of philosophical cultures that influence the order of social life. Based on the ideas of cultural and social dualism, Pitirim Sorokin initially described philosophy as a cultural phenomenon. Understanding culture as the internal and external experience, Pitirim Sorokin was able to introduce the concept of philosophical mentality that is usually expressed in items, life style and behavior. As a result of his researches, Pitirim Sorokin proceeded to describing philosophy as a social phenomenon. Such an ambivalent vision of philosophy as a cultural and social phenomenon creates the perspective to view culture as a sociocultural phenomenon. In his research the author of the article uses the version of the sociocultural approach that describes society as an assembly of cultures. Based on that approach, Pitirim Sorokin's method of philosophical research can be defined as a sociocultural phenomenology. The author of the article emphasizes the importance of the principle of isomorphism for describing the invariant structure of the cultural phenomena (philosophy, religion, science and art) as well as the need in preliminary theoretical development of associated abstrac models. The author of the article also uses quantative methods to analyze statistical data provided by Pitirim Sorokin and to compare the influence of different cultural mentalities in the XVIth - XXth centuries. The author of the article: 1) provides his interpretation of Pitirim Sorokin's teaching on social and cultural dynamics as the experience in the research of sociophilosophical dynamics, i.e. development of the society from prehistory to the modern age as it was determined by the fluctuations of philosophical cultures; 2) shows the philosophical nature of cultural mentalities described by Pitirim Sorokin and associated cultural types - idealistic, ideational and sensate cultures; 3) pays attention to the relation between interpretation of culture as the internal and external experience and solution of the so called 'main question of philosophy' about the relation between the ideal and the material; 4) through summarizing ideas of Pitirim Sorokin, the author also demonstrates the need to introduce the terms 'philosophical mentality' 'philosophical behavior', and 'philosophical activity' in metaphilosophy; 5) systematizes Pitirim Sorokin's views on the sociocultural content of the phenomenon of philosophy; 6) describes a complex spiritual and practical structure of the phenomenon of philosophy including both mental formations of different levels and behavior and lifestyle that have been changing during long historical processes of social and philosophical revolutions; 7) corrects Pitirim Sorokin's statement about the triumph of sensate culture in the modern period and the decline of sensate culture in the XXth century and concludes that sensate culture will only strengthen its positions in the future. 

Keywords: sociocultural, philosophy, sociocultural dynamics, pseudo-ideational mentality, philosophical culture, sociocultural phenomenology, Pitirim Sorokin, idealistic mentality, ideational mentality, sensate mentality

References:
Malyutin R.A. Filosofiya i politika: opyt sootneseniya metodologiy na primere dialoga Aleksandra Kozheva i Leo Shtrausa // Pravo i politika.-2013.-10.-C. 1408-1414. DOI: 10.7256/1811-9018.2013.10.9567.
Kollinz R. Sotsiologiya filosofiy. Novosibirsk: Sibirskiy khronograf, 2002. 1281 s.
Golosenko I. A. Filosofiya istorii Pitirima Sorokina // Novaya i noveyshaya istoriya. 1966. № 4. S. 85–93.
Sorokin P. A. Sotsial'naya i kul'turnaya dinamika. M.: Astrel', 2006. 1176 s.
Tyugashev E. A. Spor ob avtonomii filosofii // Znanie. Ponimanie. Umenie. 2014. № 1. S. 175-182.
Dzhonston B. V. Pitirim Sorokin i sotsiokul'turnye tendentsii nashego vremeni // Sotsis. 1999. № 6. S. 13–24.

References (transliteration):
Malyutin R.A. Filosofiya i politika: opyt sootneseniya metodologiy na primere dialoga Aleksandra Kozheva i Leo Shtrausa // Pravo i politika.-2013.-10.-C. 1408-1414. DOI: 10.7256/1811-9018.2013.10.9567.
Kollinz R. Sotsiologiya filosofiy. Novosibirsk: Sibirskiy khronograf, 2002. 1281 s.
Golosenko I. A. Filosofiya istorii Pitirima Sorokina // Novaya i noveyshaya istoriya. 1966. № 4. S. 85–93.
Sorokin P. A. Sotsial'naya i kul'turnaya dinamika. M.: Astrel', 2006. 1176 s.
Tyugashev E. A. Spor ob avtonomii filosofii // Znanie. Ponimanie. Umenie. 2014. № 1. S. 175-182.
Dzhonston B. V. Pitirim Sorokin i sotsiokul'turnye tendentsii nashego vremeni // Sotsis. 1999. № 6. S. 13–24.

Abstract: The purpose of the research is to clarify the main peculiarities of philosophical discourse by comparing it to other branches of theoretical knowledge (first of all, science). As a result, philosophical discourse is described by the author as a special theoretical activity which peculiarities include unique auto-reflectivity, broad competiveness in interpretation of both objects and methods of this activity, the absence of both scientific verifiability of results and consistent succession of the problem definition. This leads to the path of ‘eternal return’ to ‘eternal issues’ The article is focused not only on the results of philosophizing but also on the philosophical practice itself (as it was defined by Alasdair Maclntyre). Noteworthy that to differentiate between different types of philosophy, it is necessary to answer the question whether a philosopher has a goal to solve particular, usually traditional, problems (for example, metaphysical questions) by the means of common rationality (philosophical classicism) or a goal to create the ‘newspeak’ where concepts are replaced with metaphors (so called philosophical avant-garde). This delimitation offered by the author is an innovation in the sphere of comparative studies of American and continental philosophy. The author also establishes the thesis that being one of the modern philosophical trends, analytical tradition – the modern version of traditional philosophy – is more capable of producing ‘philosophical results’ than others. The author of the article shows that the most significant drawback of Russian philosophy is the absence of serious interest towards researches of concepts, terms and controversial topics. According to the author, today these researches are replaced with the imitations of post-modernistic ‘literature philosophizing’.

Keywords: philosophy, research activity, reflection, metaphysics, counterversion, classical science, post-modernism, analytical tradition, science, literature.

References:
Diogen Laertskiy. O zhizni, ucheniyakh i izrecheniyakh znamenitykh filosofov / Per. M.L. Gasparova. M.: Mysl', 1986.
Svas'yan K.A. …No eshche noch'. M.: Evidentis, 2013.
Chernov S.A., Shevchenko I.V. Fridrikh Yakobi: vera, chuvstvo, razum. M.: Progress-Traditsiya, 2010.
Shokhin V.K. Agatologiya: sovremennost'i klassika. M.: Kanon+, 2014.
Shokhin V.K. Shkoly indiyskoy filosofii. Period formirovaniya. M.: Vostochnaya literatura, 2004.
Kranz M., Bien G., Hadot P. et al. Philosophie // Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie. Hrsg. von Joachim. Ritter + und Karlfried Gründer. Bd. VII. Basel: Schwabe, 1989. S. 572-879.
MacIntyre A. After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame, 2010.
McGinn C. The Making of a Philosopher: My Journey through Twentieth-Century Philosophy. NY, 2002.
Metaphysics: The Big Questions. Ed. by Michael J. Loux and Dean W. Zimmermann. Oxford: Blackwell, 1998.
Soames S. Philosophical Analysis in the Twentieth Century. Vol. 1. Princeton UP, 2003

References (transliteration):
Diogen Laertskiy. O zhizni, ucheniyakh i izrecheniyakh znamenitykh filosofov / Per. M.L. Gasparova. M.: Mysl', 1986.
Svas'yan K.A. …No eshche noch'. M.: Evidentis, 2013.
Chernov S.A., Shevchenko I.V. Fridrikh Yakobi: vera, chuvstvo, razum. M.: Progress-Traditsiya, 2010.
Shokhin V.K. Agatologiya: sovremennost'i klassika. M.: Kanon+, 2014.
Shokhin V.K. Shkoly indiyskoy filosofii. Period formirovaniya. M.: Vostochnaya literatura, 2004.
Kranz M., Bien G., Hadot P. et al. Philosophie // Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie. Hrsg. von Joachim. Ritter + und Karlfried Gründer. Bd. VII. Basel: Schwabe, 1989. S. 572-879.
MacIntyre A. After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame, 2010.
McGinn C. The Making of a Philosopher: My Journey through Twentieth-Century Philosophy. NY, 2002.
Metaphysics: The Big Questions. Ed. by Michael J. Loux and Dean W. Zimmermann. Oxford: Blackwell, 1998.
Soames S. Philosophical Analysis in the Twentieth Century. Vol. 1. Princeton UP, 2003

Abstract: The subject of the present research article is the philosophy as a special form of the knowledge of being. The purpose of the research is to describe the subject content and ontological nature of philosophy in terms of phenomenology. The essence and the mission of philosophy have been actively discussed by philosophers throughout the past century. Researchers offer several approaches to describing the subject of philosophy. The process of interpreting philosophy involves several procedures of the analytical analysis of being: definition of the subjective measure of being (being-for-myself), description of the phenomenal picture of being (conceptual structure of being) and determination of the features of integrated phenomena in terms of the ‘general subjective’. The main research method used by the author is the phenomenological approach that defines the place of the discourse as well as its mental landscape. Based on this approach, philosophy sees being (and the world) as a subject of interpretation. Philosophers try to understand the meaning (or meanings) of the integral phenomena of being. The author also offers his own interpretation and definition of philosophy. According to the author, philosophy is the existential phenomenological analytics and pragmatics of the general-subjective being that can be understood only if we focus on human existentials and the general-subjective in the world of phenomena that are reflected in human mind. The results of the research and aforesaid provisions can be used in teaching philosophy as well as arguments in never-ending discussions about the subject of philosophy.

Keywords: philosophy, knowledge, subject of philosophy, existence, world, meaning, being-in-general, being-for-myself, phenomenon, general-subjective.

Contact information: Reznik Yury Mikhailovich, 119991, Russia, Moscow, ul. Volkhonka 14/1, str. 5, komn. 432.

References:
Prokhorov M.M.. Sotsial'nost' myshleniya i ee negatsiya // Filologiya: nauchnye issledovaniya. – 2013. – № 4. – S. 104-107. DOI: 10.7256/2305-6177.2013.4.10086
Chindin I.V. Transtsendiruyushchiy razum: filosofiya, fantastika ili tselostnost' mifovospriyatiya? // NB: Kul'tury i iskusstva.-2013.-3.-C. 35-63. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/ca/article_5010.html
O.V. Krasnoyarova Ob istokakh ontologizatsii media v fenomenologii M. Merlo-Ponti // Filosofiya i kul'tura.-2012.-1.-C. 23-29.
Przhilenskiy V.I. Filosofiya nauki kak issledovatel'skaya programma: mezhdu istoriey nauki i teoriey poznaniya // NB: Filosofskie issledovaniya.-2013.-3.-C. 205-228. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/fr/article_267.html
Prokhorov M.M. Printsip edinstva bytiya i istorii v filosofskom mirovozzrenii // NB: Filosofskie issledovaniya.-2013.-12.-C. 1-81. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/fr/article_524.html
Prokhorov M.M. Ontologiya: «bytie i nebytie» ili «bytie i sushchee»? // NB: Filosofskie issledovaniya.-2013.-5.-C. 1-102. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/fr/article_284.html
Gryaznova E.V. Predmet filosofii nauki // NB: Filosofskie issledovaniya.-2013.-6.-C. 514-529. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/fr/article_440.html
Yaspers K. Filosofiya. Kniga pervaya. Filosofskoe orientirovanie v mire / Per. A.K. Sudakova. – M., 2012. – 384 s
Spirkin A.G. Filosofiya // Filosofskiy entsiklopedicheskiy slovar'. – M., 1983.
Khaydegger M. Bytie i vremya / Per. V.V. Bibikhina. – M., 1997. – 452 s.
Put' v filosofiyu. Antologiya. – M., 2001. – 445 s.
Sartr Zh.-P. Bytie i nichto: Opyt fenomenologicheskoy ontologii / Per. s fr., predisl., primech. V.I. Kolyadko. – M., 2000. – 639 s.
Podoroga V. Chto takoe filosofiya i chem ona dolzhna byt' segodnya // Vestnik analitiki. 2013. № 3 (53). – S. 147-154.
Novye napravleniya sotsiologicheskoy teorii / Per. L.G. Ionina; Obshch. red. G.V. Osipova. – M., 1978. – 392 s.
Merlo-Ponti M. V zashchitu filosofii / Per. s frants., primech. i poslesl. I.S. Vdovinoy. – M., 1996. – 248 s.
Merlo-Ponti M. Fenomenologiya vospriyatiya / Per. s frants. i redaktsiya I.S. Vdovinoy i S.L. Fokina. – SPb., 1999. – 608 s.

References (transliteration):
Prokhorov M.M.. Sotsial'nost' myshleniya i ee negatsiya // Filologiya: nauchnye issledovaniya. – 2013. – № 4. – S. 104-107. DOI: 10.7256/2305-6177.2013.4.10086
Chindin I.V. Transtsendiruyushchiy razum: filosofiya, fantastika ili tselostnost' mifovospriyatiya? // NB: Kul'tury i iskusstva.-2013.-3.-C. 35-63. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/ca/article_5010.html
O.V. Krasnoyarova Ob istokakh ontologizatsii media v fenomenologii M. Merlo-Ponti // Filosofiya i kul'tura.-2012.-1.-C. 23-29.
Przhilenskiy V.I. Filosofiya nauki kak issledovatel'skaya programma: mezhdu istoriey nauki i teoriey poznaniya // NB: Filosofskie issledovaniya.-2013.-3.-C. 205-228. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/fr/article_267.html
Prokhorov M.M. Printsip edinstva bytiya i istorii v filosofskom mirovozzrenii // NB: Filosofskie issledovaniya.-2013.-12.-C. 1-81. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/fr/article_524.html
Prokhorov M.M. Ontologiya: «bytie i nebytie» ili «bytie i sushchee»? // NB: Filosofskie issledovaniya.-2013.-5.-C. 1-102. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/fr/article_284.html
Gryaznova E.V. Predmet filosofii nauki // NB: Filosofskie issledovaniya.-2013.-6.-C. 514-529. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/fr/article_440.html
Yaspers K. Filosofiya. Kniga pervaya. Filosofskoe orientirovanie v mire / Per. A.K. Sudakova. – M., 2012. – 384 s
Spirkin A.G. Filosofiya // Filosofskiy entsiklopedicheskiy slovar'. – M., 1983.
Khaydegger M. Bytie i vremya / Per. V.V. Bibikhina. – M., 1997. – 452 s.
Put' v filosofiyu. Antologiya. – M., 2001. – 445 s.
Sartr Zh.-P. Bytie i nichto: Opyt fenomenologicheskoy ontologii / Per. s fr., predisl., primech. V.I. Kolyadko. – M., 2000. – 639 s.
Podoroga V. Chto takoe filosofiya i chem ona dolzhna byt' segodnya // Vestnik analitiki. 2013. № 3 (53). – S. 147-154.
Novye napravleniya sotsiologicheskoy teorii / Per. L.G. Ionina; Obshch. red. G.V. Osipova. – M., 1978. – 392 s.
Merlo-Ponti M. V zashchitu filosofii / Per. s frants., primech. i poslesl. I.S. Vdovinoy. – M., 1996. – 248 s.
Merlo-Ponti M. Fenomenologiya vospriyatiya / Per. s frants. i redaktsiya I.S. Vdovinoy i S.L. Fokina. – SPb., 1999. – 608 s.

Abstract: The author of the article offers a new outlook on the process of ancient thinking formation. The novelty of the research is that the author tries to show that from the very beginning, thinking has had both methodological and phenomenological aspect, although the latter were not understood specifically due to the fact that philosophical disciplines were formed only in the culture of the Early Modern Period. Moreover, the author of the present article suggests that we should view Aristotle’s rules and thinking categories as the creation of some kind of the intellectual technology as well as the first attempt to design the institution of thinking. The author substantiates his new views on ancient thinking based on the analysis of the genesis and development of ancient philosophy as well as the description Parmenides’, Plato’s and Aristotle’s views. Noteworthy that the author shows that the concept of thinking introduced by Parmenides was nothing else but the image of the intellectual path and discussion of certain criteria showing whether the path was correct or not. After him Plato and Aristotle discussed how to put the idea into life and convey the solution (method) to others. Solution of the aforesaid problems results in creation of the concept of the ancient thinking.

Keywords: cogitation (thinking), methodology, phenomenology, technology, institution, reasoning, knowledge, personality, rules, categories.

Contact information: Rozin Vadim Markovich, 119991, Russia, Moscow, ul. Volkhonka 14/1, str. 5, komn. 514.

References:
Vspomnim, kstati, i F.Bekona, kotoryy spustya dve tysyachi let ispol'zuet tu zhe metaforu puti («razum, kotoryy vstrechaet zdes' povsyudu stol'ko zaputannykh dorog, stol' obmanchivye podobiya veshchey i znakov, stol' izvilistye i slozhnye petli i uzly prirody…»), i obsuzhdaet usloviya uspeshnosti nauchnogo puteshestviya v poznanii prirody («Nado napravit' nashi shagi putevodnoy nit'yu i po opredelennomu pravilu obezopasit' vsyu dorogu, nachinaya ot pervykh vospriyatiy chuvstv neobkhodimo vvesti luchshee i bolee sovershennoe upotreblenie chelovecheskogo dukha i razuma put' k etomu nam otkrylo ne kakoe-libo inoe sredstvo, kak tol'ko spravedlivoe i zakonnoe prinizhenie chelovecheskogo dukha»). Bekon F. Velikoe vosstanovlenie nauk // Bekon F. Sochineniya v dvukh tomakh. T.1. M., 1971. S. 68-69.
Podstrochnik iz http://ancientrome.ru/antlitr/parmenid/parmen.htm v izdanii: «Ellinskie poety VIII—III vv. do n.e.», M., 1999. Tam zhe snoska: «Parmenid iz Elei v Yuzhnoy Italii (konets VI — nachalo V v. (ok. 540—470? ok. 520—450?)..
Platon. Parmenid. Soch. v 4 t. T.2. M., 1993. S. 357.
Aristotel'. Analitiki pervaya i vtoraya. M., 1952. S. 14.
V zavisimosti ot ispol'zovaniya odno i to zhe obshchee znanie moglo byt' kategoriey i ne yavlyat'sya takovoy. Esli eto znanie ispol'zovalos' dlya zadaniya kharakteristik ideal'nogo ob'ekta, osobenno v sluchae primeneniya opredelennogo pravila, to ono vystupalo kak kategoriya. Vne etogo konteksta eto bylo prosto obshchee znanie. Vot pochemu v raznykh knigakh Aristotel' daet raznye perechni kategoriy.
Aristotel'. Analitiki... Str. 14.
Aristotel'. Pervaya Analitika. Sochineniya v chetyrekh tomakh, t. 2. M., 1978. S. 119.
Aristotel'. O dushe. M., 1937. S. 288.
Aristotel'. O dushe. S. 73.
Tam zhe. S. 97, 99.
Aristotel'. Metafizika. M.,-L., 1934. S. 211.
Rozin V.M. Istoriya stanovleniya monashestva kak sotsial'nogo instituta // NB: Istoricheskie issledovaniya. - 2012. - 1. - C. 212 - 263. DOI: 10.7256/2306-420X.2012.1.335. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/hr/article_335.html

References (transliteration):
Vspomnim, kstati, i F.Bekona, kotoryy spustya dve tysyachi let ispol'zuet tu zhe metaforu puti («razum, kotoryy vstrechaet zdes' povsyudu stol'ko zaputannykh dorog, stol' obmanchivye podobiya veshchey i znakov, stol' izvilistye i slozhnye petli i uzly prirody…»), i obsuzhdaet usloviya uspeshnosti nauchnogo puteshestviya v poznanii prirody («Nado napravit' nashi shagi putevodnoy nit'yu i po opredelennomu pravilu obezopasit' vsyu dorogu, nachinaya ot pervykh vospriyatiy chuvstv neobkhodimo vvesti luchshee i bolee sovershennoe upotreblenie chelovecheskogo dukha i razuma put' k etomu nam otkrylo ne kakoe-libo inoe sredstvo, kak tol'ko spravedlivoe i zakonnoe prinizhenie chelovecheskogo dukha»). Bekon F. Velikoe vosstanovlenie nauk // Bekon F. Sochineniya v dvukh tomakh. T.1. M., 1971. S. 68-69.
Podstrochnik iz http://ancientrome.ru/antlitr/parmenid/parmen.htm v izdanii: «Ellinskie poety VIII—III vv. do n.e.», M., 1999. Tam zhe snoska: «Parmenid iz Elei v Yuzhnoy Italii (konets VI — nachalo V v. (ok. 540—470? ok. 520—450?)..
Platon. Parmenid. Soch. v 4 t. T.2. M., 1993. S. 357.
Aristotel'. Analitiki pervaya i vtoraya. M., 1952. S. 14.
V zavisimosti ot ispol'zovaniya odno i to zhe obshchee znanie moglo byt' kategoriey i ne yavlyat'sya takovoy. Esli eto znanie ispol'zovalos' dlya zadaniya kharakteristik ideal'nogo ob'ekta, osobenno v sluchae primeneniya opredelennogo pravila, to ono vystupalo kak kategoriya. Vne etogo konteksta eto bylo prosto obshchee znanie. Vot pochemu v raznykh knigakh Aristotel' daet raznye perechni kategoriy.
Aristotel'. Analitiki... Str. 14.
Aristotel'. Pervaya Analitika. Sochineniya v chetyrekh tomakh, t. 2. M., 1978. S. 119.
Aristotel'. O dushe. M., 1937. S. 288.
Aristotel'. O dushe. S. 73.
Tam zhe. S. 97, 99.
Aristotel'. Metafizika. M.,-L., 1934. S. 211.
Rozin V.M. Istoriya stanovleniya monashestva kak sotsial'nogo instituta // NB: Istoricheskie issledovaniya. - 2012. - 1. - C. 212 - 263. DOI: 10.7256/2306-420X.2012.1.335. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/hr/article_335.html

Abstract: The subject matter of this research is objectivity as the main feature of science and scientific value. The author of the article raises a question whether the synthesis of cultural and philosophical researches is possible. The subject of such researches is the science as a cultural phenomenon, in particular, objectivity as the basic scientific value. Such interpretation of objectivity is shared by many experts in the sphere of modern epistemology. The problem is that interpretation of objectivity not only as the scientific criterion but also as the scientific value or even scientific virtue makes objectivity as a possible subject of research of both philosophy of science and cultural studies as well as other associated disciplines. At the same time, such interpretation necessarily connects scientific knowledge with human activity and therefore may even relativize it. The author of the article establishes that cultural research methods can be successfully used in solving relativism problems related to studying scientific values in modern philosophy of science. The author of the article uses the analytical research method which is caused by the need to define the essential differences in definitions of scientific values and determine their status in terms of philosophy of science. It has been established that the modern interpretation of objectivity as a scientific value or virtue creates a threat for relativism in reviewing the grounds for scientific activity. However, this threat can be overcome if the objectivity is related to human activity. In this case objectivity is understood as the efforts made by a scientist in order to overcome his own limits and involves versatile thinking and self-concern. Cultural researches have a particular subject of research and therefore often deal with the problem of relativism. Consequently, results of cultural researches can be successfully used in philosophy of science as well.

Keywords: science, objectivity, philosophy of science, cultural studies, scientific value, scientific virtue, subjectivity, relativism, universalism, versatile thinking.

Contact information: Shipovalova Lada Vladimirovna, 199034, Russia, St. Petersburg, Mendeleevskaya linia 5.

References:
Porus V.N. Etika nauki v strukture filosofii nauki // Etos nauki / red. Kiyashchenko L.P., Mirskaya E.Z. M.: Akademiya, 2008. – 544 c., c. 87-107.
Roberts R.C., Wood W.J. Intellectual Virtues: An Essay in Regulative Epistemology (Advances in Cognitive Models & Arch) / Robert C. Roberts, W. Jay Wood. – New York: Oxford University Press, 2007. – 339 p.
Virtue Epistemology: Contemporary Readings (MIT Readers in Contemporary Philosophy) / ed. J. Greco, J. Turri. – London, Cambridge Mass., 2012. – 426 p.
Rikkert G. O ponyatii filosofii / G. Rikkert Filosofiya zhizni: per. s nem.-K.: Nika-tsentr, 1998. – 512 s., s.448-486.
Stepin V.S. Evolyutsiya etosa nauki: ot klassicheskoy k postneklassicheskoy ratsional'nosti nauki // Etos nauki / red. Kiyashchenko L.P., Mirskaya E.Z. M.: Akademiya, 2008. – 544 c., c. 21-47.
Daston, L., Galison P. Objectivity / L. Daston, P. Galison.-New York: Zone Books, 2010. – 502 p.
Rorty R. Objectivity, Relativism and Truth / R. Rorty.-New York: Cambridge University press, 1991. – 226 p.
Agatstsi E. Pochemu u nauki est' i eticheskie izmereniya? // Voprosy filosofii. 2009.-№ 10. – s. 93-104.
Daston, L. and Galison P. (1992) The Image of Objectivity. Representation, 1992.-№ 40, Special Issue: Seeng Sciense. p. 81-128.
Deston L. Nauchnaya ob'ektivnost' so slovami i bez slov.// Nauka i nauchnost' v istoricheskoy perspektive / red. Aleksandrov D., Khagner M. SPb.: Evropeyskiy universitet v Sankt-Peterburge; Aleteyya, 2007. – 330 s., s. 37-71.
Proctor R. Value-Free Science?: Purity and Power in Modern Knowledge / R. Proctor.-Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1991. – p.344
Longino H.E. Science as Social knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry / H.E. Longino.-Princeton.: Princeton University Press, 1990.-262 p.
Douglas H. The Irreducible Complexity of Objectivity // Synthese, 2004.-Vol. 138, №. 3.-p. 453-473.
Megill A. Introduction: Four Senses of Objectivity // Rethinking Objectivity. / ed. A. Megill, Durham and London: Duke University Press, 1994.-p. 1-20
Dianova V.M. Protsessy universalizatsii kul'tury v kontekste globalizatsii // Kul'tura na rubezhe XX-XXI vekov: globalizatsionnye protsessy. SPb.: Nestor-Istoriya, 2009.-632 s., c.174-187.
Gryaznova E.V. Predmet filosofii nauki // NB: Filosofskie issledovaniya. - 2013. - 6. - C. 514 - 529. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/fr/article_440.html
S. V. Borisov «Filosofskiy glaz» dlya nauki: dialog v dialoge. // Filosofiya i kul'tura. - 2011. - 1. - C. 81 - 91.
Przhilenskiy V.I. Filosofiya nauki kak issledovatel'skaya programma: mezhdu istoriey nauki i teoriey poznaniya // NB: Filosofskie issledovaniya. - 2013. - 3. - C. 205 - 228. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/fr/article_267.html

References (transliteration):
Porus V.N. Etika nauki v strukture filosofii nauki // Etos nauki / red. Kiyashchenko L.P., Mirskaya E.Z. M.: Akademiya, 2008. – 544 c., c. 87-107.
Roberts R.C., Wood W.J. Intellectual Virtues: An Essay in Regulative Epistemology (Advances in Cognitive Models & Arch) / Robert C. Roberts, W. Jay Wood. – New York: Oxford University Press, 2007. – 339 p.
Virtue Epistemology: Contemporary Readings (MIT Readers in Contemporary Philosophy) / ed. J. Greco, J. Turri. – London, Cambridge Mass., 2012. – 426 p.
Rikkert G. O ponyatii filosofii / G. Rikkert Filosofiya zhizni: per. s nem.-K.: Nika-tsentr, 1998. – 512 s., s.448-486.
Stepin V.S. Evolyutsiya etosa nauki: ot klassicheskoy k postneklassicheskoy ratsional'nosti nauki // Etos nauki / red. Kiyashchenko L.P., Mirskaya E.Z. M.: Akademiya, 2008. – 544 c., c. 21-47.
Daston, L., Galison P. Objectivity / L. Daston, P. Galison.-New York: Zone Books, 2010. – 502 p.
Rorty R. Objectivity, Relativism and Truth / R. Rorty.-New York: Cambridge University press, 1991. – 226 p.
Agatstsi E. Pochemu u nauki est' i eticheskie izmereniya? // Voprosy filosofii. 2009.-№ 10. – s. 93-104.
Daston, L. and Galison P. (1992) The Image of Objectivity. Representation, 1992.-№ 40, Special Issue: Seeng Sciense. p. 81-128.
Deston L. Nauchnaya ob'ektivnost' so slovami i bez slov.// Nauka i nauchnost' v istoricheskoy perspektive / red. Aleksandrov D., Khagner M. SPb.: Evropeyskiy universitet v Sankt-Peterburge; Aleteyya, 2007. – 330 s., s. 37-71.
Proctor R. Value-Free Science?: Purity and Power in Modern Knowledge / R. Proctor.-Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1991. – p.344
Longino H.E. Science as Social knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry / H.E. Longino.-Princeton.: Princeton University Press, 1990.-262 p.
Douglas H. The Irreducible Complexity of Objectivity // Synthese, 2004.-Vol. 138, №. 3.-p. 453-473.
Megill A. Introduction: Four Senses of Objectivity // Rethinking Objectivity. / ed. A. Megill, Durham and London: Duke University Press, 1994.-p. 1-20
Dianova V.M. Protsessy universalizatsii kul'tury v kontekste globalizatsii // Kul'tura na rubezhe XX-XXI vekov: globalizatsionnye protsessy. SPb.: Nestor-Istoriya, 2009.-632 s., c.174-187.
Gryaznova E.V. Predmet filosofii nauki // NB: Filosofskie issledovaniya. - 2013. - 6. - C. 514 - 529. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/fr/article_440.html
S. V. Borisov «Filosofskiy glaz» dlya nauki: dialog v dialoge. // Filosofiya i kul'tura. - 2011. - 1. - C. 81 - 91.
Przhilenskiy V.I. Filosofiya nauki kak issledovatel'skaya programma: mezhdu istoriey nauki i teoriey poznaniya // NB: Filosofskie issledovaniya. - 2013. - 3. - C. 205 - 228. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/fr/article_267.html