Закрыть

Логин:
Пароль:
	Запомнить меня на этом компьютере
Забыли свой пароль?

  Войти      Регистрация

ЦИВИЛИЗАЦИОННАЯ ПАРАДИГМА В НАУЧНОМ НАСЛЕДИИ А.С. ПАНАРИНА / CIVILIZATIONAL PARADIGM IN ALEXANDER PANARIN’S SCIENTIFIC HERITAGE / ZIVILISATIONSPARADIGMA IM WISSENSCHAFTLICHEN NACHLAß VON A.S. PANARIN

Глушенкова Е.И.

Русская цивилизация у Н.Н. Моисеева и А.С. Панарина

Глушенкова Елена Ивановна, кандидат политических наук, старший научный сотрудник Центра проблем развития и модернизации Института мировой экономики и международных отношений РАН (ЦПРМ ИМЭМО РАН), доцент Международного независимого эколого-политологического университета (МНЭПУ)

E-mail: lenchen007@rambler.ru

В центре данной работы — теория русской цивилизации. Сравнительное исследование творческого наследия выдающегося отечественного политического философа А.С. Панарина и теоретика русского космизма и ноосферы академика Н.Н. Моисеева осуществлено сквозь призму цивилизационного дискурса, в контексте основных разработок и моделей цивилизаций Запада и России. В итоге найдено много точек соприкосновения Н.Н. Моисеева и А.С. Панарина в интересующей нас области, чему способствовало то, что академик выступил в ней как космист, скорее, религиозного, чем естественнонаучного, направления.

Ключевые слова: цивилизация, культурно-исторический тип, русская цивилизация, цивилизационный Вызов (Ответ), цивилизационная матрица, цивилизационный разлом, традиционная (технотронная) цивилизация, окружающая среда цивилизации, цивилизационное пространство.

Литература

Глушенкова Е. И. Экополитология Н.Н. Моисеева и устойчивое развитие России.  М.: МНЭПУ, 2015.

Данилевский Н.Я. Россия и Европа. М.: Древнее и современное, 2002.

Ильин И.В., Леонова О.Г., Розанов А.С. Теория и практика политической глобалистики. М.: Изд-во Московского Университета, 2013.

Моисеев Н.Н. Современный антропогенез и цивилизационные разломы // Вопросы философии. 1995. № 1. С. 3—30.

Моисеев Н.Н. Агония России. Есть ли у нее будущее? М.: Экопресс, 1996.

Моисеев Н.Н. Расставание с простотой. М.: Аграф, 1998.

Моисеев Н.Н. Размышления о современной политологии. М.: МНЭПУ, 1999.

Моисеев Н.Н., Львов Д.С., Петров А.А., Питерский В.М. Укрепление российской государственности: экономика, ресурсы, геополитика. М.: Геоинформмарк, 2000.

Моисеев Н.Н. Русский вопрос // Русская цивилизация. М.: Контакт, 2000. С. 3—15.

Панарин А.С. «Вторая Европа» или «третий Рим»? Избранная социально-философская публицистика. М.: ИФ РАН, 1996.

Панарин А.С. Православная цивилизация в глобальном мире. М.: Алгоритм, 2002.

Панарин А.С. Православная цивилизация в глобальном мире // Трибуна русской мысли. 2014. № 15. С. 58—73.

Панарин А.С. Православная цивилизация. М.: Институт русской цивилизации, 2014.

Поморцева А.М. Гносеологический статус человека в цивилизационных разломах: философско-куль­турологический аспект: Дисс... к.ф.н. Ставрополь, 2003.

Тойнби А. Дж. Постижение истории. М.: Айрис-Пресс, 2002.

Moiseev N.N. "Once Again on the Problem of Coevolution." Russian Studies in Philosophy 37.3 (1998): 63—72.

Moiseev N.N., Pospelov I.G. "The Orientation of Evolution and the Intellect." World Futures: Journal of General Evolution 32.1 (1991): 15—20.

Glushenkova E.I.

Russian Civilization in Nikita N. Moiseev's and Alexander S. Panarin's Studies

Elena I. Glushenkova, PhD., Senior Researcher at RAS Institute of World Economy and International Relations, Assistant Professor at the International Independent University of Environmental Politics

E-mail: lenchen007@rambler.ru

The contemporary philosophers pay special attention to the civilizational analysis in the age of globalization, with the rising interest in the studies of Russian civilization, that have been recently developing mostly because of the recent events in Ukraine. The concept of Russian civilization is the key issue of my study, in which I focus on works written by outstanding political philosopher Alexander S. Panarin and Russian cosmist and noosphere theoretician Nikita N. Moiseev (1917—2000). My article represents comparative analysis of their ideas, with focus on the political ideas of both of them within the conceptual framework of civilizational discourse in correlation with the workings of influential civilizational thinkers. So for those purposes I used both methods of analytical reading and discourse analysis, as well as comparative method and system analysis.

I found that, as a civilizational theoretician, Moiseev stepped aside from his cosmic methodology (to be precise — from the natural scientific branch of Russian cosmism), nevertheless his theory of civilization remains the natural component and is, as a whole, in the context of his main philosophical and political findings, including his environmental politics and ecological philosophy. I examined also Panarin's philosophy of nature that I found in his 'Civilization as a political system' analysis, considering his model of interrelations within the ‘society — natural environment’ system. The question of civilizational identification of post-Soviet countries (including Ukraine) is naturally highlighted in it too. Alexander S. Panarin and Nikita N. Moiseev're much closer as thinkers, then we were expecting, we conclude, they had much in common, not at least because of the fact, that, as a civilizational thinker, Moiseev appeared to be the representative of Russian religious Cosmism school.

So Panarin’s and Moiseev’s ideas of civilization strongly correlate; I conclude both theoreticians could be defined as civilizational thinkers of the same — religious — type. In turn, one can describe Panarin not only as a religious thinker, but as a Russian religious cosmist too. 

Keywords: civilization, cultural historical type, Russian civilization, civilizational Challenge and Answer, civilization matrix, civilizational fault, traditional (technological) civilization, environment of civilization, space of civilization.

References:

Glushenkova E.I. Nikita N. Moiseev’s Environmental Politics and Sustainable Development of Russia. Moscow: International Independent University of Environmental Politics Publisher, 2015. (In Russian).

Danilevsky N.Ya. Russia and Europe. Moscow: Drevnee i sovremennoe Publisher, 2002. (In Russian).

Ilyin I.V., Leonova O.G., Rosanov A.S. Theory and Practice of Political Globalistics. Moscow: Moscow State University Publisher, 2013. (In Russian).

Moiseev N.N. Agony of Russia. Does It Have a Future?. Moscow: Ecopress Publisher, 1996. (In Russian).

Moiseev N.N. "Modern Anthropogenesis and Civilizational Faults." Problems of Philosophy 1 (1995): 3—30. (In Russian).

Moiseev N.N. "Once Again on the Problem of Coevolution." Russian Studies in Philosophy 37.3 (1998): 63—72.

Moiseev N.N. Parting from Simplicity. Moscow: Argraf Publisher, 1996. (In Russian).

Moiseev N.N. "Russian Question." Russian Civilization. Moscow: Kontakt Publisher, 2000, pp. 3—15. (In Russian).

Moiseev N.N. Thinking on the Modern Political Science. Moscow: International Independent University of Environmental Politics Publisher, 1999. (In Russian).

Moiseev N.N., Lvov D.S., Petrov A.A., Pitersky V.M. Sustaining Russian State: The Economy, Resources, Geopolitics. Moscow: Geoinformmark Publisher, 2000. (In Russian). 

Moiseev N.N., Pospelov I.G. "The Orientation of Evolution and the Intellect." World Futures: Journal of General Evolution 32.1 (1991): 15—20.

Panarin A.S. Orthodox Civilization. Moscow: Institute of Russian Civilization Publisher, 2014. (In Russian).

Panarin A.S. Orthodox Civilization in Globalizing World. Moscow: Algoritm Publisher, 2002. (In Russian).

Panarin A.S. "Orthodox Civilization in Globalizing World." Tribune of Russian Thought 15 (2014): 58—73. (In Russian).

Panarin A.S. ‘Second Europe’ or ‘Third Rome’? Selected Socio-philosophical Journalism. Moscow: RAS Institute of Philosophy Publisher, 1996. (In Russian).

Pomortseva A.M. Gnoseological State of Human in Civilizational Faults: Philosophical and Cultural Aspect. Ph.D. diss. Stavropol, 2003. (In Russian).

Toynbee A. A Study of History. Moscow: Ayris Press Publisher, 2002. (In Russian).