CIVILIZATION: THE SEARCH FOR PHILOSOPHICAL AND THEORETICAL UNITY

Abstract

In the scientifi c literature of the philosophical and political orientation of recent years, there has been a variety of approaches to understanding “civilization”. Considering the term “civilization” as a verbal expression of a certain object is sometimes scientifi cally incorrect. The conceptual expression of the semantic meaning of “civilization” that approaches a universal, general scientifi c one. The variety of conceptual interpretations reduces “civilization” to the level of a special, or at least a single, concrete scientifi c one. The variety of interpretations confirms the fact that there is no uniformity of approaches to the actual problem of “civilization”. Philosophy is faced with the task of conceptualizing “civilization”, detailing the system-forming features, highlighting the structure, etc. Analyzing the diff erent defi nitions of “civilization”, it is possible to identify classifi cations (of stadium development, local civilizations), to consider scientifi c theories in terms of their viability and evidence base. When considering civilizational issues, it is possible to focus on the moral, religious, political, legal or economic component. A review of some approaches to the consideration of “civilization” (V. Mirabeau, J. Gobineau, A. Ferguson, F. Engels, A. Toynbee, V. Mezhuyev, S. Huntington, etc.) allows us to assume that the term under consideration cannot be represented at the universal level. A detailed analysis of Toynbee’s civilizational theory and its verifi cation by real reality (empirically) casts doubt on the main provisions. The theory of historical development of a British scientist is sometimes presented as a specifi c civilizational theory. Insuffi cient attention is paid to his thesis about the impossibility of unifying culture, which is a systemic feature of A. Toynbee. An appeal to the theory of the American researcher S. Huntington leads us to the thesis about the impossibility of the existence of a universal civilization. In his reading, civilization is only a qualitatively diff erent stage of human development. The same point of view is shared by the Russian philosopher N. Motroshilova. Unlike many theorists of the civilizational approach, the renowned Russian philosopher V. Mezhuyev outlined the direction of the problem development. He suggested that the whole process of historical development is an ascent through the diversity of a single universal civilization. A similar position was held by K.Jaspers, describing the second “axial time”. The article substantiates the need to formulate a logical construct of universal civilization.