The participants in the Round table “The Value of Scientific Journal” discuss a number of problems that are currently encountered by authors and publishers of corresponding journals. Will scientific journal be preserved in its present form in the competitive environment with drastic growth of electronic communications? Is a printed on paper journal the best way to present scientific results? Are its functions changing? What is the audience of authors and readers of scientific journals in recent time? These questions get different answers. The traditional functions of a scientific journal can now be carried out in new forms, and it is not clear what will remain of the habitual printed copy in the nearest future. In particular, this concerns the function of presenting scientific knowledge, which is gradually moving to specialized electronic portals. The issue of the relationship between socio-humanitarian journals and journals which present natural sciences is discussed separately. The standardization and formalization of the presentation of results for humanitarian articles is in most cases unacceptable, but it is this feature that is one of the most important when including the journal in most significant international databases. The same applies to journals that popularize science at the serious level. The problem of scientometrics’ objectivity is discussed. What does the fact of a higher citation level, for example, in economics, mean when Keynes and Marx are inferior to many modern researchers according to the Hirsch index? The participants discuss the problem of the scientific level of authors in Russian conditions, the problem of the lack of originality of publications, and some other issues.
The round table discussed a wide range of issues related to the history of the Komsomol, paying special attention to a historic change in the tasks and structure of the Komsomol organization. In the course of the conversation participants demonstrated different positions and approaches, as well as fundamentally different assessments of the Komsomol activity. They discussed the role of youth in the life of the state, the ways of assessments of historical events in general, and unpredictability of our history.
Since 2009 the “Novosibirsk Model of the United Nations” at the Novosibirsk State University of Economics and Management has been held by the Department of the World Economy, International Relations and Law as an important methodological and practical element of education in International Relations, International Regional Studies and the World Economy. The experience of modeling the activities of the United Nations is important for students to understand how the decision-making process in modern international system works and why in international relations everything is not going as well as we would like, but not as bad as it could be. The round table discussed the role of the UN in the modern world, the history of the organization and the contradictions, put in the basement by its founders when it emerged; the causes of the current UN crisis and the prospects for its elimination; the role of the UN in the past and present armed conflicts; in ensuring international security and protecting human rights; the United Nations activities in the field of the world economy on the example of the UN Global Compact on Social Responsibility, as well as other issues related to international relations at the present stage. It is noted that in the ordinary mind the expectations of the UN are extremely high. The UN has formed the image of a powerful and influential organization, the world government,
The round table discussed how philosophy interprets the concept of will and whether it is possible, basing on this understanding, to create a methodology for a psychological understanding of the will. It is stated that so far in the domestic tradition there is no methodology that would overcome the crisis associated with the inability to develop this concept. The category of will is considered in the key of the historical and philosophical traditions; it plays an important role both in ancient and medieval philosophy, and in the philosophy of modern times. Special attention was paid to the Schopenhauer approach, who believed that everything is an objectification of the will. The will was also discussed in its relation to such a category as the soul, and in this case the will becomes a part of the soul; and the concept of the will was also considered in its relation to the notion of power: in this case the will is the awareness of desire and aspiration for its realization.
The round table participants discussed a number of interrelated questions: how can we evaluate the relationship between the Church and society in Russia at the present stage? What is causing the obstacles for the dialogue between the Church and other social groups in modern Russia? Is there a possibility for such a dialogue in modern Russian society? What is the actual and possible role of intelligentsia in the formation of a neutral space for such a dialogue? The participants discussed different aspects of the problem: the history of the church and society relations, the problems of these relations at the present stage, the role of the church in the life of modern Russian society, the problem of the dialogue between the Church and atheists. The participants also discussed the burning problems of the Church's participation in the formation and education of youth, issues of influence of the church on the processes of cultural development, the acute problems of the fight between the Orthodox church and religious extremism, the danger of which influence, especially on young people, is often underestimated. In the final analysis, there is a multi-dimensional picture of the relationship between the institution of the Church and civil society represented by different social groups.
At the round table the theme "Siberia as a megaregion" was discussed which had first been announced at the Krasnoyarsk forum. A number of problems are analyzed, starting with the geographic boundaries of Siberia, and thus identifying the geopolitical settings of the mega-region. The depth of historical time was discussed, as well as the common history, and the problem of coexistence of different peoples. Besides, the problem of comparison of different megaregions, and the problem of their correlation with states was considered. What can be seen as the commonality, the identity of the mentality of the population of megaregion? The difference was discussed between megaregion and macro-region, which is primarily determined economically. Specifically was considered from different aspects the problem of the center of the gravity of megaregion with respect to Siberia. The role of innovation in the energy sector was analyzed as the key of a gradual transition from oil and gas to coal. Focusing on demographic and economic issues the participants related, in particular, to the programmes of complex development of Siberia, which were quite badly performed, and on the geopolitical consequences of current trends of population migration to the European part of Russia.
At the round table the problem was discussed of using mathematical methods in the analysis of historical process, or methods of historical macrosociology. On the one hand, it is obvious that in the history different societies have certain regularity, which can be examined by statistical methods. This applies to demographic waves as well as to certain economic realities, etc. For instance, we can point to the Kondratieff’s waves. If we take it for granted, it appears that it is possible to speak about the corresponding laws. However two problems appear straight away – the quality of data on which to rely, and the ratio of the peculiarities of the history of some particular societies and the general laws which characterize any society. Economists, the most advanced in application of mathematics, are building system models, while historians are just approaching to this. There is inductive approach to these issues as well, when historians use statistics to analyze certain specific processes. Also such issues were discussed such as the transformation of professional history into applied political science, which is certainly counterproductive from the point of view of science as such, and the problem of the access to the archives. In addition, it was indicated that there is a deep connection between historical research and such complex discipline as adaptology. Participants also discussed the problems of interpretation of historical data and the status of social sciences in general.