On the basis of analysis of the normogenesis concepts the author proposes the formulation of the foundations for the integrative approach to the issue of the nature of normativity. The possibility of such approach is viewed in the reference to the anthropological sense of normogenesis.A human as a special kind of being, as the basis of his being constituted the dynamic equilibrium of the individual-collective ability to live within a certain socio-cultural model of evolution. A variety of shapes and characteristics of the normativity phenomenon can be explained by means of bringing together to the relatively stable unity of the ontological foundations: substantial, cultural and historical, and discursive. The resulting theoretical model allows to link different concepts of normogenesis and obtain heuristically and prognostically a significant idea of the establishment of norms.
In the article on the material of reconstruction of Z. Bauman’s book "The Relevance of the Holocaust" and the analysis of other studies the understanding of complex sciences, which are based on interdisciplinary research and focused in terms of practical applications in engineering and technology in the broadest sense, is introduced. First, the criteria of distinguishing between legal and illegal modernization of philosophical and scientific works are discussed. Special features of interdisciplinary research are characterized in every detail: partial implementation of methodological strategies and ideals of science, balancing and configuration of monodisciplinary discourses, which are included into interdisciplinary research, epistemic knowledge requirements obtained in these studies.
The duality of a man's relationship to Deity as the "I" and "we" turns into a dual character of any social cohesion, that is both free and repressive at the same time. The concept of genetic connection between "we" and "I" is a perfect reflection of the ideal foundation of empirically given communities. It is an abstract unity, "we", which has elevated beyond "I", and submitted itself to its tyrannical "must" provoking an uprising of "I". Manifestations of obligation are empathy, legitimation, sacralization. The conflict of “I” and “we” values inherent to the very basis of the ideal society is different for specific communities. Social empiricism has different understandings of genetical connection between "I" and "we." It has always been a cyclical conflict of "I" and "we" as an alternation of anarchy and despotism. In today's society it has acquired the form of the conflict between capitalism and socialism, but has retained its sacred source – Understanding of God (Bogoponimanie). The idea of coordination and non-hierarchical position of "we" and "I" is the concept of the ideal society, which depends on the right Understanding of God (Bogoponimaniye). The evolution of Understanding of God (Bogoponimaniye) changes the ratio of transcendence and immanence of the sacred Divine image; however, its antinomy will never be overcome and it is given objectively in the collective consciousness. Therefore, the absolute ideal theosis of a man coexists with the optimization ideal "service to the people" which includes the requirements of social subordination and discipline. Disclosure of the God’s immanence to a man softens the brutality of the legal and moral norms. Their arbitrary softening leads to chaos and social disasters. The ideal society is formed with the help of a unity of principles: service to the people, solidarity, and freedom. Service to the people is antinomic: a man is obliged to promote the growth of the Good and prevent the world from the Evil. These requirements are mutually exclusive. The first one requires following the Grace of God, and the second one - following the "law." Service to the people needs both strengthening the "law" and its weakening. Saving the world from the Evil is uppermost coercion of freedom in human actions. The reference to antinomianism of the optimization ideal turns into the assumption, that anthropological perfection as the growth of the Good frees a man from the objective social order.
Widely discussed global systemic crisis is redoubled by the lack of the ideas that can generate a new paradigm in the science, philosophy and intellectual culture in general. Philosophy is able to become the beginning of the intellectual culture output from the recession. This requires the fulfillment of the conditions: a new way of the problematizations, the inclusion of new philosophical problems into interdisciplinary discussion; identification of a number of the humanity ideas with poorly reflected philosophical intuitions and their coordination with problems. Philosophy mission in the XXI century is to establish some synthesis. In the broad sense this is an association of a human, nature and society in some system while prescribing their consistent attachment to the self-development of the Universe. In the narrow sense this is a synthesis of philosophy, physics and mathematics, where the prerogative of philosophy is the organization of interdisciplinary researches and projects. Another actual for philosopher’s task turns out the work at the basis of scientific social theory which is capable to analyze social processes including simulation tools on the computer; to serve as a basis for selecting some development strategies. For philosophers it is important to perceive intellectual culture in general as the main area of their activity when science is a part of this culture.
The author has devoted his article to the consideration of the moral aspects of such an important phenomenon of human communication as a RESPONSE. In our responses we humans behave honestly / dishonestly, resolutely / hesitantly, directly / evasively, respectfully / impudently, responsibly / irresponsibly, humanely / ruthlessly, adequately / with servility. It happens not only on the atomic level of the relationship between two individuals, but also where there is a line connection between an individual and a group, between two groups, an individual and a community, a group and a community. And there is every reason to attribute the answers, given by the actors to each other, to the semantic field studied by the ethical science. The answer is not simply a reaction to the event that has caused it. It's an emotional experience, a thought, an evaluation, or an action of the subject caused by significant moral circumstances. In response, people actively express their attitude to the events, showing their moral culture. Consideration of the generalized situation structure where there is a morally significant answer (SUBJECT – ADDRESSEE – OBJECT – CONTEXT – MOTIVATION – PURPOSE – TOOLS – RESULT) extends the ethical philosophical possibilities in understanding human culture, identifying the moral resources of an individual, a group, and a human community.