Ideas and Ideals

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.

The materials of the round table “Fifty years after N.S. Khrushchev” are presented. The round table
took place on 17 April 2014 at Novosibirsk State University at the plenary session of the section “History”
in the framework of the yearly International Student Scientifi c Conference. Fundamental questions were
discussed of the reasons and prerequisites of “the thaw”, its historical signifi cance and its lessons. It
was noted that knowledge of this period is insuffi cient, as long as there is the absence of fundamental
historical research, and the problems with understanding of many moments of the history of “the
thaw”. Priority is given to political, economic, and other aspects of the process of “de-Stalinization”. The contradictions of the policy of N.S. Khrushchev are discussed which was expressed in its progressive along with conservative trends. The phenomenon of “the thaw” demonstrates certain regularities of the Russian history: the liberalization of the regime was weakening the state, and the stabilization of the state was accompanying by increasingly authoritarian tendencies. According to some speakers the growing maturity of the Russian society provides some hope for the positive outcome of this contradiction.

The discussion was attended by the historians and economists: Professor Kuznetsov I.S. (Novosibirsk State University (NSU); Professor G.I. Khanin; Dr. Sciences (History) N.N. Ablazhei (Inst. of History of Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences (IH SB RAS, NSU), Cand. of Sciences (History) O.N. Kalinina (Institute of History, RAS); Professor V.I. Isaev (IH SB RAS), Professor S.А. Krasilnikov (NSU).

The round table was devoted to the problems related to the recent state of the Russian language.

Participants of the discussion noted the need to clearly distinguish between language and speech, i.e. a system and its way of functioning in the process of communication, and between general laws of evolution of language and the specific situation in the society. A variety of socio-linguistic trends that affect literacy of native speakers was discussed, as well as the loss of prestige of the Russian language in Russian society and around the world. There were different opinions regarding whether these negative effects are disastrous for the preservation of national language and for the Russian culture manifested through language. The participants expressed confidence that the Russian language will alive in 2100, however, in order to preserve its purity and wealth and to raise the prestige in the eyes of the national and the world communities, the efforts are needed from each family and society, and from the state, and specifically from еducational institutions at all levels – from primary to tertiary ones.