The article subject is the relationship between the revolutionary action and the process of legitimation. The author demonstrates how revolutionaries acquire the right to new rationalization of history. The priority in this process belongs to narratives which are related to realization of the right to revolt. Each conscious revolutionary action anticipates the existence of some parallel structures of counterpower. These structures are mainly established as political views and imagined institutions. Within the process of revolution, this fundamental feature of political imagination is embodied in narratives of society-power relation, which is the basic component of the revolutionary legitimation. ; ***
The main goal of the article is to show the formation of cultural-historical and philosophical-legal preconditions of political legitimacy. Also it deals with the correlation of the state governing and political recognition, violence and legitimation technologies, state institutions, and the imaginaries of political power. Special attention is given to the manipulative electoral sociology in the process of the authoritarian government establishment. ; The main goal of the article is to show the formation of cultural-historical and philosophical-legal preconditions of political legitimacy. Also it deals with the correlation of the state governing and political recognition, violence and legitimation technologies, state institutions, and the imaginaries of political power. Special attention is given to the manipulative electoral sociology in the process of the authoritarian government establishment.
The legacy of the 20th century — the results of the newest aggressive paganism, combined paradoxically with acquisitions of emancipated intellect which is not constrained with morals — worries to death even in the 19th century. This, in particular, is witnessed by the newest Russian imperialism which has absorbed the mythology of the "coming boor", traditions of nihilism and anomy, political culture of the Moscow khanate, fed by propagandistic machine of the Kremlin. That is why the leading scientific subjects of the book The Red Century by Myroslav Popovich have gained the acute urgency; the book is a certain encyclopedia of phobias, drawbacks, divergences and latent threats proceeding from that social, political and cultural commonness of the 20th century which resulted in the greatest victims in the history of mankind. The round-table meeting dedicated to this book had the aim to plunge the most urgent narratives of The Red Century in the present notional context. Such a task foresaw the use of interdisciplinary methodological optics with participation of well-known philosophers, philologists, historians with the aim to find the ways of healing from thephobias, drawbacks, and divergences of the century which has passed. The round-table meeting participants discussed the broad range of questions: historical and cultural preconditions of geopolitical events of the 20th century (M. Popovich); lessons that we have to learn proceeding from these events (V. Skurativskyi); content of the present geopolitical situation (S. Proleev); contradictions of modernization and destruction of the moral and political universalism in the context of totalitarianism (A. Yermolenko); doubtful role of ressentiment as the motive force of history (V. Kozlovskyi); problems of identity in formation of the nation-state (O.Bilyi); prospects of the national state system in the 21st century (O. Maiboroda); Ukrainian context of the Second World war (Yu. Shaoval); a phenomenon of stateless subjectness of the Ukrainian nation in the historical context (S. Hrabovskyi). ; ***
The purpose of the roundtable discussion is to discuss challenges and threats to Ukraine's democratic development in the face of unsustainable democratic institutions in the process of long-term social transformation. Investigating these conflicting institutional dynamics in the spectrum of their socio-structural, socio-psychological and socio-cultural manifestations, analyzing these challenges, risks and threats to the democratic development of the country is an urgent task of humanitarian knowledge. A joint roundtable of two academic journals, bringing together the expert opinions of sociologists and philosophers, is a definite step in this direction. ; Метою круглого столу є обговорення викликів та загроз демократичному розвиткові України за умов неусталених демократичних інституцій у процесі тривалої суспільної трансформації. Дослідження цих суперечливих інституціональних динамік у спектрі їх соціально-структурних, соціально-психологічних та соціокультурних проявів, аналіз цих викликів, ризиків та загроз для демократичного розвитку країни є актуальним завданням гуманітарного знання. Спільний круглий стіл двох академічних журналів, поєднує експертні думки соціологів і філософів, є певним кроком у цьому напрямі.
The Department of Philosophy of Culture began its work in 1984. In the 1990s, the changing social conditions for the existence of philosophical thought with the acquisition of independence led to the abandonment of the Marxist paradigm of theoretical monopoly on determining the principles and direction of humanitarian thinking. This fundamentally removed the issue of overcoming social reductionism and opened the possibility of new priorities for the study of cultural reality and human understanding. Since the mid-1990s, the research program of the department has been constantly transformed: there is a transition from understanding the meaning and categorical forms of cultural reality to the analysis of various projections of socio-cultural progress. The research topics are enriched by the study of the problem of national existence, the phenomenon of politics, globalization and civilizational choice, civil society, cultural policy, the phenomenon of violence etc. The theoretical primacy of the ontological approach to culture is preserved, which involves understanding culture as a way of human existence. However, the methodological tools used in research on specific topics are more focused on the specifics of the subject and the experience of its analysis in modern world philosophical thought. ; Відділ філософії культури розпочав свою роботу 1984 року. У 1990-х зміна суспільних умов існування філософської думки зі здобуттям незалежності спричинила відмову від марксистської парадигми теоретичної монополії на визначення засад та спрямованості гуманітарного мислення. Це принципово зняло питання подолання соціального редукціонізму та відкрило можливість нових пріоритетів дослідження культурної реальності та розуміння людини. Від середини 1990-х науково-дослідницька програма відділу невпинно трансформується: відбувається перехід від осмислення сенсу та категорійних форм культурної реальності до аналізу різноманітних проєкцій соціокультурного поступу. Тематика досліджень збагачується вивченням проблеми національного буття, феномену політики, ґлобалізації та цивілізаційного вибору, громадянського суспільства, культурної політики, феномену насильства тощо. Зберігається теоретичний примат онтологічного підходу до культури, який передбачає розуміння культури як способу людського буття. Проте методологічний інструментарій, застосовуваний у дослідженнях конкретних тематик, більшою мірою зорієнтований на специфіку досліджуваного предмета та досвід його аналізу в сучасній світовій філософській думці.
Initiated "FD" round table discussion with philosophers, sociologists and other humanities ; Ініційований «ФД» круглий стіл за участю філософів, соціологів та інших гуманітаріїв
The round table subject was prompted by the proceeding of political transformations in Ukraine. The question is first of all in the phenomena connected with the processes of de-institutionalization with raising the status and prestige of political institutions, compromising of parliamentarism, with dangerous tendencies in forming the post-Soviet law system. That is why such problems as formation of cultural-historical and philosophicallegal preconditions of political legitimation, correlation of state governing and political recognition, violence and the nature of legitimation, democratic competition and compulsion proved to be in the centre of attention of the round table participants. Special attention was given to discussion of the role of manipulative technologies in the process of political legitimation, as well as the role of the shadow (informal) institutions as those inherent in authoritarian governing. In the course of the discussion there arose a distinct intention to find out to what extent and how can the objection to superficial character of the political principle concerning the private sphere of an individual, depreciation of values of institutional experience of democracy, compromising of the political one can cause the mass expansion of anomy as the principle of the novel forms of autocracy. ; ***
The round table of "Philosophical Thought": discussion between philosophers, sociologists, politicians and other humanitarians ; Круглий стіл часопису «Філософська думка» за участю філософів, соціологів, політологів та представників інших соціально-гуманітарних наук
