The relevance of the study is due to the necessity to analyze mutual determination of the development of language and culture so as to expand the problematic field of humanities. Thus, the article is focused on Alexei Losev’s book Philosophy of Name (1927) characterized with a kind of polyphony that calls for bridging the author’s position with a variety of philosophical trends dealing with the ontological problems of language and culture. The article’s authors set the goal of examining the specifics of studies on ontological characteristics of language through the prism of its cultural representation, analysing Losev’s conceptual framework. In this regard the authors set the following tasks: firstly, to determine the pre-object structure of the name as a mythologeme, by highlighting the primary status of the advancement from the internal sense, related to the existential foundations of life, to its external representations; secondly, to analyze the reverse motion from essence to its appearances as realized in the word expressing the fullness of individual and cultural meanings. In accordance with the set tasks, the results of the study follow the general logic of Losev’s conceptualizations. The dialectic of Losev’s reasoning combines the appraisal of the ascent to the Absolute in understanding the name, on the one hand, with the significance of the descent to the word with its agile lively content, on the other. Losev integrates these two trends in language development through myth, which he sees as a living reality—an actual manifestation of essence fixed in a name. The conclusions are indicated by appealing to the ontological Pan-Unity allowing Losev to integrate the ideas of man and the world, to connect reality to thought in the context of universal relations the wholeness of which becomes real in the living space of culture.
The advent of the printing press proved to be a decisive factor in the cultural development of mankind as a whole. In Eastern Europe, the complex path to the new information technology had its own specific characteristics: revolutionary technology was first used for the needs of East Slavs in 1517–1519 in the Czech kingdom and from there it was transferred to Grand Duchy of Lithuania in 1521–1522. The process of developing the printed word is linked to the figure of Francis Skorina (1470–1551), who, after the Congress of Vienna, was given the opportunity to become a book publisher in Prague. The focus of the proposed study is a corpus of Cyrillic printed monuments, which together tell an entertaining story of equal cultural and technological cooperation in the first quarter of the 16th century. In the context of mastering and adapting the latest technology, it is noteworthy that the Cyrillic Prague editions are characterized by exceptionally high polygraphy quality, which exceeds the level of Czech printing of the first half of the 16th century. Therefore, they are nowadays regarded not only as valuable works of East Slavic cultural heritage but also as outstanding monuments of Czech printing (významné bohemikální památky). From the perspective of encompassing philology (celostní filologie), from a modern methodological base and a new phase in the development of Prague functional structuralism, the article raises the question of how many of these printed monuments intended for the East Slavic reader were published in Prague at that time.
The paper treats the topic of hermeticism — an esoteric tradition of teachings — with the view to its origins and varying interpretations. In setting research objectives, the text aims at identifying the common structural foundations of myths and ideas of the hermetic genesis and to establish the main vectors of the formation and transformation of esoteric teachings presented in the spiritual domain and reflected in the material culture of Western Europe from the 4th century BC to the present. For the needs of such a comparative study that embraces philosophical, religious and historical phenomena of culture, the following methods are used. As it is mostly the texts that are analyzed, the methodological framework consists of the interpretation of texts and artifacts – all along the line of presentation of historical sequences, of their recursion, of structural and functional aspects. The sources included not only texts, mathematical operations and chemical formulas of previously known alchemic artifacts are also introduced into the comprehensive analysis. The examination of cultural phenomena leads to the systematization of religious origins, historical and philosophical traditions and scientific achievements that underlie the formation of hermeticism. This structuralisation is possible due to the tools for the analysis of the hermetic body developed in this text. The mapping of the historical development of hermeticism is proposed in a three-level paradigm model based on the image of the Thrice-Great Hermes. It is concluded that the basis of the image of Hermes is the invariant of the historical three-level model of cognition of esoteric teachings, for descriptions of which the terms of ABC — paradigm are introduced. Each of the Hermea has own disciplinary paradigm. The first level of Hermes I, the author of cosmogonic visions, A — paradigm, is represented by inner visions (revelations of the cosmic mind or daimonic visions), thus forming the cultural level of mythology, theology. The level of Hermes II, the founder of writing and counting, lies in the realm of concepts of visions ‒ e.g. the Platonic philosophy, geometry, mathematics (B — paradigm). The third level (C — paradigm) is represented by texts and alchemical artifacts (Alexandrian crystal) of Hermes III, the founder of the art of healing and chemistry, that further embodied in empirical sciences, chemistry and astronomy, as well as ancient technological knowledge of the production of metals, glass and dyes. In general, all hermetic disciplines and practices emerge on the basis of this three-level paradigm.
The article considers the concept of resilience of the scientific community, which is novel for the Russian science. By applying the conceptual analysis, the key message of the paper suggests that not only is the term instrumental in describing the traits of modern Russian science, but also it shows possible solutions of further development of science. The relevance of introducing this notion into scientific circulation is justified by both external and internal reasons, i.e. the science reform and the need to reflect on scientific and organizational processes, as scientific institutions face substantial challenges in adapting to new realities. The term is considered in a time continuum, as case studies focus on the following areas: scientists’ perceptions on funding, dilemmas of stable and competitive financing of science, organizational culture, the future image as seen by scientists and the interaction with the media. Comparative perspective is also included. Among the categories used to describe the functions and the status of scientific communities, collective subject is one that can focus on active role of such communities, on the interconnectedness and interdependence of individuals in a group, the ability of a group to show various forms of joint activity, the ability of a group to self-reflection – just like resilience. However, using subject for scientific needs seems not always suitable, for the sense it has covers not all the aspects that arise in conducting empirical research. Resilience, in contrast, suits perfectly. Another advantage the term resilience provides is that it seems to be appropriate for outlining the processes generated inside the scientific region, since it allows describing not only scientists as individuals, but also a community as a whole. This thesis is illustrated by a brief overview of research on the resilience of organizations and the resilience of families. The paper concludes with applying resilience to practice, as the state of the psychological community is assessed through the lenses of the crisis of resilience as opposed to the crisis of identity.