Abstract: On the one hand, this article represents a critical analysis of R. Collins’ positions regarding the philosophy and sociocultural reality, expressed in his monograph "The Sociology of Philosophies". On the other hand, the author suggests a unique version of historical development of the sociology of philosophy, titled the “sociology of marginal theories". The main principles that distinguish the "sociology of philosophies" from "sociology of marginal theories". The main principles that distinguish the “sociology of philosophies” from the “sociology of marginal theories” are historicism and projectivity: philosophy is involved in criticism and projection of sociocultural reality, as well as qualitatively evolves in the process of transformation of such reality. The attempts to demonstrate that the implicit assumptions of Collins’ position are counter-systematicity, counter-historicism and the counter-projectivity. The result of the article is the system of principles of the “sociology of marginal theories" that can serve as an exploratory program for the specific research. In conclusion,  the author formulates the following system of principles for the sociology of philosophies: principle of sociological materialism, principle of systematicity, principle of historicism, principle of projectivity, principle of connectivity with sociocultural processes, principle of symbolic mediation, principle of globality, principle of sociocultural priority, principle of multiplicity and interaction of between the  forms of marginal theorization, principle of the prominence of philosophy among other forms of marginal theorization.

Abstract: The reason for writing this article was read by the author C. M. Rosina "Logic and methodology: From "Analyst" of Aristotle to the "Logical-philosophical treatise" L. Wittgenstein". The article is written as a detailed analytical review to this book. The main theme of the last - methodology coming from the Moscow methodological circle. Rozin involved in the expression and justification of "methodological position" as "thinking about thinking". To do this, he examines in detail the contexts of European traditions (and their characters), which finds significant for understanding the methodology of the moments of occurrence of "thinking about thinking". One of these contexts is modern European culture - modern. Framework Rozin has the place of birth of methodology in modern dance. But Rosina is no theory of modernity, such a theory which would link the logic of modernity and the logic of the methodology. This affects the content of his conversation with a different kind of "amethodology": "ones", "scientists", "phanomenologie", "worldly esoteric". Methodology in this conversation can't go with the lines of the opposition itself, as a philosophical position, other positions. My suggestion is to get to talk about the relationship of philosophical positions with the socio-cultural systems. In this case, we must construct a theory of modernity as development and implementation in the form of socio-cultural systems of a certain ideological strategy. The modern appears strategic adversaries and allies. The methodology will have to take a place among the allies and will be able to speak in the name of modernity. So we will be able to develop a specific theory of modernity, and certain communication methodology with modern. An important point in this development should be a "dialectics of modernity" as its accentuation on different (and opposite) principles. Because the methodology can be seen dialectical scheme endless open world, then this scheme should be seen as a basic circuit of the modernism at a certain phase of its deployment. The development of these and other important topics related to bollywood and methodology, is the content of the article.

Abstract: The reason for writing this article was read by the author C. M. Rosina "Logic and methodology: From "Analyst" of Aristotle to the "Logical-philosophical treatise" L. Wittgenstein". The article is written as a detailed analytical review to this book. The main theme of the last - methodology coming from the Moscow methodological circle. Rozin involved in the expression and justification of "methodological position" as "thinking about thinking". To do this, he examines in detail the contexts of European traditions (and their characters), which finds significant for understanding the methodology of the moments of occurrence of "thinking about thinking". One of these contexts is modern European culture - modern. Framework Rozin has the place of birth of methodology in modern dance. But Rosina is no theory of modernity, such a theory which would link the logic of modernity and the logic of the methodology. This affects the content of his conversation with a different kind of "amethodology": "ones", "scientists", "phanomenologie", "worldly esoteric". Methodology in this conversation can't go with the lines of the opposition itself, as a philosophical position, other positions. My suggestion is to get to talk about the relationship of philosophical positions with the socio-cultural systems. In this case, we must construct a theory of modernity as development and implementation in the form of socio-cultural systems of a certain ideological strategy. The modern appears strategic adversaries and allies. The methodology will have to take a place among the allies and will be able to speak in the name of modernity. So we will be able to develop a specific theory of modernity, and certain communication methodology with modern. An important point in this development should be a "dialectics of modernity" as its accentuation on different (and opposite) principles. Because the methodology can be seen dialectical scheme endless open world, then this scheme should be seen as a basic circuit of the modernism at a certain phase of its deployment. The development of these and other important topics related to bollywood and methodology, is the content of the article.

Abstract: This work is an analytical commentary on the book by M. K. Petrov "Language. Sign. Culture". Petrov belongs to the generation of Soviet philosophers of the second half of the twentieth century. The central idea of his philosophy is the 'scientizing' of the society. When implementing this program, Petrov, on the one hand, introduces the idea of the structural subject of different cultural worlds - the social code. Based on this concept he distinguishes European culture from non-European culture. On the other hand, he introduces the idea of the "disciplinary structure" of science that expresses the structural anthropological subject of the European world demonstrated in the concept of "social code". The European social code views an individual person as an innovative-universal being, i.e. having the right to innovation and participation in the world construction in general. Combining the genesis of the European world with the disciplinary structure of modern science, Petrov achieves the two tasks. The first task is to descibe the genesis of European culture as a transition from "traditional" culture to the European social code. The second task is to construct the transition from the disciplinary structure of philosophy over theology to science. Implementation of the second task of Petrov is the main object of criticism in this work. The author emphasizes that the manner in which Petrov goes to the disciplinary structure of science and the understanding of this structure deproblematize the anthropological logic of European history. Instead of talking about European history as the history of the production and critics of the world projects ( first of all, projects of man), Petrov explores the logic of "disciplinary continuity" of philosophy, theology and science. As a result, the logic of the fault of European history between the middle ages and the modern period is pushed aside. Although it is, in the author's opinion, should be placed at the centre of attention when defining the essence of the fundamental structures of modern European world in general and science in particular. Exploring the logic of this fault, it is also possible to significantly complicate the notion of science, to put it in connection with the new European anthropological projects and come to understand the position of Petrov as one of the actualization of this project in the context of the struggle with the "closeness" of the totalitarian-authoritarian system.

Abstract: The aim of this paper is to show the connection between the principles of philosophical positions, K. Popper and the fundamental principles of modern European culture - modern. Art Nouveau can be represented as the deployment of the world postculture-cultural revolution. In this sense, the philosophy of Popper is considered to be one of the clearest expressions of the ideology of the revolution, especially in its postcultural aspect. Modern postcultural aspect can be thought of as the implementation of three basic designs: the "open society", the open nature" and "open theory of knowledge". Popper is in the twentieth century as one of the radical ideologues "open society" and positivist understand science. This gives you the opportunity to show how his philosophy implemented these projects. Postculture-intercultural interpretation of art Nouveau gives the opportunity to see a fundamental connection between the ideologist of the "open society" and ideologist of the "open nature", that is, between "liberal" and "scientists". The philosophical position of Popper demonstrates this connection is especially bright. Popper Evangelist and "open society" and positivist understand the science that interweaves the strategy of "open nature" and "open theory of knowledge". Popper opposes the power of the "conceptual frameworks" cultures over individualistically understand man, "objective reality" and "objective truth". In this you can see the reflection of the overall logic of the "critique of culture", which expresses postculture-cultural logic of modernity. Popper is a supporter of the "epistemology without a knowing subject". It expresses the modern logic of the movement to "objective reality", located on the other side of "God" and "man". Work is being completed by the analysis of philosophical positions And. of Lakatos, who considers himself to developing epistemological logic of Popper. It appears dialectical scheme infinite "opening" of the world, which expresses the dialectic Mature art Nouveau detecting the inability for a man to abandon aspirations to "closed".

Abstract: The main objective of this work is to consider a modernist style as to "the critic of culture". I will understand change as "culture criticism" like sociocultural construction in relation to traditional as which realization it is possible to consider the medieval European world. I will allocate two intensions of "criticism of culture": intra cultural (post-cultural) and inter-culture. The post-cultural project, result of the second intension – the intercultural project has to become result of the first intension. And their realization I am going to show logic of creation of these projects in the most general plan. The intra cultural aspect will accent all connected with individual freedom. "Culture" in this intension of criticism will look way of stealing of individual freedom of the person. Therefore "the person who is cultural believing" will be the main object in this criticism. As a positive the project world whole only on the basis of individual freedom will be developed. The Interkulturny aspect of criticism will accent those a consequence of "a cultural polaganiye" which generate division of mankind into the "cultural" worlds denying each other. This intension will build as a positive the project world whole on the basis of "universal", "inter-cultural" values. Difficult relations in design of "post-culture" and "inter-culture", attempts of restoration of "cultural" sociocultural constructions throughout the new European history make that I called dialectics of the "cultural-post-cultural-inter-cultural". I am going to show this dialectics in the most general plan. I will begin the analysis with analysis of Kant philosophy of the religion stated in "Religions within only reason". I will interpret Kant's philosophy as extremely bright expression of "criticism of culture". In Kant's this sense it will be one of ideologists of the modernist style, accurately expressed its main intensions. I will try to open through action in development of its philosophy which will begin with radical "critics of culture", and will come to the end with attempts of return of certain "cultural" principles – cultural remissions. I also will deliver to his critic of religion in prospect of this through action. I will show as far as at its philosophy there are post-cultural and inter-cultural intensions of "criticism of culture" and the dialectics of the 'cultural-post-cultural-inter-cultural'. The analysis of the phenomena of "eternal fascism" and "eternal cultural sensitivity" will be the main thing in disclosure of this dialectics as it is realized in the body of the new European world. Both that and other phenomenon will be connected with the front of cultural remissions of the XX century which can be considered as the answer to the all-European wave after the ambassador of World War I. Especially it belongs to a phenomenon of "eternal fascism" which I will cut out as extremely rigid expression of "an eternal cultural sensitivity".If as a whole to consider a modernist style as expansion "critics of culture", being realized in the philosophical and ideological plan and in the body of the European world, the logician of expansion of post-cultural and inter-cultural intensions of this criticism, the logician of multi-scale and various kickbacks to "cultural" architecture of the person, the logician of new waves of post-cultural and inter-cultural intensions of criticism in response to kickbacks and will make modernist dialectics of "cultural-post-cultural-inter-cultural".

Abstract: The purpose of this work is to submit the general plan of the new European culture as system of anthropological projects: "reformations", "educations" and "critics of cultural reason". As a pushing away point for expansion of the discourse I will use the general plan of ideas of "dialectics of education", created within the Frankfurt school of social philosophy. In a general sense my position is alternative to those options of ideas of a modernist style which are based on idea of this or that version of the project of "nature conquest", being its cornerstone. I perceive such representations as a call. The answer to this call is attempt to consider "dialectics of education" as result of realization not the project of "nature conquest", and projects of "conquest of the person". I suggest to consider Education as purely anthropological project which result of realization there had to be that a problem situation which is distinguished by the Frankfurt school. And all set of problem fields which I listed, has to be in the main lines projections of implementation of the educational anthropological project. (Including "nature conquest". )  The author has been told that his position can be considered as the answer to a position of the Frankfurt school. However, the author states, it doesn't mean that he will be engaged in the critical analysis of its positions. Consideration of the new European culture as implementation of the project of "nature conquest" is rather widespread today. Therefore I answer a call of such prevalence. The Frankfurt school in this case plays a role "the representative of a position". For me that the Frankfurt school is aligned on that phase of implementation of the project of Education which can be considered as integrated result of its institutional victory here is important: the middle of XIX – the middle of the XX century. Integrated reality which is expressed by system of concepts: "naturalism", "realism", "positivism", "individualism", "democratism", "liberalism", "burzhuaznost", "capitalism", "scientific character", "rationalism", "scientism" – this reality became expressed in a set of foreshortenings (the principles, ideals, institutes) a victory of the educational project. Those contradictions  are internal realizational contradictions of this project. Including those contradictions which seem denying the educational project. Pathos of my position consists in detection it is internal discrepancy. Those a contradiction which are connected with concepts: "nationalism", "fascism" and "communism", the author will open too in a context of dialectics of the projects "reformations", "educations" and "criticism of cultural reason".

Abstract: What is "philosophical reformation"? And what such "criticism of cultural reason"? "Philosophical reformation" I will call that integrated action which Kant makes the critical philosophy. "Criticism of cultural reason" I will call that integrated action which is made by the new European culture, a modernist style. I will consider a modernist style as the sociocultural project. I will call this project "criticism of cultural reason". (I will hold "Criticism of cultural reason" as already ready conceptual design which essence was developed by me in a number of monographs.) The content of the concepts "philosophical reformation" and "criticism of cultural reason" will reveal on the course of conversation on critical philosophy of Kant. I will conditionally divide its philosophy into criticism theoretical and to critic of practical reason. I will begin with the analysis of criticism of practical reason, assuming that it has to play the central role for all Kant criticism. Through this analysis I will leave to opportunity to express Kant criticism in general through "criticism of cultural reason", I will show restrictions which arise here. Then I will show how the Kant criticism is expressed through "philosophical reformation". I will consider "Philosophical reformation" as option of the Christian Reformation. I will finish with demonstration of that Kant "philosophical reformation", being paradigmalny expression of strategy of Education, is at the same time and one of limit options of a set of "reformations" of which the modernist style consists. I will show that, on the other hand, Kant "reformation" and other "reformations" of a modernist style, are special cases of "criticism of cultural reason" which begins with the answer to an era of religious wars after the Reformation and is way of creation of peaceful co-existence of subjects cultures in isn't removable the pluralistic world.

Abstract: This article presents critical analysis of the article by J. Habermas "Religious tolerance  - the pacemaker for cultural rights". On one hand the author analyzes the strategy of cultural tolerance, which according to J. Habermas starts with the religious toleration mindset and it is finally reflected in the logic of the modern constitutional democratic society. On the other hand, the author continues his discussion with J. Habermas by speaking of the theory of interculture as a social and cultural strategy for the formation of the new European world.  Finally, the discussion concerns the logic of formation of the new European social and cultural area in the perspective of a widely perceived tolerance program, which in turn is widened to the extent of the logic of formation of interculturalism.  The author regards the position of J. Habermas as continuation of Kant's criticism of the rational mind, and considers it possible to add to his range of ethical terms the system of terms and connections, which allows for uniting the widely interpreted tolerance strategy with the elements of the European culture, which are expressed by the terms "naturalism" and "rationalism".  With such a widened understanding of the tolerance program the new European naturalism and rationalism are connected by the inner logic with the strategy of peaceful co-existence of variety of cultural worlds. They turn out to be the consequence of the direction towards the tolerant formation of the common world to live in.  In this sense, regarding the new European world as an embodiment of the "criticism of cultural mind" the author regards the position of J. Habermas as part of this criticism.

Abstract: This article continues to introduce to the readers the theory of interculture developed by the author. The present article is devoted to the cognitive aspect of interculture. Based on the author, this aspect, just like all the others aspects of interculture, has a constitutional imprint of the basic principles of intercultural communication. Among the great variety of cognitive traditions existing within the borders of interculture, specific principles implement what is called scientific content and science, or, more specifically, experimental mathematical natural science. 'Scientific content' is the cognitive form of 'just and legal detraction of human spirit. 
The author of the article shows how a group of life challenges which gave birth to interculture, is now creating a specific new European cognitive tradition. Scientific content is viewed as the solution of the problem of the search for universal truth tht would be objective and accepted by all laws. The author shows the internal contradiction of science and that science can be transformed into cultural remission for scientists. 
The article will be of interest for everyone who is into philosophical anthropology. 

Abstract: The present article presents another stage of introducing the author's theory of interculture. In this part his study the author analyzes Auguste Comte's positivistic project. The author studies the challenge that triggered the creation of Comte's philosophy and his 'spirit of the positivism philosophy'. This challenge is viewed as one of the challenges to new European philosophy in general. In this regard, Comte's philosophy is shown as an attempt to perform 'just and fair diminition of human spirit' and to conduct intercultural revolution. Comte's positivism is described as some kind of a limit of materialistic targets of interculture. 
A famous Comte's theory of three-phase development of the humankind is viewed as a strategy of overcoming a huge social crisis of the mankind. This is what became the main challenge for Comte. The author of the present article suggests to interpret new European projects of the conquest of nature as a projection of the project of conquest of human. 
The article will be interesting for all who are into philosophical anthropology. 
 

Abstract: This article represents another step towards introduction to the theory of interculturalism developed by the author of the article. This part of the introduction is devoted to the analysis of S. Huntington's idea about 'civilizational conflict'. The author of the article compares challenges of Huntington's theory and different theories of interculturalism. The author offers to view the development of interculturalism from the very beginning of the Early Modern Period. The author also underlines the need to establish a full theory of interculturalism in order to properly understand the modern 'clash of civilization'. The 'civilizational conflict' is described from the point of view of the theory of interculturalism as cultural remissions, i.e. attempts to restore the 'cultural' method of life organization. The author also analyzes the systems of personal and group identifications as well as their role in the process of cultural remissions. Special attetion is paid to the analysis of the 'clash of civilization' (cultural remissions) in modern Russia. 
The article will be interesting for all who are interested in philosophical anthropology. 

Abstract: This article is another step towards introduction the theory of interculturalism developed by the author. In this part of introduction the author touches upon the definition of the term 'cultural remission'. In terms of interculturalism, cultural remissions are the expressions of the value geometry of the 'culture' type. Another goal set by the author is to demonstrate how the modern ideology of liberalism operating the terms 'globalizaton', 'reverse globalization', 'liberal equality' and 'tendency towards cultural isolation' tries to create the theory like interculturalism. The author proves that both the primary and modern ideologists have used similar principles and terms, faced the same challenges and tried to find the same strategic solutions, in other words, developed the theoretical grounds of interculturalism. At the same time, the author shows that such individual theories have their limits and need to be synthesized into one theory which the author offers to call 'the theory of interculturalism'. As an example, the author analyzes the book 'The Claims of Culture' written by Seyla Benhabib. The author shows that the critical analysis of the book can actually lead us to the terms 'interculturalism' and 'cultural remissions'. 
The article will be of interest to everyone who is interested in philosophical anthropology. 

Abstract: This article is another step to introducing the theory of interculture developed by the author. At this point the author focuses on the term ' interculture by advantage'. Based on the author, the United States of America is such interculture by advantage. There are certain grounds for making  USA the core of interculture. USA have come a unique path to what it is now and the founders of America already set the intercultural core of a new European culture, purified from the old traditions. Introducing USA as the interculture by advantage, the author also tries to describe the basic terms of the theory of interculture that are necessary for the readers to better understand  the article. For instance, the term 'interculture by advantange' can be viewed both as the draft ideal interculture and the real culture implementing ideal forms as much as possible. The author tries to reveal this term from both sides and to show how the real culture can be far from the ideal. As the starting point of discussion, the author quotes N. V. Zlobin's book 'America - What a Life!". The article will be of interest for all those who concern with philosophical anthropology.

Abstract: This article provides an insight into to the theory of interculture developed by the author. Based on the author's definition, interculture means a special socio-cultural construct which is traditionally called a New European (Modern) culture. In the article the author shares with us the main concepts and principles of the theory of interculture, its heuristic potentials in analyzing different elements and dimensions of the New European socio-cultural world. The author also describes the difference between axiological structure of interculture and the strucure of traditional socio-cultural cultures. The author also reveals the strategic limitations of the microsystem of cultures and describes the life challenge that occures in response to these limitations and give birth to interculture. The article describes the strategic lines of developing the intercultural world as well as its strategic borders. Insight into the theory of interculture is accompanied with anaysing Kant's strategy of constructing the 'enternal world'. The author shows that Kant's works certainly had some features of the theory of interculture. The article will be of interest to all who are into philosophical anthropology.