Abstract: The article deals with the problem of choosing a strategy for the civilizational development of Russia based on the concept of spiritual and ecological (noospheric) civilization developed by A.V. Ivanov, I.V. Fotieva, M.Y. Shishin. There are five variants of the strategy of civilizational development. The understanding of civilization formulated by A. Toynbee and refined by V.L. Tsymbursky (it is the definition of the latter that is used as a working definition) is taken as a methodological approach that allows to identify and give a general description of these options. The latter option is a variant of the New Russia, that is, a renewed Russian civilization, not inheriting, but re–building the "sacred vertical". It is in the perspective of the possibility of implementing this option, in our opinion, that the concept of spiritual and ecological civilization should be considered. The author of this article generally agrees with the main provisions of the proposed concept. The study provides a brief overview and analysis of them. It is necessary to emphasize the integrity, logic and validity on the basis of a broad material (historical, philosophical, political) of the concept of noospheric civilization. It is characterized by the novelty of thought and interdisciplinary synthetics. However, it is necessary to point out the main drawback of the proposed concept. In our opinion, it lies in the lack of consideration of the issue of collecting the subject of civilizational development. Which social actor is able to take responsibility for the implementation of the project of spiritual and ecological civilization? Or is it assumed that it will come by itself, due to the objective laws of the historical process? The latter assumption seems utopian. The author of this article offers his answer to the question, thereby contributing to the development of the concept. At the same time, the political component of the concept under consideration is criticized, instead of the idea of hagiocracy, the idea of meritocracy is proposed as a form of government that largely corresponds to the stated principles.

Abstract: This article examines the problem of civilizational development of Russian in its institutional aspect. Russian civilization is interpreted as a holistic dynamic system that requires the existence of basic institutions for its successful functioning and further development, through which it would be able to reproduce itself. The author highlights the backbone institutions of Russian civilization, such as the institution of unitary state, institution of Orthodox Church, and institution of community; as well as analyzes their transformation as civilization-forming institutions and in terms of interaction with each other. The combination of civilizational and structural-functional approaches allows having a new perspective on the problem of civilizational development by overcoming the determinism of cultural paradigm. Despite the fact that the role of culture for the establishment of one or another civilizational community is indisputably great; civilization is incapable to exist without the institutions defining its structure. Designation of community as a basic institution of the Russian life, which manifested alongside other historical forms in Soviet collectivism, as well as inability of the Orthodox Church to ensure spiritual consolidation of modern society, makes paying attention to unitary (imperial-like) state as the last institution that allows preserving the unity of Russian civilization.

Abstract: This research examines the problem of existence of the Russian civilization; however not from the usual perspective of the debates whether or not Russian is a separate civilization and its relationship with the European civilization, but rather from the perspective of the question about its evolution and transformation as a factor of such development. On one hand, the author demonstrate the scientific purposefulness of the use of civilizational approach for analyzing the current state of Russian society and state. On the other hand, civilizational approach is inseparably associated with the problem of historical development, which manifests in this article as a value imperative. Civilizational paradigm is not opposed to the idea of historical renewal, but couples with it; the historical development is understood as a process inscribed into the existential forms of local civilization, although not limited by them. The author comes to a conclusion that the only way out for Russia’s self-preservation under the established geopolitical, geoeconomic, and geocultural circumstances is the reference to the internal resources of civilizational development. However, such return is not a revival of the traditional institutions in forms of their existence in the past or simple reproduction of the traditional practices, but a renewal based on the creative response in the context of civilizational development (rather than strictly national or modernization), a renewal through the sociocultural evolution.

Abstract: This article is concerned with a pressing issue of establishing civil culture. It studies the issue of civic awareness against the backdrop of human development itself and evolution of its material and spiritual nature. The process of establishing civil culture is felt to be unfinished, rather being in its first stages, than in culmination. The peculiarities of establishing civil culture in Russia are analyzed. One of the key values for the Russian civil culture appears a value of the truth. The truth is a special category related to the Russian set of mind, and it includes both the concepts of verity and justice. This category makes it possible to give a positive answer to a question about existence of the Russian civilization and define some of its peculiarities, as well as differentiate it from the Western civilization, having the value of law as its key value.