Abstract: This article continues the research published in the journal Philosophical Thought No. 9 and 10 (2024) and No. 1 (2025). The purpose of the article is to substantiate the bioessential deterministic paradigm in linguistics as an anthropocentric one in a broad sense. The subject of the research is the bioessential deterministic paradigm, understood as anthropocentric in a broad sense. The relevance of the article is due to the adoption of the Declaration on Animal Consciousness. In April 2024, the New York Declaration on Animal Consciousness was adopted by the scientific community. This declaration asserts the existence of consciousness of animals. Since consciousness, mind, thinking and language are interconnected, the authors suggest talking about the language of animals. The authors believe that all living things have the language ability and are bioessentially determined. The anthropocentric paradigm studies language from the standpoint of a native speaker. In previous articles, the system-structural and bioessential-deterministic meta-paradigms were described in a transdisciplinary aspect. In this article, the authors describe the bioessential deterministic paradigm in a single discipline - linguistics. In linguistics, the system-structural and anthropocentric paradigms are traditionally distinguished. It is traditionally considered that systemic structuralism studies language as a system of signs, while anthropocentrism studies language taking into account the human factor. The authors propose to expand the understanding of anthropocentrism. The terms bioessential deterministic paradigm and bioessential determinism are introduced. The bioessential deterministic paradigm is understood as an anthropocentric paradigm in a broad sense. Bioessential determinism is understood as being conditioned by the essence of life; the essence is conditioned by life. Bioessential determinism presupposes the study of the language of any living being, whereas anthropocentrism presupposes the study of human language only. Thus, anthropocentrism is a special case of bioessential determinism. Language as a system is a legacy of systemic structuralism. According to the authors, the bioessential deterministic paradigm is what makes linguistics psycholinguistics.

Abstract: This work is devoted to a conceptual understanding of trends in the development of scientific knowledge. It continues the research presented in previous issues of the journal Philosophical Thought. The study focuses on the essential characteristics of the systemic-structural and bioessential-deterministic meta-paradigms.

This article aims to summarize the results of previous studies and provide a brief overview of scientific works on similar topics. For this purpose, the origins of meta-paradigms are examined from various angles. The generalized results of previous studies are presented. The conclusions reached by various scientists are described: Yu. V. Latov; S. R. Bekulova; E. Baskell; G. S. Levit, U. Hossfeld and A. A. Lvov; M. Boon and S. Van Baalen; T. V. Chernigovskaya. The theory of sign and paradigm in linguistics are compared: systemic-structural and anthropocentric. This made it possible to identify meta-paradigms. New terms have been introduced: bioessential-deterministic meta-paradigm, system-structural meta-paradigm, bioessentialism, bioessential determinism.

The conclusion is that the systemic-structural meta-paradigm is understood as a conceptually generalized set of formally oriented ideas. In contrast, the bioessential-deterministic meta-paradigm is understood as a conceptually generalized set of essence-oriented ideas.

Systemic-structural and bioessential-deterministic meta-paradigms are binary oppositions, form, and content, asymptotically guiding the development of scientific knowledge. M. Polanyi's concept of personal knowledge manifests bioessential determinism.

The representation of meta-paradigms in T. S. Kuhn's theory is shown. The works of other scientists on a similar topic are analyzed. The conclusion is drawn that various scientists express the ideas of the meta-paradigm in various scientific disciplines. This indicates that a critical point of reflection has been reached.

Abstract: The work is devoted to the conceptual understanding of trends in the development of scientific knowledge. The discovered patterns are universal and manifest themselves in a number of scientific disciplines.
The section "Systemic-structural and bioessential-deterministic meta-paradigms in linguistics" presents various understandings of anthropocentrism. The systemic-structural and anthropocentric paradigms are considered through the prism of sign theory. The theory of the sign is extended to other fields of scientific knowledge. Based on the material of a number of scientific disciplines, the relevant sections of the article show the implementation of systemic-structural and bioessential-deterministic meta-paradigms: in some sciences – in the form of paradigms (linguistics), in others – in the form of separate concepts, theories and trends (literary studies, exact sciences, religious studies). In addition, the implementation of systemic-structural and bioessential-deterministic meta-paradigms in the works of individual researchers is shown: "The structure of scientific revolutions" by T. S. Kuhn. The systemic-structural and anthropocentric paradigms are compared with the theory of the sign. The meta-paradigms correlating both the plane of expression and the plane of content in the theory of the sign are highlighted. The meta-paradigm is understood as a conceptually generalized set of scientific concepts in a number of fields of scientific knowledge, as a system of many paradigms determining the development of scientific knowledge in various scientific disciplines. The article examines the theory of the sign in an interdisciplinary aspect.
The conclusion is made that one can understand anthropocentrism in an extremely integrated way: as taking into account the sum of restrictions on the way of embodying the sign system in the linguistic and speech activity of the subject – and the sum of restrictions on the way of realizing the subject in the sign system and speech activity. An assumption is made: language is determined by the type of thinking inherent in the subjects using it. An assumption is made about the connection between signaling systems and thinking. New terms have been introduced: biossential determinism, bioessential deterministic meta-paradigm, system-structural meta-paradigm. The systemic-structural meta-paradigm is understood as a meta-paradigm of a formally oriented nature, the bioessential-deterministic one as an essentially oriented meta-paradigm.
The characteristics of the systemic-structural and bioessential-deterministic meta-paradigms are given on the example of linguistics. The universality of the nature of the meta-paradigm shift is shown. Currently, the systemic-structural meta-paradigm is being replaced by a bioessential-deterministic one.