Abstract: The article examines the question of the relationship between two concepts: the ancient Greek measure and the Scandinavian lagom. The author, on the one hand, turns to the heritage of ancient Greek philosophy and tries to reconstruct the main semantic characteristics of the ancient measure, and on the other hand, to the historical context of the emergence of the concept of lagom and its meaning. The disclosure of the semantic context of these concepts occurs through aspects: onto-cosmological, existential-anthropological. The author, in a philosophical and cultural manner, pays special attention to identifying the similarities and differences in the semantic content of these terms. The author also seeks to understand where the concept of lagom, as used in everyday life, can be consistent with and fit harmoniously into the philosophical context of “self-care”. This allows us to clarify the relationship between the concepts of measure and lagoma, their boundaries and specifics. The author comes to the conclusion regarding the Scandinavian lagom that although this concept carries the original conceptual load of measure as the limit of being, there is practically no philosophical development of its semantic content, that is, this concept remains in the context of myth. The existential-anthropological criterion shows that the concept of lagom can and should be used in philosophy, especially when it comes to the philosophy of everyday life, minimalism and eudaimonism. The philosophical content of the concept of lagom and its consideration as a meta-term leads the author to the conclusion that it can and should be used in philosophy, especially when it comes to the philosophy of everyday life, the philosophy of minimalism and eudaimonism. It is obvious that lagom is an independently developing term denoting a special style of everyday lifestyle, caring for oneself and the world.

Abstract: This article discusses the problem of the lost meaning of the philosophy, which emerged as a result of its “technematization” in modern world. The question of “What is philosophy?” is being raised again. The author refers to the two key representatives of philosophical thought of the ancient West and East: Socrates and Lao Tzu, using the comparative approach and considering the category of Tao in the contrast to the main categories of ancient Greek philosophy: being, truth, logos, and action. Reconstruction of the teachings of Socrates and Lao Tzu contributes to the disclosure of philosophy through the four crucial aspects: ontological, gnoseological, anthropological, and ethical. The explanation of these aspects or dimensions of the philosophy gives the key to its initial meaning. The author concludes on the borderline and specificity between “wisdom” and “discretion”, where the latter is the primary foundation of the existence of philosophy. The philosophy itself is viewed as a being and process of cognition, directed not only to the outwards, which is characteristic to the Western European tradition overall, but also to within, which is typical to the Eastern thought. The disclosure of the structure of philosophy indicated the need for coming back to its basic meaning through the ethical dominant, which was initially embedded in the concepts of “wisdom” and “love”. The author introduces a peculiar term of “Sophiphilia”, which corresponds to the level of “discretion” as a pre-philosophical field of existence.