Civilizational Approach and the Need of Its Revision under the New Historical Conditions

The article discusses the civilizational approach, which was formed in the 20^th century and has become one of the main research approaches both in Russia and in the Western countries. The author presents a brief overview of the main milestones in the development of civilizational theory and its main representatives in Russia and the West. It is shown that in Russia, the importance of the civilizational approach is caused by the “change of epochs” that occurred after the 1990s and demanded to consider the civilization principles in the social sciences and in the socio-political structure of the country. A brief description of the civilizational theory in the West, which has its own characteristics, not only demonstrates the universality of this scientific method but also reveals both its positive and negative aspects that were identified by the researchers. Although the Russian and Western scholars focus on the specifics of their own situations, they agree that in order to overcome the limitations of the civilizational approach, it is necessary to supplement it with other methods of scientific analysis. Since this article deals with the problems faced by Russia, the author presents the arguments of the Russian researchers, who suggest supplementing the civilizational analysis with the logic of sense, formations, geopolitical, ideological and worldview research approaches. It should be noted that the logic of sense approach is the latest achievement of the philosophical thought and a kind of scientific discovery (authored by A.V. Smirnov). It is concluded that all the supplementing methods find their meaning and place in relation to each other only within the framework of a holistic interdisciplinary approach, which provides a theoretical understanding of a larger set of problems that the country is facing today.

1. Arjomand S.A. & Tiryakian E.A. (Eds.) (2004) Rethinking Civilizational Analysis. London: SAGE.

2. Arnason J.P. (2010) Civilizational Analysis: A Paradigm in the Making of Life Support. In: World Civilization and History of Human Development. Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (pp. 1–34). Oxford: Eolss.

3. Berdyaev N. (1990) The Fate of Russia. Moscow: MSU Press (in Russian).

4. Bettiza G. (2014) Civilizational Analysis in International Relations: Mapping the Field and Advancing a “Civilizational Politics” Line of Research. International Studies Review, Vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 1–28.

5. Bodrunov S.D. (2018) Noonomics. Moscow: Kul’turnaya revolyutsia (in Russian).

6. Chereshnev V.A. & Rastorguev V.N. (Eds.) (2018) Civilizational Development of Russia: Heritage, Potential, Development. Moscow: Publisher A.V. Vorobyov (in Russian).

7. Danilevsky N.Y. (2008) Russia and Europe. Moscow: Institute of Russian Civilization (in Russian).

8. Dossin C. & Joyeux-Prunel B. (2015) The German Century? How a Geopolitical Approach Could Transform the History of Modernism. In: DaCosta Kaufmann T., Dossin C., & Joyeux-Prunel B. (Eds.) Circulations in the Global History of Art (pp. 183–201). New York: Routledge.

9. Honneth A. (2017) Die Idee des Sozialismus. Versuch einer Aktualisierung. Berlin: Surkamp (in German).

10. Kara-Murza S.G. (2011) Russia and the West. Paradigms of Civilizational Development. Moscow: Kul’tura (in Russian).

11. Karaseva L.A. (2019) The Peculiarity of the Political Economy Research Breakthrough in Technological and Industrial Development of the Country. Scientific Works of the Free Economic Society of Russia. Vol. 218, pp. 378–386 (in Russian).

12. Karsavin L.P. (Ed.) (1926) Experience of Systematic Presentation. Paris (in Russian).

13. Knöbel W. (2010) Path Dependency and Civilizational Analysis. Metodological Challeges and Theoretical Tasks. European Journal of Social Theory. Vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 83–97.

14. Lemeshchenko P.S. (2019) The Economy of the 21st Century: Why the Politeconomy and Is There an Alternative? Scientific Works of the Free Economic Society of Russia. Vol. 218, pp. 369–377 (in Russian).

15. Moschelkov E.N. & Sytin A.G. (2019) Nikita Moiseyev as a Philosopher and Political Thinker. Voprosy filosofii. 2019. No. 6, pp. 5–16 (in Russian).

16. Оvchinsky V. & Larina E. (2015) Report to the Izborsky club. In: Cold War 2.0. Moscow: Ves’ mir (in Russian).

17. Porokhovsky A.A. (2019) Evolution of Political Economy Subject and Method at the Dawn of Digitalization. Scientific Works of the Free Economic Society of Russia. Vol. 218, pp. 353–360 (in Russian).

18. Savitsky P.N. (1997) Citizenship of the Idea. In: Savitsky P.N. The Continent of Eurasia (pp. 127–133). Moscow: Vysshaya shkola (in Russian).

19. Savitsky P.N. (Ed.) (1997) Exodus to the East. Premonitions and Accomplishments. Statements of Eurasians. Moscow: Dobrosvet (in Russian).

20. Savitsky P.N. (2003) Geographical and Political Foundations of Eurasianism. In: Classics of Geopolitics: 20th Century. Moscow: AST (in Russian).

21. Shepel E.A. (2014) National Ideology as a Means of Actualizing the National Spirit. In: State Ideology and Modern Russia (pp. 159–164). Moscow: Nauka i politika (in Russian).

22. Smirnov A.V. (2019) Universal vs. All-Human. Moscow: LRC (in Russian).

23. Trubetskoy N.S. (1997) On True and False Nationalism. In: Savitsky P.N. (Ed.) Exodus to the East. Premonitions and Accomplishments. Statements of Eurasians (pp. 71–85). Moscow: Dobrosvet (in Russian).