The article analyzes the main ideas of Marx and Engels on the essential processes characterising the historical development of societies. The author shows that it is scientifically untenable to contrast the views of Marx and Engels on the ability to learn the laws of natural and social development. Marx and Engels are great scientists and revolutionaries. They turned socialism from utopia to science. Marxism discovered the main law of historical development: the law of equivalence of production relations to the character and development level of production forces. Marxism proved that the main contradiction of capitalism is the contradiction between the social character of production and private character of product appropriation. Marx was certainly right in his understanding of the main processes of capitalist development. He gave the fighters against capitalist exploitation and oppression a model of the socialist society, which will inevitably establish itself as an alternative to capitalism, a society, where life will be characterized by labour, freedom, equality, justice, solidarity and peace.The author is convinced that Marx's theory is deeply scientific. Yet he does not say that one can find there all the answers to the questions of modern historical development. The experience of millions and time will show us the way. We need to study that experience, and check the reality against our ideals, without ever adjusting it to some forever established postulates.

These two papers deal with different ways Marx and Engels searched for the origin of the materialistic historical theory; they show the methodology used by Marx and Engels to find out the origin of the theory. It is proposed to consider the category of human relations to the world to be the origin of the materialistic historical theory. The paper shows up the general methodology used by Marx and Engels to determine three origin premises of the reality, three origin aspects of the social activity, trilateral first definitions for the terms production, communication (Verkehr) and society, as well as trilateral first definitions for the term productive forces, that were used little, if at all, in the official dogmatic historical materialism - partly for ideological reasons, partly as a result of translation errors. Based on the way Marx and Engels defined the categories, discussed in the paper and providing for the integrity of the materialistic historical theory, the paper deals with the question: Was there the first stage of the communism in the USSR?

In the article the state of civil society is related to the development of the Welfare State in the face of accelerated transformation of State forms and institutions of public life. Legally-legal characteristic of the Welfare State is that it is a democratic State. In its policy the Welfare State follows the goal of ensuring stable material well-being of people and civil liberties for creative self-realization of person. In addition, the State of social type assumes as its conditions and consequences a developed civil society. The second characteristic of the Welfare State is connected with the ongoing orientation of social policy on the implementation of statutory civil human rights provided by law. The basis of its development is political, economic, cultural and moral processes in their humanistic contents.

The base for mainstreaming the concerns of the social State is an institutional fact: in the article 7 of the Basic Law of Russia is recorded “The Russian Federation is a social State whose policy is aimed at creating conditions to ensure a dignified life and free development of man”. The meaning of “social State” is holistic, multidisciplinary and must take into account the totality of the aspects. It is important to take into account the historical experience of the theory and practices of the Welfare State, the social market economy in developed Western countries, successful in 70-80’s and crisis at the beginning of this century. On the other hand, the Russian State, proclaiming himself a social, announced intentions to implement modern features in relation both to various categories of citizens, and to society as a whole, but far from implementing these intentions. It is desirable to identify specific ways, methods, which release energy and self-development capacities of local and regional communities, enhance their level of self-organization. The absence of such self-development signals on the conservation of energy of self-development and the possible movement of the tide - to reproduce socioparasitic structures, civilised regress of individual regions or all over Russia.

The article considers the social state as an institution embodying social solidarity between different strata, groups, communities, regulating social distances in a society. The survey showed that the majority of the population of Europe and Russia recognize the responsibility of the state to regulate the income gap and reduce poverty. But distance forms not only a material stratification, but also a way of life, possession of material and social re-sources, provision of social services - medical, educational, etc. The length of social distance, its acceptance by other individuals, the mobile nature of this distance is important. When deep differentiating factors act, social distances increase in a society, social tension grows. In such conditions, the social policy of the state to reduce social distances is an urgent necessity.

The article deals with the problem of people’s access to human development, the quality of life. In this regard, the experience of the European system of the state, represented by its variety: Anglo-Saxon, Scandinavian, Continental and Mediterranean, with a view to basic principles is analyzed. The specifics of implementing these models of social policy can be used in the Russian context. The Russian model of social policy is formed taking into account historical, cultural and regional development, and at the same time, to respond to the challenges of modern times associated with globalization, directly affecting people. This is the change in the nature of work, due to technological innovation, unemployment, immigration, adaptation to fluctuations and proposals in the labor market, retraining of employees, upgrading their skills and competencies. To implement a successful social policy, it is necessary to update the social contract of the state, business and civil society, the distribution of social responsibility between them. The author justifies the conclusion on the defining significance of the principle of universality in the provision of social services, strengthening social protection and full employment as conditions for removing barriers to the free development of man and a long-term strategy for a positive change in the quality of life. At the same time, the idea of unconditional base income and unreasonable transfers is critically evaluated, taking into account their social consequences.

The article gives a brief analysis of the formation and development of the Welfare State in the West and in Russia. It is shown that the social State of the West arose in certain historical circumstances (the early industrial capitalism) as a way to cope with the problem of pauperism (impoverishment of the working class). In turn, the pauperism as a phenomenon, according to the researchers, was possible thanks to multi-directional interests of major classes of capitalist society. In these circumstances the Welfare State becomes a tool that allows to bring these concerns to the relative concord. The article notes that in our country there are all preconditions for the formation of the Welfare State (social, economic, legal), but that State itself is still in the stage of its development. The main obstacle to the formation of the modern Welfare State in Russia is the dominance of the State bureaucracy in the social and political life.

The article examines the Welfare State as the resultant effect of the success of the society, the development of its core areas. Social State can successfully operate on the basis of modernization of society and its institutions. The article notes the importance of the regional dimension of research and the formation of a Welfare State. The emergence of the Welfare State can be seen as a natural choice for the development of European civilization, based on the values of humanism. Social State supports higher achievement of civilization in the area of public construction.

The article is devoted to the meeting of the presidium of the Federal Educational and Methodological Association (cluster “Philosophy, Ethics, and Religious Studies”) held in September 2017 in Saratov. It deals with topical educational and methodological issues discussed at the meeting. In particular, it outlines the problems of the development of a pedagogical module for the programs of higher education, the tasks of this module, its structure and competencies. It considers the problems of the development of general basic educational programs of the bachelor and master’s level: the questions of the register of profiles, the structure of competencies and the construction of curricula, and also pays attention to the current condition of the Faculty of Philosophy of the N.G. Chernyshevsky Saratov National Research University and its current work.

The set of global challenges to the classical University from the modern society and the risks connected with them are analyzed. Thus an innovative type of social development creates the risk of the decrease in the efficiency of University training, the weakening of the scientific component of University education. Virtualization of social relations is fraught with the risk for University to lose training functions. Consumer style of life and thinking of students gives rise to the risks of decreasing the level and quality of educational training, of defundamentalization, fragmentation, and profanation of education in total. Economocentric orientation of modern society provokes the risk of losing the centuries-old University identity foundations - the liberal education and the independent researches, of the University transforming into institution that serves current public needs. The risks of globalization are the loss of national sovereignty by the state higher school, marginalization of national Universities as the result of “The Global University” transnational company establishment. It is considered that mentioned risks can be minimized thanks to the modernization of the classical University.

The article deals with the modern development of philosophy of education in the context of globalization, taking into account the prospects of comparative research. The article draws attention to the fact that, until the end of the 20th century, Eurocentrism prevailed in Western philosophical discourse, which was expressed in the corresponding system of views, including education as an object of philosophical reflection. The comparative approach is seen as a way of overcoming the only view on philosophy of education from the position of the West, identifying alternative points of view, overcoming stereotypes and patterns, synthesizing various philosophical concepts, treating them as mutually complementary rather than mutually exclusive. The advantages of applying the comparative research strategy in the philosophy of education are revealed and substantiated. An introduction to comparative studies of education allows us to better understand tendencies of the Russian Federation education system, satisfies the intellectual and theoretical need to study other cultures and civilizations; promotes better international understanding and cooperation; forms a worldview in the light of changing geopolitical realities, as well as theoretical and paradigmatic shifts in the field of humanities and social sciences.

The article analyzes the diverse aspects of the creative contribution of prof. M.A. Maslin to the investigation of fundamental problems of the his-tory of Russian philosophy. An important result of his scientific activity is the book “The diversity and unity of Russian philosophy” (2017) presenting the original authorial approaches to the development of complex problems of the historiography of the Russian philosophical tradition of the 18th - 19th centuries. The history of life and work of Russian thinkers of different epochs and directions forms, according to the author’s opinion, a complex polyphonic dialogue of ideas of a single circle of “persons” who in the era of modernity determined the main directions of Russian thought. Particular at-tention is paid to the profound analysis of prof. M.A. Maslin of the main di-rections of the evolution of Russian liberal philosophy and political thought, political and sociological aspects of М.М. Bakhtin’s creative thinking, as well as very specific problems associated with the various stages in the formation of anthropological, philosophical and socio-political concepts of Russian Eurasianism and its predecessors (for example, “protoeurasianism” of V.I. Lamansky and K.N. Leontiev). The article also emphasizes the conso-nance of innovative scientific elaborations of M.A. Maslin to the theoretical searches of the largest representatives of foreign schools analyzing the Rus-sian philosophical tradition (A. Walicki), as well as various trends in Western cultural studies (E. Auerbach) and political theory (Ch. Merriam).

Expertise play an important role in the social life of modern society. This role expanded so much that it is required to clarify the evaluation methodology, determine the status of the expert, the requirements for his competence. Special attention deserves a problem of complex evaluation. This publication presents a discussion of these issues at a special round table, in which psychologists took part primarily.