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.

The article researches the historical transformation of the dichotomy of civilization and barbarism, which originally in ancient Greece did not have a pejorative connotation. This dichotomy has become relevant today to justify the classification of states according to their degree of acceptance of “civilization standards,” which are understood as the standards of the European model of development. The main features of the stereotype of the divide between civilization and barbarism, which took shape in the Roman era, have survived to the present. The premise of “civilizational superiority” of European culture is accompanied by a moral depreciation of other civilizations, turning a barbarian into an enemy of civilization with an explicit racist connotation. Civilization itself is seen as a “vaccination” in the process of missionary work. There emerges the concept of “Eastern barbarism,” coupled with the concepts of terra nullis and the innate irrational behavior of the population of these countries, which justify the seizing of territories for a “more rational” resource management. This activity is historically accompanied by colonization and, in the modern world, by forceful forms of “promoting democracy.” According to the logic of the divide between civilization and barbarism, non-Western countries are doomed to imitate and perpetually fall behind, which causes the disunity of society and internal hostility of “second-rate Europeanized” nations. The Western mentoring has transformed from protectorate to the creation of governance structures that are headed by Western-educated local elites and are designed to change the cultural patterns of society. There was a conception that the world is divided into spheres, in the first circle of which there is a progressive civilized European world, followed by a number of countries similar in structure and values to the European model, and then there is a sphere of barbarism and backwardness. In the contemporary version, this theory presumes the division of states into “pre-modern,” modern, and post-modern states. It the conclusion, it is noted that this divide contradicts to the humane essence of culture and civilization process.

We discuss the role of linguistic metaphors as a cognitive frame for the understanding of genetic information processing. The essential similarity between language and genetic information processing has been recognized since the very beginning, and many prominent scholars have noted the possibility of considering genes and genomes as texts or languages. Most of the core terms in molecular biology are based on linguistic metaphors. The processing of genetic information is understood as some operations on text – writing, reading and editing and their specification (encoding/decoding, proofreading, transcription, translation, reading frame). The concept of gene reading can be traced from the archaic idea of the equation of Life and Nature with the Book. Thus, the genetics itself can be metaphorically represented as some operations on text (deciphering, understanding, code-breaking, transcribing, editing, etc.), which are performed by scientists. At the same time linguistic metaphors portrayed gene entities also as having the ability of reading. In the case of such “bio-reading” some essential features similar to the processes of human reading can be revealed: this is an ability to identify the biochemical sequences based on their function in an abstract system and distinguish between type and its contextual tokens of the same type. Metaphors seem to be an effective instrument for representation, as they make possible a two-dimensional description: biochemical by its experimental empirical results and textual based on the cognitive models of comprehension. In addition to their heuristic value, linguistic metaphors are based on the essential characteristics of genetic information derived from its dual nature: biochemical by its substance, textual (or quasi-textual) by its formal organization. It can be concluded that linguistic metaphors denoting biochemical objects and processes seem to be a method of description and explanation of these heterogeneous properties.

The article is devoted to the problem of interpreting of the several consequences that derive from multi-world concepts of modern physics. The inflation scenario and the associated string landscape model are the objects of analysis. The reviewed multi-world concepts are exposed to presume the existence of a plenitude (possibly infinite) of various fundamental principles (laws of nature) that govern the physics of one or another possible reality. The research is based on the hermeneutical method, comparative method, dialectical method, formal translation method, and scientific modeling method. The author represents specifics of physical theories (the criteria and requirements for them) that claim to describe all possible worlds in the conclusions. In this regard, the issues of the status of “possible” and “impossible” worlds and practicable ways to determine them are discussed. The main result of the study is the justification (based on the assumption of many fundamentally different worlds scenario possibility) that each type of world must correspond to a certain structure of consciousness defined by its basic physical principles (and probably other mathematics). This possibly means that a unified “theory of everything” that includes all possible mathematical and physical fundamental structures cannot exist since every one of them determines a specific type of consciousness (where it is possible).

The article discusses the challenges, benefits, and risks that, from a bioethical perspective, arise because of the the development of eHealth projects. The conceptual framework of the research is based on H. Jonas’ principles of the ethics of responsibility and B.G. Yudin’s anthropological ideas on human beings as agents who constantly change their own boundaries in the “zone of phase transitions.” The article focuses on the events taking place in the zone of phase transitions between humans and machines in eHealth. It is shown that for innovative practices related to digitalization and datafication in medicine, it is needed to rethink central bioethical concepts of personal autonomy and informed consent. In particular, the concept of broad or open informed consent is discussed, which allows the idea of moral responsibility in the field of biomedical technologies to be extended to events of uncertain future. The authors draw attention to the problems associated with the emergence of new autonomous subjects/agents (machines with artificial intelligence) in relationship between doctors and patients. The humanization of machines occurring in eHealth is accompanied by a counter trend – the formation of conceptions and practices of the quantified self. There emerges the practices of self-care and bio-power (M. Foucault) caused by the datafication and digitization of personality. The authors conclude that bioethics should proactively develop norms for the evolving interaction between doctor and patients.

The article discusses the ethical problems that arise due to the processes of digitization and robotization in medicine, and focuses on the relationship between the doctor and the patient. The purpose of this article is to identify the limits of the transformative impact of these processes on the medical profession. The possibilities and disadvantages of telemedicine are considered, and the role of artificial intelligence in modern medical practice is analyzed. The author compares the traditional paternalistic model of the doctor’s attitude to the patient and the modern engineering model replacing it. The study has identified risks of computerization for doctors and patients, which may include the lack of direct contact between the doctor and the patient, the inability to “physical examination,” the uncertainty of liability for medical errors, as well as problems of maintaining the confidentiality of personal data of patients. The dominance of a technical-type model can lead to depersonalization of the patient and replacement of most doctors with artificial intelligence (AI) systems and robots. Since modern medicine belongs to two categories – “human territory,” which implies taking care of a person as the main task, and “machine territory,” which is associated with the automation of many processes, the article raises a natural question about the place of a doctor in the modern world. The findings allow to draw some conclusions. With the widespread introduction of artificial intelligence and robotic systems into medicine, the relationship between doctor and patient is being transformed. Diagnostics, treatment and medical manipulations will increasingly be assigned to machines, which will free doctors from the impossible task of collecting a huge array of medical data and free up time to communicate with patients. Intelligent machines and robotic systems will outperform doctors in diagnosing diseases and performing precise surgeries, but they will never replace doctors in caring for patients. An important task of modern medicine is to maintain “live contact” between the doctor and the patient.

The article examines the impact of digitalization on human life and intellectual experience. The development of computer technology demands an understanding of new aspects of human development and requires a capability to overcome not only external conditions but also ourselves. Entering a new level of development cannot imply a complete rejection of previous dispositions, but should be accompanied by reflection on personal experience and by the quest for new forms of interaction in society and with nature. Communicative and cognitive activity of a person has an ontological basis and relies on processes that actually evolve in nature. Therefore, the creation of new objects is always associated with the properties of natural material and gives rise to new points of support in the development of man. The more audacious his projects, the more important it is to preserve this connection to nature. It is always the human being who turns out to be the initiator who knows how to solve problems. The conformity of complex technical systems to nature is not only a goal but also a value of meaningful construction of development perspectives. The key to the nature orientation of the modern digital world is the human being himself, who keeps all the secrets of the culture of his natural development. Therefore, the proposed by the Russian philosopher V.S. Stepin post-non-classical approach, based on the principle of “human-sizedness,” is an important contribution to contemporary research because it draws attention to the “human – machine” communication, to the relationship between a person and technological systems he created. The article concludes that during digital transformation, a cultural conflict arises: in an effort to solve the problems of the future, a person equips his life with devices that are designed to support him, to expand his functionality, but at the same time, the boundaries of humanity become dissolved and the forms of human activity undergo simplification. Transhumanism engages society in the fight against fears of vulnerability and memory loss and ignores the flexibility and sustainability of natural foundation.

Round table summary. In January 2019, the Faculty of Philosophy of the Lomonosov Moscow State University held the round table “Problems of Consciousness: Research Opportunities.” It was dedicated to problems of interdisciplinary studies of consciousness. Many famous Russian specialists whose academic interests include consciousness, brain and mind took part in this event: K.V. Anokhin, D.I. Dubrovsky, T.V. Chernigovskaya, M.A. Piradov, A.A. Potapov, V.Y. Sergin, V.V. Vasil’ev, Z.A. Zorina and others. At the round table, the following problems were discussed: the specificity of consciousness problem, its relevance in various academic disciplines, contemporary research possibilities for consciousness studies to solve the problems that specialists actually face. Much attention was paid to the problems of neurobiology, empirical research of consciousness. Nonetheless, participants showed in their speeches that the problem of consciousness is also a philosophical problem. Hence, it requires thoughtful consideration of philosophers. Participants decided that for progress in solving this problem researchers from various (not only natural) disciplines have to cooperate.