202
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
DOI: https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2023.61.01.21
How to Cite:
Galiakberova, A.A., Mukhametshin, A.G., Asratyan, N.M., Kornilova, I.V., & Galiev, R.M. (2023). Categories and methods of
civilizational approach in modern philosophical and historical discourse. Amazonia Investiga, 12(61), 202-211.
https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2023.61.01.21
Categories and methods of civilizational approach in modern
philosophical and historical discourse
Категории и методы цивилизационного подхода в современном философско-
историческом дискурсе
Received: January 24, 2023 Accepted: February 26, 2023
Written by:
Alfinur A. Galiakberova85
https://orcid.org/0009-0006-9502-8277
SPIN-код: 1240-5712
Azat G. Mukhametshin86
https://orcid.org/0009-0005-6521-9171
SPIN-код: 1837-7534
Norair M. Asratyan87
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6075-2018
SPIN-код: 748501
Irina V. Kornilova88
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0910-8897
SPIN-код: 6727-2777
Rustem M. Galiev89
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5096-8648
SPIN-код: 2399-5862
Abstract
The diverse contradictions of the modern world,
social and international conflicts, the growing
trends of both globalization and national
isolation, the rapid development of
communication technologies against the
background of growing gap between poverty and
wealth of the countries and within them are
evidence of another crisis in the system of
international relations, of the entire world order.
The growth of entropy has once again raised the
question of the lack of a holistic and systematic
understanding of the processes of socio-
historical development, and actualizes the need
to analyze theories that consider the development
of large socio-cultural communities. In this
regard, it is important to study socio-
philosophical and philosophical-historical
theories and views, united in a civilizational
approach. The dominance of the formational
approach in Soviet historical science ended in the
late 1980s. And in 1995 the Russian Academy of
85
Candidate of Economic Sciences, Associate Professor Naberezhnye Chelny State Pedagogical University, Russia.
86
Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences, Professor Naberezhnye Chelny State Pedagogical University, Russia.
87
Candidate of Philosophical Sciences, Associate Professor Naberezhnye Chelny State Pedagogical University, Russia.
88
Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor Naberezhnye Chelny State Pedagogical University, Russia.
89
Candidate of Pedagogical Sciences, Senior Researcher Naberezhnye Chelny State Pedagogical University, Russia.
Galiakberova, A.A., Mukhametshin, A.G., Asratyan, N.M., Kornilova, I.V., & Galiev, R.M. / Volume 12 - Issue 61: 202-211 /
January, 2023
Volume 12 - Issue 61
/ January 2023
203
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
Sciences recognized that civilizational theory
can serve as one of the conceptual principles for
analyzing and describing the historical process in
textbooks for schools and universities. The
object of our article is the essence of the
civilizational philosophical and historical
concept. The subject is the discourse, in the space
of which there is developed a methodology, and
are analyzed the categories of the civilizational
approach to history. We apply general theoretical
research methods: analysis, synthesis,
comparison, interpretation. It is shown that
within the framework of the theory under
consideration methodological differences are
significant, so several theoretical varieties are
identified and the key categories of the
civilizational concept in them are interpreted
differently.
Keywords: culture, civilization, civilizational
approach to history.
Introduction
In modern Russian philosophical and historical
discourse there is observed an antagonism
between two opposing conceptual approaches -
formational and civilizational. The basis of the
formational approach is the Marxist theory,
according to which human history is a linear
process, the driving force of which is the class
struggle. The periodization of history is built on
this principle, where after the primitive society
there come a slave-owning, feudal, capitalist
ones. And the highest stage (formation) is
recognized as an ideal communist society, in
which all major social contradictions are
resolved that leads to social homogeneity and
social harmony. Proponents of the formational
concept try to separate utopian elements from
rational ones in it. And critics point to the key
shortcomings of this theory: materialism
considers the spiritual life of a person in a
simplified way, does not see the cultural identity
and diversity of peoples, does not identify the
reasons for their uneven development, and
belittles the role of the individual in history. A
view of history based on a civilizational concept
puts at its core the concepts of civilization and
culture. This approach pursues the main goal -
the study of local cultures and civilizations in all
the diversity and richness of their most important
phenomena: religion, art, rituals, customs, crafts,
principles of education, the nature of the family.
It is recognized that the historical process has a
variety of forms and represents a complex mosaic
picture. However, critics of the civilizational
concept argue that it does not give us a holistic,
but a fragmented picture of history, does not
reveal to us the general laws of the socio-
historical process. Repeated attempts by a
number of philosophers and historians to find
ways to harmonize both methodological
approaches and present them as complementary
ones have not been successful. However, no
matter what conceptual principles scientists
adhere to, their research should be aimed at
comprehending objective truth and represent a
respectful and benevolent view of the history and
culture of each nation.
Methodology and design
The categories of culture and civilization, their
correlation are of fundamental importance for the
study of society, its structure, and understanding
of the most important historical events.
Considered in a philosophical and cultural vein,
these categories make it possible to form holistic
and systematic ideas about the features of the
development of social communities within
certain spatial and temporal boundaries, to
identify objective laws in their development, to
consider the place of certain events and processes
within the life cycle of society, to predict the
manifestation of certain trends.
204
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
The object of our article is the essence of the
civilizational philosophical and historical
concept. The subject is the discourse, in the space
of which there is developed the methodology, are
studied the main principles of the civilizational
concept and analyzed the categories of the
civilizational approach to history. The work
implies general theoretical research methods:
analysis, synthesis, comparison, interpretation.
On this basis, the following tasks are formulated:
− to study the essence and methodology of the
civilizational approach;
− to consider the relationship between the
concepts of "civilization" and "culture";
− to study and evaluate the discussions within
modern philosophical and historical
investigations concerning the most
important categories on which civilizational
theory is based;
− to reveal the strengths and weaknesses of
this theory, the possibilities of its integration
with other conceptual approaches.
Analysis and Discussion
1. The concept of Civilization
The appearance of the word "civilization" dates
from the middle of the XVIII century. The term
comes from the Latin "civilis", interpreted as
"civil, state". Based on the etymology of the
term, it is possible to say that we are talking about
a period when society left its primitive state,
there arose an organization in the form of a state,
and active development started to characterize
cultural life.
The English thinker of the 18th century.
A. Ferguson used the concept of "civilization" to
study the early stages of the development of
peoples. As criteria for "civilization" the author
named the transition of peoples from
shepherding to production, as well as the
appearance of property rights (Ferguson, 1792).
Analyzing the modern application of the term,
B.S. Erasov identifies 9 variants of its usage.
Most often it is used to denote the stage of
development of society, to describe the
development of mankind in terms of its place in
the Universe, to designate a particular society,
taken within certain time and territorial
boundaries, to identify the level of development
of society, as well as with an axiological purpose
(Erasov, 2002).
E.B. Chernyak gives the following definition of
this concept: "civilization is an integral self-
developing system that includes all social and
non-social components of the historical process,
the entire set of material and spiritual objects
created by the human being" (Chernyak, 1996).
A similar opinion is presented by
M.M. Mchedlova: "civilization is an extremely
wide, stable socio-cultural community that exists
in certain spatial and temporal coordinates"
(Mchedlova, 2008). At the same time, the author
points out that civilizations are characterized by
a certain ratio of different value categories.
2. The concept of culture
The word "culture" has Latin roots and comes
from "cultura", which means "cultivate".
Initially, it was meant that this concept neither
refers to the natural habitat (nature) nor to human
nature (organism), but to the methods and results
of "cultivation", changing the external material
environment, as well as to transforming people
themselves. Therefore, the field of culture is an
artificial environment created by people, which
includes diverse spiritual values, social relations
and artifacts, as well as bodily and spiritual
abilities and social traits acquired by people in
the process of upbringing and socialization.
Due to the versatility of this concept, there have
developed many of its definitions, each of which
being based on a certain conceptual approach.
Here are the following major features for the
definition of culture (Kuznetsova, 2013):
1) objective (culture is a set of material and
spiritual values created by people); 2) procedural
(culture is a process of production, distribution
and development of cultural values); 3) semiotic
(culture as a sign system that preserves the
experience of generations in various symbols –
words, concepts, art, tools, consumer goods);
4) functional (culture as a way of existence and a
system of means that allows individuals and
communities to solve diverse problems they
face); 5) activity (culture as practice for the
creation, mastery and implementation by
individuals of the wealth accumulated by
mankind: knowledge, skills, abilities).
In accordance with certain approaches, the
authors define culture as generally accepted
ideas, manifested in actions and artifacts that
characterize a particular society (Redfield,
1941); as a set of non-biological manifestations
of a person (Pelipenko & Yakovenko, 1998); as
a practical implementation of universal and
Volume 12 - Issue 61
/ January 2023
205
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
spiritual values (Vyzhletsov, 2016); as a special
semiotic mechanism and a set of genetically non-
inherited information in the field of human
behavior (Lotman, 1996); as a historically
established system of norms of behavior and
activity (Il’enkov, 1991).
V.Zh. Kelle noted that, in relation to historical
development, the concept of "culture" was first
used by German researchers in the 18th century.
This concept in this period “was applied mainly
to the phenomena of the spiritual sphere as the
highest layer of the peoples’ life” (Kelle, 2008).
At the same time, the researchers made a
conclusion about the diversity of cultures, their
significant differences from each other,
uniqueness and intercultural relations. In the
same period, within the context of German
Romanticism development, there was formed a
concept of culture as a worldview: each culture
sees the world in its own way, it represents an
original picture of the world.
Starting with the prominent American
philosopher and ethnologist Robert Redfield
(1952), the concept of integrity and consistency
of each culture is presented and studied as a
general cultural picture of the world (Ariarskiy,
2001; Arnol’dov & Kruglikov, 1987; Bibikhin,
2007; Bykhovskaya, 2017). At the same time,
many scientists are delving into different aspects
of the world picture in order to study them in
detail.
In connection with the aggravation of the human
problems and the crisis of culture in the modern
era, the relevance of the humanitarian picture of
the world is significantly increasing (Torosyan,
2020; Asratyan et al., 2018b; Galiakberova et al.,
2018). Being part of the general cultural picture
of the world, it generalizes and synthesizes the
key results of research in many fields of the
humanities. In its turn the humanitarian picture of
the world contains an ethnic picture of the world
(Gibadullin et al., 2018; Zverev, 2011;
Seredkina, 2014), an artistic picture of the world
(Averintzev, 1975; Bakhtin, 1990; Borev, 1970;
Blokh et al., 2019; Grakhova et al., 2019;
Asratyan et al., 2020) a religious picture of the
world (Tillich, 2015; Grigor’eva, 2008) a
linguistic picture of the world (Asratyan et al.,
2018a; Kornilov, 2003; Zaliznyak et al., 2005).
3. Correlation between the concepts of
"civilization" and "culture"
We have analyzed how different concepts
consider the relationship between the categories
of civilization and culture. As a result, there were
identified three groups of concepts:
1. Concepts where the notions of "civilization"
and "culture" act as being close or
synonymous. For an example, we can refer
to the theory of
A. Toynbee, where civilization is considered
as one of the stages in the development of
culture. At the same time, attention is
focused on the spiritual component, and
religion is considered its main component
(Toynbee, 2011; 1993).
2. Concepts that consider both the similarity
and difference of culture and civilization.
This group of concepts includes the theory
of F. Braudel, who proceeded from the
position that civilization is the basis of
culture. At the same time, the author also
focuses on the spiritual aspect of
civilization, but he assigns the central role to
mentality (Braudel, 2008).
3. Concepts where culture and civilization are
antagonists. This group certainly includes
the theory of O. Spengler, set forth in his
work “The Decline of Europe”. Civilization
within the framework of this theory is
presented as the final stage of the existence
of culture, as its disintegration (Spengler,
1993; 1998).
L. M. Martseva considers the semantic
commonality of the concepts of "civilization"
and "culture" and claims that they correlate "as a
dialectical unity of content and form ... The
dialectical unity of content (dominant spiritual
and moral values, moral behavioral norms) and
its expression (laws and regulations) fixes
"cultural code of the development of the nation”
(Martseva, 2017).
V.M. Strogetskiy (2020) believes that most
modern concepts proceed from the fact that there
are points of intersection between civilization
and culture, while there is no complete
compatibility. The author points out that culture
is associated with various types of human
creative activity, while civilization reflects the
broad context of social development from the
functioning of social groups to the creation and
use of material values. At the same time, the
category of civilization least of all refers to the
individual's contribution to society.
V.M. Strogetskiy, like L.M. Martseva, makes a
conclusion about the dialectical connection
between civilization and society.
S.I. Levikova, exploring this issue, indicates that
in the English-language works the concepts of
206
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
"civilization" and "culture" are considered as
synonymous. However, the situation is different
in the discourses of other countries.
The author points out that the first attempts to
"unite civilization and culture" date back to the
18th century. Later on the study of this issue was
significantly developed in the 19th century, in the
works of German philosophers. This problem
aroused considerable interest of researchers in
the 20th century. S.I. Sevikova points out that the
source of the problem of the relationship between
civilization and culture is scientific and
technological progress, which has had a
significant impact on the social life of a person
(Levikova, 2018).
V.D. Komarov seeks to integrate the ideas of
dialectical materialism and the civilizational
approach. He points out that civilization
combines the material foundations of society life,
political institutions and socio-cultural
processes, the way of people’s life. The author
comes to the conclusion that "civilization – in the
most general definition – is such a historical state
of society in which the accumulation of material
social wealth and the development of social
freedom determine the humanistic progress of
culture" (Komarov, 1998). At the same time, the
author introduces the concept of "civilized
culture", thereby pointing to the relationship
between culture and the stage of development of
society. Thus, culture is based on the current
level of development of society (including its
material component). In turn, the development of
culture creates the basis for the development of a
human being at this stage of the development of
society (social being).
In our opinion, the categories of "culture" and
"civilization" should be considered in a complex
dialectical contradiction. Although these
concepts are very close, their identification leads
to a narrowing and impoverishment of the
content, does not take into account important
semantic shades. Culture proceeds from the
priority of spiritual principles over material
factors, while civilization is firmly connected
with the material and technical component of
society's life. It is also important to take into
account that the development of both culture and
civilization contains not only the characteristics
of a linear movement, but also the continuity of
previous experience and its accumulation.
However, each new level, if it is achieved
through free creativity, huge constructive efforts,
can represent a special inimitable quality,
historical uniqueness. At the same time, human
history is full of examples of cultural degradation
and historical regression.
From this we can conclude that modern humanity
retains the possibility of both the formation of
united civilization, which was mentioned by
K. Jaspers (1994), and is able to slide into an even
more pronounced differentiation in the spirit of
S. Huntington's theory of the clash of
civilizations (Huntington, 1996).
4. The essence and methodology of the
civilizational approach
The use of the category "civilization" in itself
does not indicate a commitment to a
civilizational approach in understanding history.
Thus, the already mentioned A. Ferguson, as well
as the equally outstanding figures of
L.H. Morgan (1934) and H.T. Buckle, who
during all his lifetime was writing “The History
of Civilizations” (2000–2002), took a linear
progressive view of history as a single process.
They considered civilization to be the stage
following "savagery" and "barbarism",
civilization meant a higher historical stage, the
superiority of some societies over others that did
not reach this stage.
The emergence of the civilizational concept gave
this term a fundamentally different meaning. The
classical principles of the civilizational approach
imply a rejection of understanding history as a
single linear process of movement. The emphasis
is replaced on the uneven development of various
communities, their self-sufficiency and
autonomy. Within the same time period, different
communities can be at different stages of their
development.
The process of formation of a civilizational
approach went through a number of stages. The
first of them dates from the 2nd half of the 19th
century, when for the first time there appeared a
view of history not as successive stages of
development, but as the coexistence of different
cultures. This position was quite clearly
expressed in the work of H. Rickert (1908). In
Russia it’s possible to attribute to this stage the
ideas of N. Danilevsky (1995), who
distinguished 10 types of cultures. At this stage,
the concepts of civilization and culture were not
yet opposed to each other.
The second stage starts at the beginning of the
20th century. Here the key role belongs to the
work of O. Spengler "The Decline of Europe"
(1993, 1998), in which civilization is understood
as a time of decline following the period of
Volume 12 - Issue 61
/ January 2023
207
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
culture. O. Spengler’s ideas are comparable with
the position of N.A. Berdyaev (1969), who spoke
of the soullessness of civilization as opposed to
the religiosity and spirituality inherent in culture.
The third stage can be dated from the beginning
of the second half of the 20th century, associating
it with the concept of A.J. Toynbee (2011-1993),
which explored the life cycle of civilizations.
A. Toynbee introduced the term "local
civilization", combining in it various aspects of
existence of civilization (territorial, ethnic,
religious). Similar ideas were shared by the
Russian-American scientist P.A. Sorokin (1992).
As a result of this evolution, civilizational theory
has acquired many features that require scientific
analysis. L.G. Koroleva (2019) highlights the
following peculiarities that are characteristic of
modern theories within the civilizational
approach:
− an indication of the diversity of historical
forms of development;
− the study of the whole manifold
interweaving picture of interests, values and
ideals of various socio-cultural
communities’ representatives;
− recognition of the possibility of two or more
systems coexistence within the framework
of world civilization.
V.T. Novikov & N.A. Kandrichin (2007) identify
three approaches that differ in their
understanding of self-sufficiency of civilizations
or their interdependence.
The concepts of the first group form ideas about
the mosaic nature of the world picture,
emphasize the regional features of the various
structures that make up civilization. Here, less
importance is attached to the issues of interaction
between cultures, than to those of a single
civilization society development. The authors
refer to the concepts of this group the theories of
O. Spengler, L. Gumilyov (1989), J. Derrida
(2012) and others.
The second group of concepts is focused on the
spiritual component. When considering the
stages of civilization development, we won’t find
strict cause-and-effect conditionality, there are
no rigid frameworks and criteria for belonging to
a particular civilization. The authors refer to this
group the views of P. Sorokin, K. Jaspers and
others.
The concepts of the third group connect
civilizational problems with the modern
processes of globalization and glocalization. The
emphasis is on common features in the
development of civilizations and on the factors
influencing this process. In these theories,
attempts are made to identify general patterns, to
reveal possible directions and prospects for the
development of civilizations. This group of
theories, according to the authors, is the most
promising.
In an effort to generalize numerous studies,
different authors in their own way in a
concentrated form represent the essence of the
civilizational approach.
According to E.V. Chepikov, this entity includes:
− rejection of the end-to-end periodization of
all the mankind history, the discreteness of
the historical process;
− as subjects of history there are considered
cultural-historical types (according to
Danilevsky), great cultures (according to
Spengler), civilizations (according to
Toynbee) or large cultural super-systems
(according to Sorokin); they are
fundamentally different from the historical
stages analyzed within the framework of
ideas about linearly progressive historical
development;
− recognition of the originality of each
civilization, the uniqueness of its spiritual
culture;
− acknowledgement of the cyclical nature of
civilization: as a rule, there are distinguished
the stages of its birth, flourishing and death
(Chepikov, 2010).
A slightly different algorithm is proposed by
A.N. Polyakov, who proceeds from the
peculiarities of socio-economic development and
priority values, therefore sees the following
typological features of civilizations:
− the presence of a "social" core of civilization
(strata of the population that are freed from
productive labour);
− study of the features of management and
lifestyle;
− analysis of the key values inherent in this
community;
− studying the correspondence between
axiological and economic components
(Polyakov, 2007).
A.V. Lubskiy proposed to make a theory based
on the unity of the following components of
civilization:
− the leading role of social integration;
208
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
− psychological type of the super-ethnos
(mentality, values and worldview);
− correlation between needs and the most
typical living conditions (Lubskiy, 2005).
Conclusions
Thus, the civilizational approach itself is a field
of discussion, it includes a wide range of
concepts. However, in most studies as the key
features of this approach there are recognized
discreteness, singularity, uniqueness of
civilizations, cyclicality and multivariance of
their development. Such a view significantly
distinguishes civilizations from all sorts of
historical stages studied in the context of a linear
approach to history.
The actualization of civilizational methodology
is explained by the noticeable shortcomings of
the linear and, in particular, formational
approaches, in which the uniqueness and
singularity of individual social objects are
leveled. In contrast to them, civilizational
methodology emphasizes the diversity of social
reality, the cultural and historical context of
human activity, helps to describe the historical
process as a cultural mosaic of specific human
communities and individuals.
However, it is obvious that the civilizational
approach is not free from shortcomings either.
This is especially evident when there is a need for
a comprehensive study of social processes, their
forecasting in conditions of increasing entropy.
This method is deprived of tools that should help
to understand and define versatile human and
global problems, universal principles that
determine the geopolitical processes of the
modern world.
The methodological crisis that has developed in
modern studies of socio-historical processes is
due to the dichotomy of two approaches – linear
and civilizational. Meanwhile, in the conditions
of a stochastic picture of society and geopolitical
realities that are difficult to predict, such a
situation is becoming increasingly unacceptable.
Obviously there is a necessity that in modern
theories their authors should more and more
strive not to isolate the civilizational approach
and oppose it to other ones, but to combine them
in a complicated way. Consequently, further
deepening and meshing of the civilizational
approach should lead it to ever greater
intertwining with other approaches and thereby
enrich the historical panorama. It is necessary to
take into account and study both trends in world
history: the trend towards universalization, the
formation of a single world civilization and the
one towards differentiation, towards peoples'
awareness of the uniqueness of their culture, the
desire to preserve it as their most important asset.
And this is possible on the basis of a new
methodology based on the synthesis of various
approaches.
Acknowledgements
The study was carried out under the project
"Formation of future teachers’ professional skills
for the work with students with health disabilities
using the Digital Simulator of pedagogical
activity” within the framework of the Agreement
on the provision of subsidies from the federal
budget to finance the implementation of state
task for the provision of public services
(fulfillment of works) between the Ministry of
Education of the Russian Federation and the
Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution
of Higher Education "Naberezhnye Chelny State
Pedagogical University" (additional agreement
No. 073-03-2023-015/1 dated February 14, 2023
to agreement No. 073-03-2023-015 dated
January 26, 2023).
Bibliographic references
Ariarskiy, M.A. (2001). Applied cultural studies.
Saint Petersburg: EGO.
https://studfile.net/preview/1611283/
Arbeláez-Campillo, D., Tatsiy, V.,
Rojas-Bahamón, M., & Danilyan, O. (2020).
Contributions of critical thinking as a form of
participation and political deliberation.
Amazonia Investiga, 9(27), 5-12.
https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2020.27.03.1
Arnol’dov, A.I., & Kruglikov, V.A. (1987).
Culture, the human being and the picture of
the world. Moscow: Nauka.
https://vk.com/doc35927296_360336584
Asratyan, Z.D., & Sadrieva, G.A., Potanina,
A.V., & Kiselevskaya, V.A. (2020).
Discourse in Artistic Literature. Revista
Inclusiones, 7(num Especial), 228–237.
https://acortar.link/iJ8LFN
Asratyan, N.M., Gibadullin, R.M.,
Asratyan, Z.D., Magizov, R.R.,
Nurullina, R.V., Shpeka, I.I., &
Levchenko, M.V. (2018a). Language
Processes and Bilingualism in Polyethnic
Environment: The Investigation in the
Republic of Tatarstan. Modern Journal of
Language Teaching Methods, 8(3), 173–182.
https://mjltm.org/article-1-173-en.html
Asratyan, N.M., Mukhametshin, A.G., &
Asratyan, Z.D. (2018b). Humanitarian World
Picture within Pedagogical Education.
Volume 12 - Issue 61
/ January 2023
209
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
Modern Journal of Language Teaching
Methods, 8(7), 119–123.
https://mjltm.org/article-1-109-en.pdf
Averintzev, S.S. (1975). Preliminary Notes on
the Study of Medieval Aesthetics. Old
Russian art. Foreign connections. Moscow:
Nauka, 371–382.
https://pedlib.ru/Books/3/0249/index.shtml?f
rom_page=32
Bakhtin, M.M. (1990). The creative work of
Francois Rabelais and the folk culture of the
Middle Ages and the Renaissance. Moscow:
artistic literature.
https://www.booksite.ru/fulltext/bah/tin/fra/n
su/ara/ble/index.htm
Berdyaev, N.A. (1969). The meaning of history.
Paris V: YMCA-Press.
http://www.odinblago.ru/smisl_istorii
Bibikhin, V.V. (2007). World. St. Petersburg:
Nauka. Grandmother.
http://www.bibikhin.ru/mir
Blokh, M., Asratyan, Z., & Asratyan, N. (2019).
Topic of the Imaginative Text and Its
Philosophical and Linguistic Presentation.
Journal of History Culture and Art Research,
8(2), 128−135.
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1c37/a62ac
0d935a114f3c36c6c931353c29763da.pdf
Borev, Yu.B. (1970). The comical. Moscow:
Iskusstvo.
https://biblio.imli.ru/images/abook/teoriya/b
orev_yu_komicheskoe_ili_o_tom_kak_smek
h_kaznit_nesovershens.pdf
Braudel, F. (2008). Grammaire des civilisations.
Moscow: Ves’ mir.
https://www.rulit.me/books/grammatika-
civilizacij-read-244795-1.html
Buckle, H.T. (2000–2002). History of
civilizations. History of Civilization in
England. Moscow: Vol. 1, 2.
https://knigogid.ru/books/101984-blyuz-
116-go-
marshruta/toread?ysclid=leh0ioyojp9922117
91
Bykhovskaya, I.M. (2017). Culturological
analysis as a means of forming a
humanitarian style of thinking. Uchyonyi
sovet, 3, 37–44.
https://publications.hse.ru/mirror/pubs/share/
folder/xaykhhhecp/direct/206243475
Chepikov, E.V. (2010). Transformation of the
civilizational teachings of A. Toynbee:
Abstract of the thesis of philosophical
sciences cand. Khabarovsk.
https://www.dissercat.com/content/transform
atsiya-tsivilizatsionnogo-ucheniya-toinbi
Chernyak, E.B. (1996). Civiliography. The
science of civilization. Moscow:
International relations, 78.
https://www.nkbooksellers.com/books/?rid=
83350&lang=cyr
Danilevsky, N.Ya. (1995). Russia and Europe.
St. Petersburg: Glagol Publishing House.
https://danilevsky.ru/rossiya-i-evropa/
Derrida, J. (2012). Marges de la philosophy.
Moscow: Academic project.
https://djvu.online/file/Vk8tXjoiXVtjM
Erasov, B.S. (2002). Civilizations: Universals
and Identities. Moscow: Nauka.
https://acortar.link/dqsl6N
Ferguson, A. (1792). Principles of Moral and
Political Science. Edinburg.
https://books.google.ru/books?id=mcoLAA
AAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&hl=ru#v=on
epage&q&f=false
Galiakberova, A., Asratyan, N., Asratyan, Z., &
Mukhametshin, A. (2018). Conceptual,
Linguistic and Pedagogical Aspects of
Humanitarian World Picture. Journal of
History Culture and Art Research, 7(3),
43–50.
http://kutaksam.karabuk.edu.tr/index.php/ilk
/article/view/1753/1247
Gibadullin, R., Asratyan, N., Asratyan, Z.,
Nurullina R., & Iljuhin, A. (2018). Ethnic
Self-Consciousness and Interethnic Relations
in the Poly-Ethnic Region: A Research in
Tatarstan. Journal of History Culture and Art
Research, 7(4), 340–346.
http://kutaksam.karabuk.edu.tr/index.php/ilk
/article/view/1855/1315
Grakhova, S.I., Gaifutdinov, A.M.,
Asratyan, N.M., Mustafina, S.F., &
Sharafetdinova, Z.G. (2019). General
regional studies aspects and facilitation
technologies in the study of creations of
leading painters and outstanding writers.
Amazonia Investiga, 8(19), 540- 546.
https://amazoniainvestiga.info/index.php/am
azonia/article/view/267/244
Grigor’eva, L.L. (2008). Religious picture of the
world and its reflection in phraseology.
Gramota, 8(15), 45–48.
https://www.gramota.net/articles/issn_1993-
5552_2008_8-2_18.pdf
Gumilyov, L.N. (1989). Ethnogenesis and
biosphere of the Earthю St. Petersburg:
Crystal, 2001. https://vk.com/wall-
63038783_62319?ysclid=lfcwn29pb492551
1184
Huntington, S.P. (1996). The Clash of
Civilizations and the Remaking of World
Order. New York: Simon & Schuster.
https://archive.org/details/clashofciviliza00h
unt/mode/2up
Il’enkov, E.V. (1991). Philosophy and culture.
Moscow: Politizdat.
https://platona.net/load/knigi_po_filosofii/ku
210
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
lturologija/ilenkov_eh_v_filosofija_i_kultur
a_1991/16-1-0-1429
Jaspers, K.T. (1994). The meaning and purpose
of history. Moscow: Republic.
http://imwerden.de/pdf/jaspers_smysl_i_naz
nachenie_istorii_1991.pdf
Kelle, V.Zh. (2008). Civilization approach and
problems of historical process theory
formation. Problems of social theory, 2(1-2),
356–374.
https://iphras.ru/uplfile/root/biblio/vst/2008/
kelle.pdf
Komarov, V.D. (1998). Philosophy of
civilization. Philosophy and Society, 3,
55–112.
https://www.socionauki.ru/upload/socionauk
i.ru/journal/fio/1998_3/55-112.pdf
Kornilov, O.A. (2003). Language pictures of the
world as derivatives of national mentalities.
Moscow: ChePo.
https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=197658
44
Koroleva, L.G. (2019). Civilization approach in
modern philosophy of history. Scientific
notes. Electronic scientific journal of Kursk
State University, 3(51).
https://www.elibrary.ru/download/elibrary_4
1232851_31825387.pdf
Kuznetsova, E.V. (2013). Definition of culture: a
variety of approaches. Perspectives of
Science and Education, 5(5), 49–55.
https://www.elibrary.ru/download/elibrary_2
0357201_25633218.pdf
Levikova, S.I. (2018). The problem of
correlation between culture and civilization:
socio-philosophical aspect. Creativity and
culture in the light of philosophical reflection.
Creativity of culture and culture of creativity.
Ulyanovsk: Ulyanovsk State University,
48–56.
http://lib.ulstu.ru/venec/disk/2017/233.pdf
Lotman, Yu.M. (1996). On the semiotic
mechanism of culture. Anthology of cultural
thought. Moscow: publishing house “ROU”,
323–327.
https://uchebnikfree.com/kultura/semiotiche
skom-mehanizme-kulturyi-68831.html
Lubskiy, A.V. (2005). Alternative Models of
Historical Research. Moscow: Social and
Humanitarian Knowledge.
https://acortar.link/MgCM1z
Martseva, L.M. (2017). The relationship between
the concepts of "culture" and "civilization".
National Priorities of Russia, 1, 34–47.
https://www.elibrary.ru/download/elibrary_2
8913849_67302987.pdf
Mchedlova, M.M. (2008). Russian civilization:
challenges of the XXI century: textbook.
Moscow: Peoples' Friendship University of
Russia.
Morgan L.H. (1934). Ancient Society, or An
Inquiry into the Lines of Human Progress
from Savagery through Barbarism to
Civilization. Leningrad: Institute of the
Peoples of the North Peoples of the Central
Executive Committee of the USSR.
https://www.pseudology.org/Sex/MorganLG
_DrevneeObshestvo2.pdf
Novikov, V.T., & Kandrichin, N.A. (2007). The
Phenomenon of Globalization and Value
Priorities of the East Slavic Civilization
Human Being. Philosophical problems of
civilizational dynamics, 1, 27-37.
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/290217310.
pdf
Pelipenko, A.A., & Yakovenko, I.G. (1998).
Culture as a system. Moscow: Languages of
Russian culture. https://acortar.link/sOQ05L
Polyakov, A.N. (2007). Civilization as a social
system: theory, typology and method.
Problems of History, 11, 63–70.
https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=957628
5
Redfield, R. (1952). The Primitive World View.
Proceedings of the American philosophical
Society, 94, 30.
https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/mon
o/10.4324/9781315129440-16/primitive-
world-view-robert-redfield-clifford-wilcox
Redfield, R. (1941). The Folk Culture of
Youcatan: Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 132.
https://ehrafworldcultures.yale.edu/cultures/
nv10/documents/016
Rickert, H.J. (1908). Philosophy of history. Saint
Petersburg: D.E. Zhukovskiy, XIV.
https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/filosofiya-
istorii-spb-1908
Seredkina, N.N. (2014). Ethnic picture of the
world in the context of modern social
research. Sociodynamics, 10, 26–59.
https://e-notabene.ru/pr/article_13441.html
Sorokin, P.A. (1992). Human being. Civilization.
Society. Moscow: Politizdat.
https://www.booksite.ru/fulltext/1179666/te
xt.pdf
Spengler, O. (1993). Decline of Europe. Essays
on the morphology of world history. Vol. 1.
Gestalt and reality. Moscow: Mysl’.
http://yanko.lib.ru/books/cultur/spengler=za
kat-1=ann.htm
Spengler, O. (1998). Decline of Europe. Essays
on the morphology of world history. Vol. 2.
World-historical perspectives. Moscow:
Mysl’. https://acortar.link/eyCZF8
Strogetskiy, V.M. (2020). Fundamentals of
cultural studies. Moscow: Yurait.
Volume 12 - Issue 61
/ January 2023
211
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=375393
12
Tillich, P.J. (2015). Selected works. Foundation
shake. Moscow; St. Petersburg: Center for
Humanitarian Initiatives.
https://fictionbook.ru/static/trials/12/15/67/1
2156796.a6.pdf
Torosyan, V.G. (2020). Humanitarian picture of
the world: history and modernity: textbook.
Moscow; Berlin: Direct Media.
https://biblioclub.ru/index.php?page=book_r
ed&id=572438
Toynbee, A.J. (1993). A Study of History.
Nobsword.
https://nobsword.blogspot.com/1993_10_17
_nobsword_archive.html
Toynbee, A.J. (2011). Civilization before the
court of history. Moscow: ACT.
https://vk.com/wall-
52136985_23820?ysclid=lfcut97m41038065
05
Vyzhletsov, G.P. (2016). Axiology of culture at
the turn of the century. International Journal
of Cultural Research, 33(3), 15–26.
https://www.elibrary.ru/download/elibrary_2
6234560_63264138.pdf
Zaliznyak, A.A., Levontina I.B., &
Shmelyov, A.D. (2005). Key ideas of the
Russian language picture of the world.
Moscow: Languages of Slavic Culture.
http://rusgram.ru/sites/default/files/liter/pres
upp/zal-lev-shm_keyideas.pdf
Zverev, O.V. (2011). Ethnic picture of the world
as an expression of the mentality of an ethnic
group. Bulletin of the Moscow State
University of Culture and Arts, 4(42),
105–108.
https://www.elibrary.ru/download/elibrary_1
6964354_21777017.pdf