Textbook for universities

PART I

THEORY OF CULTURE

CHAPTER 1. CULTURAL STUDY AND ITS SUBJECT

Basic Concepts: Relevance of cultural research and cultural studies. The calling of cultural studies and approaches to understanding culture and cultural studies. Levels of cultural comprehension. The subject and task of cultural studies. Main directions in cultural studies.

Relevance of cultural studies and cultural studies

The tradition of studying the phenomenon called culture goes back many centuries. In the philosophy of the Ancient World, a significant place is occupied by the consideration of problems of morality, religion, art, and the existence of the individual; The term “culture” appeared in ancient philosophy. Much later, a relatively independent direction of philosophizing was formed - “philosophy of culture”. Along with philosophy, the phenomenon of culture attracts the attention of many humanities, primarily history, psychology, religious studies, sociology, and ethnography (ethnology).

In the twentieth century, humanitarian theory realized the need for a comprehensive study of man and the phenomena of his life, primarily culture. The reason for the turn of knowledge towards humanitarian issues was the systemic crisis of society, the leading value of which for several centuries was scientific and technical knowledge and technocracy. Non-scientific forms of consciousness, including religion and mysticism, were revived to active life. There was an awareness of the insufficiency of the ideas of linear and cyclical development of humanity. The growth of national self-awareness, as an element of rapidly growing local diversity, dictates a new formulation of comparison and subordination of cultures. They began to look for the unified nature of the local diversity of equivalent, intensively interacting cultures. The ambiguous results of the technocracy’s activities set the task of compensating for narrow professionalization with humanitarian knowledge. There is an urgent need for verified practical actions to create a different type of society, a different character of planetary culture, therefore, there is a need for a systematic analysis of culture as a sphere of public policy with informed management decisions.

Modern cultural studies emerges from philosophy, forming its own subject and corresponding research methods. Culturology, as the newest branch of the humanities, has not yet acquired a generally accepted interpretation of its subject and purpose. Experts from traditional fields of knowledge participate in discussions about the meaning of cultural studies. Relatively recently, cultural studies received significant confirmation of the status of an independent science; Cultural researchers began to be awarded an academic degree in cultural studies.

The general concept of cultural studies is also ambiguous; In a variety of interpretations, researchers try to highlight the main approaches to understanding cultural studies as such. To a first approximation, three approaches can be formulated. The first is determined by the philosophical tradition of considering culture. Culturology, understood as a general theory, is identified with the philosophy of culture. Sometimes cultural studies are considered as part of the philosophy of culture, exploring the diversity of culture through systematization and typology of the phenomenon. Philosophers consider the history of culture (cultures) as one of the typologies of culture. In this version, culturology coincides with the axiology of culture and approaches cultural anthropology and sociology of culture. The second approach considers cultural studies as a designation for a set of independent disciplines that study aspects and forms of culture. The goal of cultural studies is the study of the socio-historical existence of culture, the result is the accumulation and systematization of knowledge about culture. The third approach considers cultural studies as an independent branch of humanitarian and social knowledge. This approach exists from the formulation of the problem by L. White and involves identifying the subject of cultural studies, its place among the branches of social and humanitarian knowledge.

Stages of research and levels of cultural achievement

There are various methodologies for considering the subject of cultural studies: axiological, praxeological, regulatory, semiotic. In accordance with the types of modern philosophizing, models for considering culture and cultural studies have developed: classical (absolutization of the rational, scientific aspect), non-classical (hermeneutics) and post-classical (phenomenology, postmodernity).

In the domestic tradition of cultural studies, two stages can be distinguished. The first, starting from the sixties of the last century, considers culture from the standpoint of axiology and the activity approach. According to the axiological approach, culture appears as a set of significant achievements of humanity (values). Within the framework of the activity approach, culture is considered in the context of subjective-personal or objective-social development. In the unity of interaction between the subjective and objective, culture appears as a specifically human way of activity. Since the nineties (second stage), developments in line with the concepts of the Western tradition of cultural studies have become widespread in the post-Soviet space: semiotics, cultural anthropology, structuralism, synergetics, intercultural communication.

Three levels of cultural comprehension can be distinguished. Starting from the knowledge of the phenomena of local culture, a culturologist goes back to understanding and assimilating the meaning and spirit of culture. At the second level, the communicative nature of culture, the socialization (or formation) of the individual and society through communication mechanisms are explored. The highest, essential level of culture is the basis of culture. The basis is not obvious, so there are different versions of its understanding. Some see the essence of culture in language, others in the sacred (religion, mysticism), others in symbols, others in values, and so on.

Culturologists are united by the understanding of culture as the integration basis of society and the individual. From the meaning of culture flow the axiom principles of its existence: creation, renewal, preservation, veneration and transmission of culture.

Consequently, the subject of cultural studies as an independent science is the formation and development of culture as a way of life inherent in humans. Culture as a way of life of a person (humanity) is a specific form of existence of living nature. Sometimes researchers, emphasizing the specificity of culture that is different from nature, call it a way of extra-biological human activity. The primacy of the phenomenon of life, of course, is not denied: in order for a person to become cultural, he must, at a minimum, be a biological being. The very concept of “human life” carries within itself the unity of the generic (biological) and species (sociocultural). Culturology aims to create a model of the “mechanism” of cultural existence. The meaning put into the word “mechanism”, or into possible synonymous words “code”, “gene” and others, is the unity of two points: understanding the existence of culture and the ability to adequately (competently) manage cultural processes.

Main directions in cultural studies

According to the subject and task of cultural studies, the new humanities are a theoretical discipline that operates with systems of described cultural artifacts (facts). In other words, cultural studies is not concerned with collecting and describing cultural artifacts; it creates concepts of culture using available generalizations from a collection of artifacts. Therefore, cultural studies is a style of philosophizing and is closely related to philosophy through the philosophy of culture. Philosophy and philosophy of culture, in particular, is a methodology of cultural studies. Culturology occupies a middle place between philosophy and specific sciences that describe cultural artifacts. This specificity is characteristic of cultural studies in general, that is, both for theory and for the history of culture. The historical development of culture for cultural studies is not an end in itself, but a prerequisite for explaining modern culture and modeling the optimal culture of the future.

For cultural studies as a science, the achievements of cultural anthropology and ethnology are of particular importance. Cultural anthropology, as understood by leading representatives of this branch of knowledge, studies specific values ​​and mechanisms for the transfer of cultural skills. Depending on the approach to understanding cultural studies, cultural anthropology can be part of cultural studies, or coincide with the content of the latter. Ethnology (or ethnography) is the description and study of various peoples. Often the term “ethnic” refers to a cultural unit.

Since the nineteenth century, evolutionism has taken hold in anthropological and ethnographic studies of cultures, significantly displacing organicism. Evolutionary sociologist G. Spencer identifies a regulatory system of a social organism that ensures social control. Social control of people’s everyday behavior, the researcher believes, has existed since primitive times and remains more effective than the institutions of the state and church that emerged from it. Spencer hoped that in the future a federation of higher nations would be able to prohibit such manifestations of barbarity as wars between nations and thereby strengthen the foundations of sociocultural civilization. E. Taylor (Tylor) studied primitive culture, in which he saw the beginnings of human development. Currently, his ideas about humanity as an integral part of nature and the unity of man regardless of racial, ethnic and cultural differences are of the highest value. L. Morgan, the creator of the theory of primitive society, affirms the idea of ​​the universality of the progressive development of society, since, in his opinion, the clan organization, as the beginning of humanity, is obligatory for all groups of primitive society.

In the twentieth century, a civilizational approach to the study of culture took shape. Russian culturologists associate the emergence of the approach with the work of N.Ya. Danilevsky. Danilevsky’s cultural-historical type, according to the tradition of organicism, is an independent, closed and therefore hostile culture-civilization towards others. O. Spengler considers civilization as a stage in the dying of culture. Each culture is born, grows, flourishes, decays and dies, like any organism of life. The culture-organism is closed. A. Toynbee sees in civilization a specific historical type of society, which is based on a certain type of culture, primarily religion. Responding to the challenges of nature, a full-fledged civilization goes through the stages of its existence. Communities (elite and proletariat) of flawed civilizations and civilizations at the end of their development are not able to consolidate to solve the problems of their existence. Denying organicism, M. Weber considers the type of religious and ethical norms to be the basis of economic life. Religion is a sociocultural institution that combines the features of a value system and a social institution. Concepts, including types of cultures and civilizations, are ideal-logical categories that correlate with the reality of life, but do not coincide. M. Weber created the sociology of science, which P.A. Sorokin identifies with the sociology of culture. P.A. Sorokin identifies two main cultural types - sensitive and ideational cultures - which replace each other through an idealistic culture - an intermediate mixed type.

L. Frobenius is the founder of the cultural-morphological school and researcher of African culture. According to the views of the school, a specific culture is created by nature under the influence of human economic activities, but regardless of his will. Man is a carrier, but not the creator of culture. Consequently, using the method of layer-by-layer penetration it is possible to identify the original culture and later layers introduced from the outside. V. Schmidt, based on ethnographic data, created the concept of proto-monotheism. According to the concept, the original form of religion was monotheism (monotheism). Fragments of ancient ideas about a single Creator God acquired the image of ancestors, cultural heroes in the myths and religions of primitive peoples. D. Frazer pays special attention to the spiritual culture of primitive society. The ethnographer separates magic and religion and contrasts them. As an evolutionist, he believes that the mental development of mankind evolves from magic to religion and then to science.

Social and cultural anthropology. Functionalist direction

B. Malinovsky, the creator of the functional theory of culture, believes that culture appeared as a vital function for solving a practical problem; it links biological primary needs with cultural artifacts and secondary needs generated by culture. Each culture is an integrity that differs in the ways of satisfying needs and the nature of transmitted secondary needs (tradition). A. Radcliffe-Brown, unlike B. Malinovsky, pays special attention to the study of the structure of society and social relations, understood in connection with the functions of social institutions. The founder of the anthropological approach to the study of culture, F. Boas, contrasts his method with the comparative historical method of the evolutionary school. Boas believes that the study of culture is associated with the description of phenomena and the accumulation of empirical facts. The culture of each people should be studied in all aspects, including taking into account the physical characteristics of the ethnic group. A major representative of structural functionalism, E. Durkheim assigned a decisive role in social integration to ideals and beliefs. He calls religion a system of all beliefs and practices sanctioned by society and obligatory for every member of society. The main function of religion so interpreted is to ensure solidarity. The creator of structural anthropology, C. Lévi-Strauss, explores the thinking of “primitive” man. Mythology for primitive man, like ideology for civilized man, is the fundamental content of collective consciousness. The creator of the school of structural functionalism, T. Parsons, proposes a theory of culture. Culture is all the spiritual and material achievements of people. Achievements are the result of actions at the level of social and cultural systems themselves. Culture, due to its normative and symbolic nature, is the most important regulator of society. M. Scheler, the founder of philosophical anthropology, develops the concept of the sociology of culture. In the sphere of spiritual culture, the logic of meaning dominates. Man is an indissoluble unity of life and spiritual principles. Religion, philosophy and science are equivalent types of knowledge in spiritual culture. Anthropologist H. Plesner emphasizes the eccentricity of human existence, which consists of sociality, historicity and expressiveness, which he understands as the leading anthropological definitions of man. According to the views of A. Gehlen, a person is a system of functions. By acting, man creates a culture that belongs to human nature and is impossible outside of man. Purposeful human activities, along with the expected results, can bring useful by-products; they are recognized as useful and are consolidated in purposeful activities. This is how a person simultaneously frees himself from dangers and creates cultural institutions. K. Rahner believes that man exists as a question about being, as openness to being. He sees the source of culture and creativity in the process of man overcoming his insufficiency on the paths of intuitive comprehension of God. E. Rothacker strives to present a person as a living historical figure. The integrity of personality consists in the unity of the animal, unconscious and conscious layers of man. The person is open to the world. Man is the creator and bearer of culture through language and an interested experience of reality. Culture is a form of expression of man's creative response to the challenge of nature. Culture is a person's lifestyle.

E. Cassirer places the concept of symbol at the center of his philosophy of culture. He sees the solution to the problems of culture and human existence in finding the specifics of the symbolic form. G. Rickert identifies culture as a sphere of experience where individual phenomena are correlated with values. For him, values ​​are the principle that determines being, cognition and activity. Values ​​determine the magnitude of individual differences.

Philosophy of culture in existentialism

M. Heidegger interprets a historical and artistic event as a node in which the truth of being is an opportunity that attracts a person to realize this opportunity and at the same time realize himself. Therefore, poetry and art act as guardians of existence and interlocutors of philosophy. The language of thought and poetry begins with the call of the world, waiting for a person to give it a word, that is, to become a mediator in expressing the meaning of existence. A. Camus believes that man is doomed to live in an alienated world, in which the meaning of life is given by the truth of man. The absurd as a worldview is a clear mind aware of its limits. The philosopher believes that the lot of modern man, living in a non-religious (desacralized) history, is rebellion: I rebel, therefore we exist. Rebellion is an element of civilization, since revolution can only be established in civilization, and not in terror or tyranny. In rebellion, a person asserts himself as an individual living according to the laws of beauty and goodness. He attaches particular importance to artistic rebellion, since in art the artist remakes the world in his own way. Beauty and freedom will help us find a new humanism: get out of isolation, find solidarity and establish social justice. K. Jaspers proposes the idea of ​​communication, which he interprets as the correlation of existences (existence). Communication is personal true communication. The thinker proposes to overcome the traditional contradiction in philosophizing between knowledge and faith with the concept and justification of philosophical faith. Philosophical faith is the highlighting of the specifics of a philosophical worldview. Jaspers believes in universal communication in which people will overcome evil and establish sociocultural goodness. Perhaps this will happen in the process of crisis-transition to a new qualitative state of personality, culture and history. Crisis-transition is the essence of the concept of “axial time” proposed by the philosopher. Jaspers resolves the “East-West” problem with the judgment that two independent and equivalent types of spiritual and cultural connections between man and society complement and feed each other in the historical dynamics of interaction. T. Eliot understands culture as the way of life of a people living in one place. The creative energy of a person is determined by the potential of the spiritual elite. The spiritual elite as a creative force consists of smart, talented, moral representatives of all social groups of society. There is a spiritual elite, which means that culture will develop.

J. Huizinga drew attention to the study of myths and fantasy in culture and history. The thinker highlights the intellectual aspect of the game beginning. The game is what supports the ideal and determines the spiritual culture of the era. Attention is drawn to the connection between education and fun in the ancient Greek language. In fun (game), a person, bypassing complex definitions and procedures, brings together contradictory phenomena into one whole. The problem of “game-seriousness” is insoluble and inexpressible, since the game can open and close the relationship between man and being. Play, understood as a part of ritual, thinking and language, is actually human existence; The game allows you to expand the capabilities of the human mind. But the game, like medicine, knows when to stop. A normal game presupposes: a balance of spiritual and material values, a focus on a common ideal and dominance over nature. Excess play is immeasurable childishness - a state into which modern civilization is plunging. Huizinga calls reasonable self-restraint a condition for the purification of modern humanity.

Psychological and psychoanalytic directions

V. Wundt, one of the founders of experimental psychology, believes that the social existence of an individual is manifested in language, religion, and everyday life. An individual's pursuit of personal goals collides with the interests of other people, so history has no pattern. The starting point of the study is mental, that is, experience understood as a set of subjective processes, usually recognized as a result of introspection. The experiment is not applicable for studying complex processes (speech, thinking). In the sphere of consciousness, psychic causality operates, and behavior is determined by psychic force - apperception. Complex manifestations of mental life should be the object of study of an independent branch of knowledge - the psychology of peoples, which studies the psyche based on cultural products. Wundt collected enormous material on the history of language, myths, and customs. S. Freud, the creator of psychoanalysis and the psychoanalytic approach to culture, believes that the values ​​and artifacts of culture are the result of the transformation of human mental energy. Art and religion as forms of culture, acting as self-therapy, neutralizes natural aggressiveness at the subconscious level. An excess of culture, first of all, strict regulation of gender relations leads to the emergence of individual and social neuroses. K. Jung, the founder of analytical psychology, identifies the collective unconscious - the main thing from the experience of previous generations, which is fixed in the structures of the brain. Archetypes of consciousness are universal human prototypes-samples. The dynamics of archetypes is the basis of the phenomena of spiritual culture. E. Bern, developing the ideas of psychoanalysis, focused on interpersonal relationships. In the process of communication, a person plays, being in one of three transactional states - adult, parent, child. The leading problem of culture is to assist the individual in freeing himself from “childish” games and mastering the promising games of the community.

M. Blok and L. Febvre, the founders of the school of annals (after the name of the journal they published, annals - chronology), consider a comprehensive knowledge of society as a path to knowledge of history. L. Febvre identifies society and civilization, the main categories of knowledge of the material and spiritual life of people. Civilizations (cultures) are distinguished by their own characteristics and independent worldview systems. The image of the world, including the past, present and future, created in every civilization, has objectivity. To understand the specifics of civilization, it is necessary to reconstruct its tools, that is, the system of worldview and knowledge. The Annales School thus places particular emphasis on the study of everyday life. P. Nora, the successor and transformer of the tradition of the annals school, pays more attention not to everyday life, but to “places of memory” - the leading events of national history - to understand the present rather than the past of ethnic culture.

The concept of K. Marx received its interpretation in various approaches to the study of culture among those thinkers who call themselves followers of Marxism. G. Marcuse took a critical position in relation to Soviet Marxism and the realities of capitalism. In the modern world, he believes, totalitarianism and technology dominate; they have turned man into a “one-dimensional” being. Mass culture has depersonalized humanity. Modern man has lost the ability for constructive revolution and transformation, therefore, sociocultural outsiders who are only capable of destruction participate in spontaneous and organized conflicts. M. Horkheimer rejects the concept of revolution in the fight against totality and authoritarian regimes. It is not peoples and classes, but individuals capable of uniting out of a sense of solidarity that constitute a concrete historical reality. Critical thinking, as the only free one, turns into politics. Philosophy must become critical theory. “Cultural materialism” pays more attention to the technical and economic side of culture than others. L. White, one of the founders of cultural studies, views culture as a self-developing system with its own laws of functioning. The technological subsystem of culture is leading; it defines the other two – social and ideological – subsystems. Culture (civilization) is a process-result of the degree of human energy weapons.

Religious cultural studies

E. Gilson connects the future of culture with the revival of the influence of religious and moral values. Philosophers of different times and peoples comprehend the first principles of existence. The nature of philosophical misconceptions in the absolutization of relative knowledge. He sees the pinnacle of thought in the work of Thomas Aquinas, who combined the achievements of ancient philosophy with Christian philosophy. The subsequent development of the philosophy of rationalism lost its life-giving connection with the sources and led to the cult of science since the times of R. Descartes and I. Kant. Supporters and opponents of science in the philosophy of positivism and alternative directions have lost the ability to constructively solve problems. Only the return and development of Thomism can help. The neo-Thomist J. Maritain believes that the rationalism of R. Descartes and the teachings of M. Luther are to blame for the destruction of the value basis of medieval culture. The empirical tradition feeds the negative cultural phenomena of the modern world. The thinker shares the ideals of integral humanism about solidarity in corporations, the Christianization of culture and the rapprochement of religions. Maritain's sociocultural ideal was recognized by theologians of the Catholic Church. A representative of dialogical personalism, M. Buber defends the religious values ​​of Judaism and Christianity. The duality of man, the alienation of the individual from the natural world and society lie at the basis of dialogical personalism. Buber sees the task of philosophy in revealing a person’s attitude towards himself and others, in changing the way of life towards the formation of sincere relationships between people and unity, expressed in the concept of “We”. Nobel Peace Prize laureate A. Schweitzer supplements his principle of reverence for life with a statement about the divine origin of the human spirit. He proposes to replace the old rationalism with a new version of mysticism, which presupposes faith in the sanctity of life. The task of the new mysticism is to revive the creative activity of the individual, to affirm his existence in an inhumane civilization. The criterion for the development of culture is humanism and optimism. (For more information about the confessional direction in cultural studies, see the section “Culture and Religion”).

Postmodernism in cultural studies

M. Foucault believes that language in culture appears in several states: as a thing, as a means of expressing thought, as an independent force in cognition. The transformations of language, together with life and labor, threaten the unity of man. Power is ambiguous; power-knowledge gives rise to reality and ways of knowing it. Foucault is looking for options for the free behavior of a moral subject in a real system of institutions and behavioral strategies. A person of passion (feeling, desiring) is formed as a moral subject from relationships with his soul, body, others, and social duty. The aesthetics of modern existence is the morality of a specific act. J. Derrida chose as an object of criticism texts of metaphysics in which being is understood as presence. He considers the method of deconstruction to be a condition for overcoming metaphysics. Criticizing the concept of being as presence, Derrida argues that a pure present does not exist: the past and the future are present in the present. The present does not coincide with itself; repetition, copy, trace are not secondary, but primary phenomena. By erasing traces of absence, metaphysical thinking creates presence as such. To indicate the boundaries of metaphysics it is necessary to test the text as such. The fabric of the text is created in the play of meanings. The thinker creates experimental texts with which he strives to show his method of identifying the true reality of language and culture in the layers introduced by the texts of metaphysics.

The origin of cultural sciences in Russia dates back to the beginning of the last century, when the study of culture became a branch of social, historical and philological sciences. The views of outstanding writers and philosophers had a significant influence on the cultural thought of that time. During the Soviet period, historical and philological directions were developed in the works of cultural historians, archaeologists, literary scholars, linguists, orientalists and ethnographers. The social direction of cultural sciences was developed by psychologists, historians, ethnographers, and sociologists.

In the post-Soviet spiritual and intellectual space, including in Kazakhstan, cultural sciences are at the stage of separation from the philosophy of culture, historical, sociological, philological and other humanities and social sciences.

The high educational value of cultural studies is beyond doubt among the international community; Cultural studies, for example, in terms of the volume of study hours, is one of the leading disciplines in the cycle of humanities compulsory for professional higher education. The fact of the formation of culturology as a science poses a certain difficulty for the formation of a state educational standard for culturological training and its educational and methodological support. The existing state standard of cultural studies education aims at studying the basic concepts of cultural theory, familiarity with the main directions of world and domestic cultural studies, knowledge of the leading aspects of culture, as well as the main stages and patterns of existence of world and domestic culture (civilization). The educational complex “Fundamentals of Cultural Studies” is the educational and methodological basis of the course in accordance with the norms of the state compulsory standard of cultural studies education.

Practical advice for teachers

A teacher of cultural studies knows that the monistic tradition of an unambiguous approach to the formation of the content of educational courses in the humanities and social knowledge is being replaced by the principle of pluralism. The leading problem of the educational implementation of pluralism in education, in our opinion, is that each of the many options for understanding, in this case culture, presupposes its own logic of content development. Since you cannot embrace the immensity, you can only strive for the maximum. The course teacher, like the author of an educational book (textbook) on cultural studies, has to independently search for the optimal combination of content and teaching methods. It seems that the search should be carried out within the boundaries of the triad: between (1) a description of many models of culture, (2) a systematic presentation of the theory and history of culture based on any one concept, and (3) a treasury of cultural artifacts, a significant part of which the student needs to see and hear. The content of the course and the profile of the educational institution will suggest the methodology and methodology for teaching cultural studies.

It seems that in the structure of cultural studies as an academic discipline at universities and colleges, it is advisable to distinguish the following sections: cultural theory, cultural history, culture and religion.

The theory of culture includes information about the subject of the academic discipline and a presentation of the foundations of the theory of culture (basic concepts and concepts of cultural studies; the concept of essence, dynamics, structure, types of culture). We believe that in this section it is fundamentally important to disclose the above points; the subordination of material and the naming of parts of the theory of culture are secondary, since they are options for the optimal grouping of content problems.

The history of cultures reveals the actual cultural foundations of the world's leading cultures of Ancient and Modern times, highlighting the specifics of the traditional culture of various peoples. In the content of this section, one can and should avoid unreasonable repetition of parts of world history devoted to culture, which, as is known, are studied by students in parallel with cultural studies. Why avoid? In current courses in cultural studies and Russian history, the same events are often considered from the perspective of approaches to Russian history. Meanwhile, cultural studies, as an integral science, using cultural artifacts identified by humanitarian knowledge, including history, according to its subject, considers the history of cultures at a different level of generalization - as a mechanism for the dynamics of human culture. Corresponding to the specifics of cultural studies, special attention should be paid to the cradle of human culture - the civilizations of Eurasia, including Central Asia. It is preferable to reveal the cultures and civilizations of Eurasia, focusing on the principles of existence of a planetary culture proposed by K. Jaspers with the dichotomy of its component cultures: ancient and “axial” (modern), East and West. It seems that this typology is closer to the essential understanding of human culture than the Eurocentric tradition, which adjusts world history and culture to the patterns of the history of Western Europe with the well-known stages from primitive society to modern times.

Culturology: Textbook for universities / P.F. Dick, N.F. Dick. – Rostov n/d: Phoenix, 2006. – 384 p. (Higher education).

Methodological foundations of cultural studies. Diversity of approaches and directions in cultural studies. Culturological theories of N. Danilevsky and K. Leontiev. Concepchia of local cultures by O. Speigler and A. Toynbee. Historiosophical theory of K. Jaspers. Conceptions of culture as a game by I. Huizinga and S. Lem. Theory of supersystems by P. Sorokin. Cultural and historical concepts of Eurasians. Ethnogenetic theory of L. Gumilyov.

The actualization of the problem of preserving spirituality and cultural values ​​at the end of the 20th century led to a turn of a number of scientific disciplines towards the study of the essence and functioning of the phenomenon of culture. The process of scientific understanding of such a phenomenon as culture requires the use of certain methodological foundations. In other words, the study of culture must be carried out within the framework of one or another philosophical thought. It is the difference in methodological foundations that determines the presence of three approaches in the study and understanding of the phenomenon of culture, namely: systemic, activity-based and value-based (axiological) approaches.

According to the domestic scientific tradition of the 20th century, the study of culture took place within the framework of philosophical thought, striving to develop a holistic, systematic approach to the analysis of culture as a social phenomenon. As a result, we have a philosophical justification for culture, when its essence is considered as a universal property of society. Within the boundaries of this methodology, an artificial division of the integral cultural process into material and spiritual levels arose. It should be noted that researchers began to pay less and less attention to material culture, concentrating efforts on studying the spiritual side of culture.

This kind of methodological basis for the study of culture limited the understanding of the essence of the phenomenon of culture, because problems associated with the creative process and the multidimensionality of culture remained in the shadows (after all, the orientation was on the productive nature of cultural phenomena). At the same time, this approach reveals the social essence of culture, so it has become a theoretical basis for further methodological searches in the course of cultural research. Culture began to be understood as something that is hidden behind the dialectic of “material” and “spiritual”; this, in turn, stimulated the search for a single source and essence of culture.

This source was the activity approach, on the basis of which various models of culture as an integral system were created. Within the framework of this approach, characteristic of Russian cultural studies, two orientations are most widespread. For representatives of the first (N. Kagan, N. Zlobin, etc.), culture is a process of creative activity, during which both the spiritual enrichment of society and the self-creation of man as a subject of the cultural-historical process occur. Here attention is focused on the fact that culture gives a person the opportunity to be born a second time (the first birth is a biological act!).

Adherents of the second orientation (E. Markaryan, V. Davidovich, Yu. Zhdanov) see in culture a specific way of activity that contributes to the preservation and reproduction of civilization in conditions of variability in the surrounding world (this orientation is discussed in detail in the previous lecture). The different orientations that exist within the framework of the activity approach complement each other and have a common methodological basis - culture is derived from human activity. The activity approach to the essence of culture serves as a definite basis for the study of local cultures and historical types of culture, as well as the relationship between culture and civilization.

The study of such complex problems as culture and values, culture and spiritual life requires different methodological foundations. A value-based (axiological) approach is appropriate here - culture is a function of the human race, it includes the ways in which a person asserts his existence in the world. The purpose of cultural activity is to preserve the species “Homo sapiens,” thereby defining the main value—human beings. Thus, it is man, the human race, that acts as an absolute cultural value. The axiological approach to the problems of culture is determined both by the opposition of culture to nature and by the fact that not all social phenomena are included in the world of culture (it is enough to recall the tendency to destroy the system of cultural values ​​or an element of this system, which is why they talk about “anticulture”).

In cultural studies there is a variety of approaches, trends and schools, which, due to the limited volume of the book, will simply have to be listed. One of the first approaches to the study of culture is anthropological; its formation began with the theories of early evolutionists (G. Spencer, E. Tylor and D. Morgan). The latter are characterized by an absolutization of the principle of continuity of the historical process. Then a cultural anthropological approach was formed, developed in the works of B. Malinovsky, C. Lévi-Strauss, E. Fromm, A. Kroeber, F. Kluckhohn, etc. Within the framework of this approach, a number of schools emerged: functionalism, structuralism, etc. Thus, summarizing their own studies of the tribes of New Guinea and Oceania, B. Malinovsky, together with Radcliffe-Brown, formulated three main postulates of functionalism: every culture is an integrity (as a consequence of the functional unity of society); every society or type of civilization, every custom or rite, worship or belief performs a certain vital function for culture; For a culture to preserve its integrity, each of its elements is irreplaceable.

In modern Western cultural studies, the sociological approach, or sociology of culture, has become widespread. Its representatives: P. Sorokin, M. Horkheimer, T. Adorno, G. Marcuse, K). Habermas - made a significant contribution to the development of problems of the cultural-historical process. The goal of the sociology of culture is to apply a systematic approach to the analysis of culture by comparing it with other social phenomena. The concept of culture within the boundaries of this direction does not cover the entire life of society, but only one of its aspects.

The structuralist approach in cultural studies is developed by K. Lévi-Strauss and M. Foucault. Lévi-Strauss considered the main problem of cultural studies to be the study of the process of transition from nature to culture and used the methods of structural linguistics and computer science theory. No less interesting is the playful approach to culture, which is set out in the works of I. Huizinga and S. Lem (this will be discussed below). The semiotic approach is also becoming widespread, when culture is viewed as a symbolic system. The works of E. Cassirer, Z. Langer, C. Morris, Y. Lotman and others are known here; they focus on the semiotic character of art in all its varieties (in particular, music, abstract painting), non-instrumental knowledge and a wide range of entertainment activities.

And finally, there is a biosphere approach to the study of culture, shared by scientists such as K. Lorenz, B. Skinner and others, and which has heuristic potential. If we consider our planet as an all-encompassing system, then it is legitimate to try to understand the cultural

tour from a biosphere point of view. This is what K. Lorenz does, postulating in his book “Beyond the Mirror” the following: 1) the subject of evolution is integral systems, 2) more complex systems have properties that are not reducible to the properties of the simple systems of which they consist. On this basis, he makes an attempt to trace the history of the evolution of systems, starting with simple cells and ending with complex cultures. In other words, cultures (and civilizations) are part of the biosphere, which itself is a particle of the Universe. Within the above approaches, which are often intertwined, there is a variety of schools of different types. For example, some researchers adhere to rationalism (N. Lévi-Strauss, M. Foucault, Y. Lotman, etc.), others are adherents of irrationalism (K. Jaspers, K. Jung, etc.). Irrationalistic ideas about the essence of culture were formed in the “philosophy of life” of Nietzsche, Bergson, the works of existentialists Jaspers, Sartre, Camus, etc.

It is interesting that the approaches and trends in cultural studies discussed above are used by theorists of the national liberation movement and the countries of the so-called “third world” in the fight against the concepts of European cultural scientists. Thus, irrationalism, a cultural-anthropological approach is used in such concepts of the cultural-historical process as Negritude, Indianism, “black consciousness,” pan-Arabism, Paturkism, etc. The same negritude represents a form of struggle between the value-emotional culture of the Negro-Berbers against the rational-cold culture of the West.

In the concept of Negritude, Negro culture is endowed with features that unite it with nature and cosmic cycles (the concept of Negritude was created by L. Senghor). This culture is characterized by integrity of worldview, developed intuition, and, socially, by the affirmation of justice and mutual assistance. In contrast to black culture, L. Senghor believes, the culture of Europeans is a symbol of “cold scientific thinking” and all-encompassing analysis. In an effort to understand and transform nature, this culture actually destroys it. In turn, the development of technology and the widespread use of mechanical devices lead to the leveling of personality and, as a reaction to this, to the expansion of brutal individualism and violence in the form of class struggle and colonialism. The deep anti-humanism of Western culture, the tendency of whites to violence and the seizure of someone else's L. Senghor takes it out of its paradigm. From here it is not far to the messianism of Negro Africans in order to save world civilization from white violence.

Now let's look at the basic concepts of culture that enjoy significant fame. First of all, let's pay attention to the book by N.Ya. Danilevsky (1822-1885) “Russia and Europe”, which substantiates the concept of multilinear and closed development of cultures. Using rich empirical material, he put forward a theory of cultural-historical types, which had a great influence on modern Western philosophy of culture. This theory is a theory of the plurality and diversity of human cultures (or civilizations), which contradicts the Eurocentric and linear concept of world culture. Our scientist is characterized in the West as the founder of the now popular approach there to the spatio-temporal localization of cultural phenomena. ‘ N.Ya. Danilevsky divided all original civilizations into three classes: positive, negative figures and civilizations serving other people's goals. The first includes: Egyptian, Chinese, Assyrian, Indian, Iranian, Jewish, Greek, Roman, Arabian, German-Roman (European) and Buryat. To these should also be added the Mexican and Peruvian civilizations that did not have time to complete their development. These cultural-historical types represent positive figures in the history of mankind; they contributed to the progress of the human spirit. The second class is formed by negative cultural and historical types (Huns, Mongols, Turks) that help “to give up the spirit of civilizations struggling with death.” The third class includes those civilizations that are beginning to develop (the Finns, etc.), which are not destined to play either a creative or destructive role in the history of mankind, because they became part of other civilizations “as ethnographic material.”

According to the theory of N.Ya. Danilevsky, humanity is by no means something unified, a “living whole”; it is rather a living element, cast into forms similar to organisms. The largest of these forms are “cultural-historical types”, which have their own lines of development. There are common features and connections between them that express a universal humanity that exists only among the people. The originality of the main idea of ​​N.Ya. Danilevsky is that a single thread in the development of mankind is rejected, the idea of ​​history as the progress of a certain common, or “world” mind, a certain common civilization, which is identified with European, is rejected. There is simply no such civilization; there are many developing individual civilizations, each of which makes its own contribution to the common treasury of humanity. And although these civilizations come and go, humanity lives on, constantly using this common treasure and becoming more and more rich. This is the area in which and what progress in the general course of history was recognized by our compatriots.

One of the supporters of the position of N.Ya. Danilevsky was a famous writer, diplomat and historian K. Leontyev (1831-1891). He entered cultural studies as the author of the collection “East, Russia and Slavism.” K. Leontyev generally shared Danilevsky’s concept of the closed development of cultures, but, unlike him, he associated belonging to one or another cultural-historical type not so much with a national, but with a religious confession. In this, K. Leontiev anticipated the concept of local cultures by A. Toynbee. Thus, he associated the creation of the Russian-Slavic type of culture, first of all, with the strengthening of Orthodoxy and a return to sovereign Byzantium.

Believing that political democracy is hostile to the essence of culture, K. Leontiev was an ardent opponent of the revolutionary movement. At the same time, he criticized tsarism, but “from the right.” At the end of his life he advocated the unification of the autocracy with the socialist movement; uniting the efforts of tsarism and the Catholic Church in the fight against the liberal democratic forces of Europe.

Theory N.Ya. Danilevsky had a strong influence on the work of the German thinker O. Spengler, anticipating many of the provisions of his famous book “The Decline of Europe”. It delivers a harsh verdict on modern Western civilization for its naked technicalism and lack of life-giving organic principles. O. Spengler distinguishes between possible (as an idea) and actual (in the form of the body of an idea) culture, accessible to human perception: actions and moods, religion and state, art and sciences, peoples and cities, economic and social forms, languages, law, customs, characters, facial features and clothing. History, like life in its formation, is the realization of a possible culture: “Cultures are organisms. The history of culture is their biography... The history of culture is the realization of its possibilities.”

In Spengler's concept, cultures are incommensurable with each other, because each of them has its own primordial symbol (soul), its own specific mathematics, its own art, etc. World history as a whole is like a motley meadow on which completely different beautiful flowers grow, not similar to each other. At the same time, it should be noted that, like organisms, cultures have their own phases of development, namely: spring, summer, autumn and winter (civilization). In relation to spiritual life, this means, respectively, the awakening of the dream-shrouded soul and the creation of powerful works by it, consciousness close to maturity, the highest point of strictly mental creativity and the extinction of spiritual creative power. This implies the death of Western civilization, its doom is emphasized. However, it is not very well known that at the end of his life O. Spengler revised his views regarding the disappearance of Western civilization and came to the conclusion that the West would be reborn in the future; literally this conclusion sounds like this: “The Rise of Europe.”

O. Spengler's influence on cultural studies went far beyond the German tradition, and the most outstanding researcher who fell under this influence was the famous scientist A. Toynbee (1889-1975). In his famous 12-volume work, A Study of History, he sets out the concept of local cultures. In methodology, A. Toynbee was an empiricist, while N. Danilevsky and O. Spengler rather proceeded from generalizing principles. However, like all supporters of the multilinear development of cultures, he divides the history of mankind into local civilizations, each of which is a “monad” in the Leibnizian sense of the word. The idea of ​​the unity of human civilization is, in his opinion, a misunderstanding of the European tradition generated by Christianity.

In the 12th volume of Studies in History, A. Toynbee lists 13 developed civilizations: Western, Orthodox, Islamic, Indian, ancient, Syrian, Chinese, Indus civilization, Aegean, Egyptian, Sumerian-Akkadian, Andean, Central American. Only 5 active civilizations have survived to this day: Western, Islamic, Chinese, Indian and Orthodox. Each civilization goes through four stages in its development: emergence, growth, breakdown and collapse, after which it dies, and its place is taken by another civilization, i.e. Before us is the concept of the historical cycle of civilizations.

Subject of cultural studies

In a broad sense, cultural studies is a complex of individual sciences, as well as theological and philosophical concepts of culture; other elephants, ϶ᴛᴏ all those teachings about culture, its history, essence, patterns of functioning and development, which can be found in the works of scientists presenting various options for understanding the phenomenon of culture. Excluding the above, cultural sciences are engaged in the study of the system of cultural institutions, with the help of which the upbringing and education of a person is carried out and which produce, store and transmit cultural information.

From this position, the subject of cultural studies forms a set of various disciplines, which include history, philosophy, sociology of culture and a complex of anthropological knowledge. In addition to this, the subject field of cultural studies in a broad sense should include: history of cultural studies, ecology of culture, psychology of culture, ethnology (ethnography), theology (theology) of culture. Moreover, with such a broad approach, the subject of cultural studies appears as a set of various disciplines or sciences that study culture, and can be identified with the subject of philosophy of culture, sociology of culture, cultural anthropology and other middle-level theories. In this case, cultural studies is deprived of its own subject of research and becomes an integral part of the noted disciplines.

A more balanced approach seems to be one that understands the subject of cultural studies in a narrow sense and presents it as a separate independent science, a specific system of knowledge. With this approach, cultural studies acts as a general theory of culture, based in its generalizations and conclusions on the knowledge of specific sciences, such as the theory of artistic culture, cultural history and other special sciences about culture. With this approach, the initial basis is the consideration of culture in its specific forms, in which it will remain as an essential characteristic of a person, the form and way of his life.

Based on all of the above, we come to the conclusion that subject of cultural studies there will be a set of questions about the origin, functioning and development of culture as a specifically human way of life, different from the world of living nature. It is worth noting that it is designed to study the most general patterns of cultural development, the forms of its manifestation that are present in all known cultures of mankind.

With this understanding of the subject of cultural studies, its main tasks will be:

• the most profound, complete and holistic explanation of culture, its
• essence, content, characteristics and functions;
• the study of the genesis (origin and development) of culture as a whole, as well as individual phenomena and processes in culture;
• determining the place and role of man in cultural processes;
• development of categorical apparatus, methods and means of studying culture;
• interaction with other sciences studying culture;
• studying information about culture that comes from art, philosophy, religion and other areas related to non-scientific knowledge of culture;
• study of the development of individual cultures.

The purpose of cultural studies

The purpose of cultural studies becomes such a study of culture, on the basis of which its understanding is formed. It is worth saying that for this it is extremely important to identify and analyze: cultural facts that together constitute a system of cultural phenomena; connections between cultural elements; dynamics of cultural systems; ways of producing and enhancing cultural phenomena; types of cultures and their underlying norms, values ​​and symbols (cultural codes); cultural codes and communications between them.

The goals and objectives of cultural studies determine the functions of this science.

Functions of cultural studies

The functions of cultural studies can be combined into several main groups according to the tasks being implemented:

• educational function - study and understanding of the essence and role of culture in the life of society, its structure and functions, its typology, differentiation into branches, types and forms, the human-creative purpose of culture;
• conceptual-descriptive function - the development of theoretical systems, concepts and categories that make it possible to create a holistic picture of the formation and development of culture, and the formulation of description rules that reflect the peculiarities of the development of sociocultural processes;
• evaluative function - carrying out an adequate assessment of the influence of the holistic phenomenon of culture, its various types, branches, types and forms on the formation of social and spiritual qualities of the individual, social community, society as a whole;
• explanatory function - scientific explanation of the characteristics of cultural complexes, phenomena and events, mechanisms of functioning of cultural agents and institutions, their socializing impact on the formation of personality on the basis of scientific understanding of the identified facts, trends and patterns of development of socio-cultural processes;
• ideological function - the implementation of socio-political ideals in the development of fundamental and applied problems of cultural development, the regulating influence of its values ​​and norms on the behavior of individuals and social communities;
• educational(educational) function - dissemination of cultural knowledge and assessments, which helps students, specialists, as well as those interested in cultural problems, learn the features of this social phenomenon, its role in the development of man and society.

The subject of cultural studies, its tasks, goals and functions determine the general contours of cultural studies as a science. Let us note that each of them, in turn, requires in-depth study.

The historical path traversed by humanity from antiquity to the present time has been complex and contradictory. On this path, progressive and regressive phenomena were often combined, the desire for something new and adherence to familiar forms of life, the desire for change and the idealization of the past. At the same time, in all situations, the main role in people's lives has always been played by culture, which helped a person adapt to the constantly changing conditions of life, find its meaning and purpose, and preserve the human in a person. Because of this, people have always been interested in this sphere of the surrounding world, which resulted in the emergence of a special branch of human knowledge - cultural studies and a new academic discipline that studies culture. Culturology is primarily the science of culture. This specific subject distinguishes it from other social and humanitarian disciplines and explains the need for its existence as a special branch of knowledge.

The formation of cultural studies as a science

Let us note the fact that in modern humanities the concept of “culture” belongs to the category of fundamental ones. Among the many scientific categories and terms, there is hardly another concept that would have so many shades of meaning and be used in so many different contexts. This situation is not accidental, since culture is the subject of research in many scientific disciplines, each of which highlights certain aspects of the study of culture and gives a different understanding and definition of culture. At the same time, culture itself is multifunctional, therefore each science singles out one of its sides or parts as the subject of its study, approaches the study with these methods and methods, ultimately formulating its own understanding and definition of culture.

Attempts to provide a scientific explanation for the phenomenon of culture have a short history. The first such attempt was made in

XVII century English philosopher T. Hobbes and German jurist S. Puffenlorf, who expressed the idea that a person can be in two states - natural (natural), which will be the lowest stage of his development, since he is creatively passive, and cultural, which they considered as a higher level human development, since it is creatively productive.

The doctrine of culture developed at the turn of the 18th-19th centuries. in the works of the German educator I.G. Herder, who viewed culture from a historical perspective. The development of culture, but in its opinion, constitutes the content and meaning of the historical process. Culture will be the revelation of the essential forces of man, which vary significantly among different peoples, which is why in real life there are different stages and eras in the development of culture. With all this, the opinion has become established that the core of culture is the spiritual life of a person, his spiritual abilities. This situation persisted for quite a long time.

At the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries. Therefore, works appeared in which the analysis of cultural problems was the main task, and not a secondary one, as it had been until now. In many ways, these works were related to the awareness of the crisis of European culture, the search for its causes and ways out of it. As a result, philosophers and scientists realized the need for an integrative science of culture. It was equally important to concentrate and systematize the enormous and varied information about the cultural history of different peoples, the relationships of social groups and individuals, styles of behavior, thinking and art.

This served as the basis for the emergence of an independent science of culture. Around the same time, the term “cultural studies” appeared. It was first used by the German scientist W.
It is worth noting that Ostwald wrote in 1915 in his book “System of Sciences,” but then the term was not widely used. This happened later and is associated with the name of the American cultural anthropologist L.A. White, who in his works “The Science of Culture” (1949), “The Evolution of Culture” (1959), “The Concept of Culture” (1973) substantiated the need to isolate all knowledge about culture into a separate science, laid its general theoretical foundations, and made an attempt to isolate it the subject of research, delimiting it from related sciences, to which he included psychology and sociology. If psychology, White argued, studies the psychological reaction of the human body to external factors, and sociology studies the patterns of relationships between the individual and society, then the subject of cultural studies should be understanding the relationship of such cultural phenomena as custom, tradition, ideology. It is worth noting that he predicted a great future for cultural studies, believing that it represents a new, qualitatively higher level in understanding man and the world. This is why the term “cultural studies” is associated with White’s name.

Despite the fact that cultural studies is gradually occupying an increasingly firm position among other social and human sciences, disputes about its scientific status do not stop. In the West, this term was not immediately accepted and culture there continued to be studied by such disciplines as social and cultural anthropology, sociology, psychology, linguistics, etc. This situation indicates that the process of self-determination of cultural studies as a scientific and educational discipline has not yet been completed. Today, cultural science is in the process of formation, its content and structure have not yet acquired clear scientific boundaries, research in it is contradictory, there are many methodological approaches to its subject. Everything suggests that this area of ​​scientific knowledge is in the process of formation and creative search.

Based on all of the above, we come to the conclusion that cultural studies is a young science that is in its infancy. The biggest obstacle to its further development will be the lack of a position on the subject of this research with which most researchers would agree. The identification of the subject of cultural studies occurs before our eyes, in the struggle of different opinions and points of view.

The status of cultural studies and its place among other sciences

It is important to note that one of the main issues in identifying the specifics of cultural knowledge and the subject of its research is to understand the relationship of cultural studies with other related or similar areas of scientific knowledge. If we define culture as everything that is created by man and humanity (this definition is very common), it will become clear why determining the status of cultural studies is difficult. Then it turns out that in the world in which we live, there is only the world of culture, which exists by the will of man, and the world of nature, which arose without the influence of people. Accordingly, all sciences existing today are divided into two groups - sciences about nature (natural science) and sciences about the world of culture - social and human sciences. In other words, all social and human sciences will ultimately be cultural sciences - knowledge about the types, forms and results of human activity. The material was published on http://site
At the same time, it is not clear where among these sciences the place of cultural studies is and what it should study.

To answer these questions, we can divide the social sciences and humanities into two unequal groups:

1. sciences about specialized types of human activity, distinguished by the subject of the activity, namely:

• sciences about forms of social organization and regulation - legal, political, military, economic;
• sciences about forms of social communication and transmission of experience - philological, pedagogical, art sciences and religious studies;
• sciences about the types of materially transforming human activities - technical and agricultural;

2. sciences about the general aspects of human activity, regardless of its subject, namely:

• historical sciences that study the emergence and development of human activity in any field, regardless of its subject;
• psychological sciences that study the patterns of mental activity, individual and group behavior;
• sociological sciences, which discover forms and methods of unification and interaction of people in their joint life activities;
• cultural sciences that analyze norms, values, signs and symbols as conditions for the formation and functioning of peoples (culture), showing the essence of man.

We can say that the presence of cultural studies in the system of scientific knowledge is revealed in two aspects.

First of all, as a specific cultural method and level of generalization of any analyzed material within the framework of any social or human science, i.e. as an integral part of any science. At this level, model conceptual constructions are created that describe not how a given area of ​​life functions in general and what the boundaries of its existence are, but how it adapts to changing conditions, how it reproduces itself, what are the causes and mechanisms of its orderliness. Within the framework of each science, one can single out a field of research that concerns the mechanisms and methods of organization, regulation and communication of people in the relevant areas of their life. The material was published on http://site
This is what is commonly called economic, political, religious, linguistic, etc. culture.

Secondly, as an independent area of ​​social and humanitarian knowledge of society and its culture. In this aspect, cultural studies can be considered as a separate group of sciences, and as a separate, independent science. In other words, cultural studies can be considered in a narrow and broad sense. Taking into account the dependence on this, the subject of cultural studies and its structure, as well as its connection with other sciences, will be highlighted.

Connection of cultural studies with other sciences

Culturology arose at the intersection of history, philosophy, sociology, ethnology, anthropology, social psychology, art history, etc., therefore, cultural studies will be a complex socio-humanitarian science. Its interdisciplinary nature reflects the general tendency of modern science towards integration, mutual influence and interpenetration of various fields of knowledge when studying a common object of research. In relation to cultural studies, the development of scientific knowledge leads to a synthesis of cultural sciences, the formation of an interconnected set of scientific ideas about culture as an integral system. At the same time, each of the sciences with which cultural studies comes into contact deepens the understanding of culture, supplementing it with its own research and knowledge. The most closely related to cultural studies are the philosophy of culture, philosophical, social and cultural anthropology, cultural history and sociology.

Culturology and philosophy of culture

As a branch of knowledge that emerged from philosophy, cultural studies has retained its connection with the philosophy of culture, which acts as an organic component of philosophy, as one of its relatively autonomous theories. Philosophy as such, strives to develop a systematic and holistic view of the world, tries to answer the question of whether the world is knowable, what are the possibilities and boundaries of knowledge, its goals, levels, forms and methods, and philosophy of culture must show what place culture occupies in the general picture of existence, strives to determine the variety and methodology of cognition of cultural phenomena, representing the highest, most abstract level of cultural research. Acting as the methodological basis of cultural studies, it determines the general cognitive guidelines of cultural studies, explains the essence of culture and poses problems that are significant for human life, for example, about the meaning of culture, about the conditions of its existence, about the structure of culture, the reasons for its changes, etc.

Philosophy of culture and cultural studies differ in the attitudes with which they approach the study of culture. Cultural studies considers culture in its internal connections as an independent system, and the philosophy of culture analyzes culture in conjunction with the subject and functions of philosophy in the context of philosophical categories such as being, consciousness, cognition, personality, society. Philosophy examines culture in all specific forms, while in cultural studies the emphasis is on explaining various forms of culture with the help of middle-level philosophical theories based on anthropological and historical materials. With this approach, cultural studies makes it possible to create a holistic picture of the human world, taking into account the diversity and diversity of processes occurring in it.

Culturology and cultural history

Story studies human society in its specific forms and conditions of existence.

These forms and conditions do not remain unchanged once and for all, i.e. united and universal for all humanity. It is worth noting that they are constantly changing, and history studies society from the perspective of these changes. Because cultural history identifies historical types of cultures, compares them, reveals general cultural patterns of the historical process, on the basis of which it is possible to describe and explain specific historical features of the development of culture. A generalized view of the history of mankind made it possible to formulate the principle of historicism, in which culture is viewed not as a frozen and unchanging formation, but as a dynamic system of local cultures that are in development and replacing each other. We can say that the historical process acts as a set of specific forms of culture. Let us note that each of them is determined by ethnic, religious and historical factors and therefore represents a relatively independent whole. Let us note that each culture has its own original history, conditioned by a complex of unique conditions of its existence.

Cultural studies in turn, studies the general laws of culture and identifies its typological features, develops a system of its own categories. In this context, historical data helps to construct a theory of the emergence of culture and to identify the laws of its historical development. It is worth saying that for this purpose, cultural studies studies the historical diversity of cultural facts of the past and present, which allows it to understand and explain modern culture. It is in this way that the history of culture is formed, which studies the development of the culture of individual countries, regions, and peoples.

Cultural studies and sociology

Culture will be a product of human social life and is impossible outside of human society. Representing a social phenomenon, it develops according to its own laws. In this sense, culture will be a subject of study for sociology.

Sociology of culture explores the process of functioning of culture in society; tendencies of cultural development, manifested in the consciousness, behavior and lifestyle of social groups. In the social structure of society, there are groups of different levels - macrogroups, layers, classes, nations, ethnic groups, each of which is distinguished by cultural characteristics, value preferences, tastes, style and way of life, and many microgroups that form various subcultures. It must be remembered that such groups are formed for various reasons - gender, age, professional, religious, etc. The multiplicity of group cultures creates a “mosaic” picture of cultural life.

The sociology of culture in their studies is based on many special sociological theories that are close in the object of study and significantly complement ideas about cultural processes, establishing interdisciplinary connections with various branches of sociological knowledge - the sociology of art, the sociology of morality, the sociology of religion, the sociology of science, the sociology of law, ethnosociology, sociology of age and social groups, sociology of crime and deviant behavior, sociology of leisure, sociology of the city, etc. Let us note that each of them is not able to create a holistic idea of ​​cultural reality. The material was published on http://site
Thus, the sociology of art will provide rich information about the artistic life of society, and the sociology of leisure shows how different groups of the population use their free time. This is very important, but partial information. It is quite clear that a higher level of generalization of cultural knowledge is required, and this task is realized by the sociology of culture.

Cultural studies and anthropology

Anthropology - a field of scientific knowledge within which the fundamental problems of human existence in the natural and artificial environment are studied. In this area today there are several directions: physical anthropology, the main subject of which is man as a biological species, as well as modern and fossil apes; social and cultural anthropology, the main subject of which will be the comparative study of human societies; philosophical and religious anthropology, which are not empirical sciences, but a set of philosophical and theological teachings about human nature.

Cultural anthropology deals with the study of man as a subject of culture, gives a description of the life of various societies at different stages of development, their way of life, morals, customs, etc., studies specific cultural values, forms of cultural relationships, mechanisms for transmitting cultural skills from person to person. This is important for cultural studies, because it allows us to understand what lies behind the facts of culture, what needs are expressed by its specific historical, social or personal forms. We can say that cultural anthropology studies ethnic cultures, describing their cultural phenomena, systematizing them and comparing them. In essence, it examines a person in the aspect of expressing his inner world in the facts of cultural activity. The material was published on http://site

Within the framework of cultural anthropology, the historical process of the relationship between man and culture, human adaptation to the surrounding cultural environment, the formation of the spiritual world of the individual, and the embodiment of creative potentials in activities and their results are studied. Cultural anthropology identifies the “key” moments of socialization, acculturation and enculturation of a person, the specifics of each stage of the life path, studies the influence of the cultural environment, education and upbringing systems and adaptation to them; the role of family, peers, generation, paying special attention to the psychological justification of such universal phenomena as life, soul, death, love, friendship, faith, meaning, the spiritual world of men and women.

The approach of the Third Millennium involuntarily prompts reflection on the prospects for the development of the humanities, changes in their social and cultural status, and identification of priority directions and trends.

Of course, “it is not given to us to predict how our Word will respond,” therefore, any forecast has only approximate contours, unclear outlines, retaining the right to disappointment in an overly optimistic prediction of the future or confirmation of those premonitions that were justified as prophecies. In any case, the futurological temptation has always reflected man’s desire to penetrate into the future, to balance his efforts, to highlight the secrets of the century, to understand the consequences of scientific discoveries, and to determine alternative paths for the development of society, culture and man.

Without pretending to describe trends completely, I will note those that have an impact on culture and stimulate an appeal to the scientific justification of cultural studies.

Firstly, there is a “densification” of the information field in which a person lives. This is an unprecedented increase in information in history, which, like a “snowball”, increases in different forms: book, magazine, newspaper products; electronic media; media and literally “falls” on a person. This process requires a new technology for learning, using and mastering knowledge.

Secondly, the previous boundaries between sciences are changing, they are becoming more and more “transparent”, the process of scientific, social, and cultural integration is intensifying. This trend leads to the connection and penetration of the humanities into each other, to the mastery of related professions.

Thirdly, a new socio-cultural stratification of humanity is emerging, when the previous estate, class, and party divisions are lost, but national and ethnic communities, belonging to various subcultures, religious beliefs, and corporate interests gain importance. This stimulates the creation of new sources of social tension and risk zones, so-called “hot spots”.

Culture is acquiring a new role in ensuring national security. It is called upon to develop the principles of mutual understanding and solidarity, harmony and tolerance, preventing aggression and violence.

Fourthly, the development of cultural contacts, the easing of visa regimes, the expansion of the circle of contacts between people, gradually removes the division of cultures and peoples into “us and others”, and increases interest in learning about other forms of cultural life.

This contributes to the revival of traditional cultures, maintaining their identity as a national treasure, a subject of public veneration and pride.

Each ethnic group is “concerned” with searching for its roots, identifying its national “face” and cultural image, and its place in the world community.

Fifthly, the attitude towards culture as the basis of social and personal identity is changing. It is cultural achievements and monuments that symbolize involvement in historical traditions and form a person’s self-awareness. This stimulates the mastery of numerous cultural languages, the disclosure of their semantic and value meaning. Increasing the role of inculturation as a means of familiarization with culture, the acquisition of cultural competence as an indicator of the level of intellectual and emotional development of an individual determines the strategy for educating the younger generation.

Culture acquires the importance of a factor of consolidation, unity of society, overcoming tendencies of isolationism, development of national identity and a sense of involvement in the historical process.

We can continue listing trends in social and cultural development. It is important to imagine the colossal shift in modern civilization, to determine the vector of change.

Culture is at the epicenter of change, and the pace of modernization of society and the social effectiveness of reforms significantly depend on its level.

It should be noted that the nature of many controversial issues discussed at the state level emphasize the changing role of culture in society. The adoption of state symbols - the flag, coat of arms, anthem - required many arguments to convince the decisions taken. Preparations for the celebration of the 300th anniversary of St. Petersburg, anniversaries of cultural figures, a new attitude towards the culture of the Russian Abroad, careful preservation of historical city centers, concern for cultural heritage and the purity of the Russian language - all this indicates changes in cultural policy.

At the same time, it should be noted that many things happen spontaneously. In addition, the inertia of people’s consciousness is revealed, their inability to adapt to changes, the idealization of the culture of the past, and nostalgia for the old way of life. This leads to the spread of pessimism, denial of novelty, and inhibition of modernization and reforms. Intensified searches for one's own path, indiscriminate denial of Western experience and one's own merits and achievements also indicate a low level of culture.

To this it is necessary to add the spread of vices, aggressiveness, crime, drug addiction, which have become a disaster and lead to the degradation of the nation’s gene pool.

The stratification of people by income level has changed the opportunities for cultural integration and increased the social distance between people. The social role of the intelligentsia in education has decreased significantly; many works of classical literature and art are not accepted, and preference is given to mass culture and the sensations of the “yellow press”.

There was a “simplification” of mass secondary education and a reduction in humanities subjects.

All this is quite well known, but does not reduce the need to search for means and ways to solve acute social and cultural problems. The intellectual crisis of national self-awareness, the increase in indifference and “getting used to” tragedies and emerging problems are becoming especially dangerous. Social apathy can become a detonator of destructive tendencies.

That is why the role of culture is so great in overcoming negative trends and creating an atmosphere of trust, understanding, responsibility, decency, professionalism, promoting social stability, personal involvement in reforms and increasing the level of well-being and mental health of a person.

The development of humanitarian culture is of particular importance in the modern world.

Countries and peoples are concerned about the problems of preserving cultural heritage, maintaining the uniqueness of original cultures, their protection from the invasion of mass and standardized products that displace the classics, neglect of natural landscapes, contamination and vulgarization of the native language.

The lack of culture causes particular concern and anxiety, because it becomes a global disaster, evidence of the loss of spiritual guidelines and responsibility to the present and future.

It is found in many everyday phenomena: in the slovenliness of people’s appearance, the neglect of urban and rural environments, the spread of rudeness and vulgarity passed off as the norms of communication, aggressiveness and hostility in relations between people.

One can “endlessly” continue listing the vices and cruel conflicts that shock every person, leaving no one alone. Trying to find an explanation for these processes, they refer to the “objective” difficulties of modernizing Russia, the instability of power and distrust of reforms, the lack of spiritual leadership, economic priorities and economic pragmatism, and the loss of traditions. Undoubtedly, all this matters, because each factor makes its own negative “contribution” to the state of society and culture. To this should also be added nostalgia for the past and the ever-present “image of the enemy,” who allegedly fulfills the social order for the destruction of Russia.

The ongoing search for a common idea that can unite society and overcome hostility and mistrust has not yet led to success.

There is no need to repeat like an incantation the eternal questions that have been repeated many times in history: “what to do?” and “who is to blame?” Even they have lost their energy, having no call to action. The challenge of history requires an Answer. Perhaps it has not yet acquired sufficient clarity and is formulated only as a choice of a priority direction, as a Scenario of behavior and attitude to reality.

To overcome psychological inertia and social apathy, it is necessary to raise spiritual forces that contribute to the humane improvement of society, change the spiritual atmosphere, encourage talent, and develop individuality.

As Academician D.S. rightly noted. Likhachev, the 21st century is the century of humanitarian culture. At the same time, he gave humanitarian culture a broad, ideological meaning. The culture of a person in any profession is determined by his understanding of music, poetry, painting, and architecture. Art, science, philosophy, religion, morality form a necessary contour of humanity, promoting mercy, goodwill, and tolerance in relations between people, nations, and states. Without a common culture, the exact sciences, which require great intellectual effort and humanitarian expertise in ongoing projects, will also “wither.”

Low culture negatively affects all phenomena of social life, manifests itself in political irresponsibility, carelessness and mismanagement, and the lack of elementary tact in relations between people.

In each new generation, the cultural layer must constantly increase, constituting the basis for spiritual growth and moral stability. Calls for erasing previous cultural layers, a negative and sweeping attitude towards the past, undermine the foundations of peace and harmony.

Humanitarian culture is based on the democratization of society, openness and freedom of creativity, respect for different opinions, the encouragement of cultural contacts and the interaction of national traditions.

The central idea of ​​the philosophy of education is to strengthen the humanitarian training of specialists of any profile. The humanities contribute to the formation of a world of spiritual values ​​among young people, ideas about dignity and honor, patriotism and responsibility, respect for the individual, and respect for human life.

Humanities education protects a person from technocratic myopia and primitive pragmatism, helps relieve psychological stress and emotional overload, helps restore mental balance and health, increases creativity and resilience of the individual.

Humanitarian culture creates unique “islands of stability” in a world of endless changes and transformations. It transmits eternal values ​​and masterpieces of world culture from generation to generation.

It is these factors that determine the strategy for the development of higher education in Russia. Culture provides guidance in the life of a modern person, determines the main vector of his interests and worldview. A liberal arts education is becoming a prerequisite even in areas where, until recently, only practical or political experience was sufficient.

A certified specialist becomes an “important person” in all areas of activity. His authority largely depends on the level of his culture, ability to negotiate, show sincere interest and respect for the traditions of other peoples.

The higher education system must offer young people a whole range of humanities in order to find their way in a rapidly changing world, to overcome the boundaries of narrow specialization, when the acquired knowledge becomes old and is not used. The fundamental nature of education, combined with the technology of innovation and a high general culture, determine the development strategy of higher education.

However, this promising line began to be questioned. And this circumstance causes legitimate concern. Proposals are being made to shorten the humanities cycle of disciplines, to make the choice of subjects arbitrary, and to “remove” them outside the scope of the educational process.

The training of highly qualified specialists in a number of branches of knowledge, including the humanities, has undergone yet another “restructuring” without sufficient grounds. This led to an unjustified acceleration of the work of dissertation councils in scientific work, a revision of the topics of scientific research, the scope of candidate exams, and changes in the work of graduate and doctoral studies. Such “reforms” negatively affect the training of young specialists, who are already lacking in the “aging” education system.

The coming century will significantly expand the traditional range of specialties in all areas, including the humanities. It is hardly possible to stop this process with “nomenclature circulars”.

Many of the listed circumstances and trends stimulated the development of cultural studies as a special branch of humanitarian knowledge. In the history of social thought, philosophers have repeatedly turned to problems of culture. They were concerned about the prospects for the development of culture and civilization, the possibilities of human creative self-realization, the preservation of cultural heritage, the prevention of conflicts and spiritual crises.

These reflections form the historical basis of cultural studies.

However, in the twentieth century, cultural problems became particularly acute and necessitated a holistic view of culture as a social phenomenon.

It should be noted that St. Petersburg University has always been distinguished by a high level of humanitarian culture, the relationship between “physicists and lyricists,” an organic combination of European enlightenment and Russian mentality, the breadth of cultural erudition, and an understanding of the specifics of Eastern wisdom.

N.Ya. made a great contribution to the science of culture. Danilevsky, P.A. Sorokin, M.M. Kovalevsky, L.I. Mechnikov. Their works on culture gained worldwide fame.

At the Faculty of Philosophy, the methodological foundations for the study of culture as a social phenomenon and systemic integrity were determined. Works of V.P. Tugarinov about the values ​​of life and culture, M.S. Kagan on the philosophy of culture, B.V. Markov on the anthropology of culture, philosophical aspects of everyday culture in the works of K.S. Pigrova contributed to the development of cultural studies.

At the Faculty of Philosophy, for the first time at the University, the Department of Philosophy of Culture and Cultural Studies was created, headed by Doctor of Philosophy, Professor Yu.N. Solonin. The Dissertation Council on Philosophy of Culture and Cultural Studies is successfully operating, training highly qualified specialists.

Centers for cultural studies have also emerged in other universities, where graduates of the Faculty of Philosophy successfully work.

Among them are the Department of Theory and History of Culture of the St. Petersburg State University of Culture and Arts, the Department of World Artistic Culture of the Pedagogical State University named after. A.I. Herzen and many others.

Cultural studies is developing in many cities of Russia: Moscow and Yekaterinburg, Rostov-on-Don and Krasnodar, Novosibirsk and Samara, Veliky Novgorod and Khabarovsk. All this indicates the need to study the culture of society in its entirety, and the prospects of cultural studies as a science of the 21st century.

Culture is a complex, open, diffuse, self-organizing system. It covers various aspects of human interaction with other people and with oneself, with nature and society. The communicative essence of culture encourages dialogue, stimulates creativity, knowledge and understanding. As an integral attribute of human existence, it has an extremely wide distribution area “everywhere and in everything.” This property of culture makes it difficult to define its subject area and causes a lot of discussion.

In addition, cultural phenomena do not always lend themselves to precise description and explanation and “elude” rationalistic analysis. There is always uncertainty, understatement, mystery and mystery in them. Culture turns out to be internally contradictory and difficult to predict.

All these features of culture make it difficult to study, and often call into question the need for cultural studies as a science. American anthropologist Leslie White, author of The Science of Culture (1949), wrote about this skepticism. Nevertheless, overcoming objections, he noted that there is a whole class of phenomena in social reality that are subject to special study. They are associated with a person’s unique ability to symbolize, to give objects and phenomena meaning and significance.

It is this ability to symbolize that forms the world of culture. This class of phenomena includes ideas and beliefs, relationships between people, behavior patterns, customs and rituals, language and art forms. All these objects and actions are endowed with symbolic meaning, and cultural studies is engaged in revealing their meaning and values. A completely new area is opening up in science and the understanding of cultural processes will be on a par with the heliocentric theory of Copernicus or the discovery of the cellular basis of all forms of life, wrote L. White.

A culturologist is called upon not so much to describe an event or phenomenon, but to understand its meaning, based on the symbols, signs, meanings and values ​​inherent in a given culture. They are the ones who make up the nation’s mentality, its self-awareness and dignity.

The emergence of a new branch of knowledge always causes a mixed reaction in the scientific community. It is enough to recall genetics and cybernetics, sociology and social psychology, psychoanalysis and pedology. They not only caused discussions, but were subject to bans and persecution. Fortunately, those times are over. But wariness towards new science remains. Both enthusiastic and skeptical assessments are expressed about cultural studies. But gradually the force of resistance is overcome, because cultural studies opens up unusually interesting and exciting research opportunities and masters the scientific and educational space.

It is one of the humanities disciplines in universities and colleges; doctoral and candidate academic degrees are awarded in cultural studies. Many textbooks, teaching aids, anthologies, dictionaries, encyclopedias, and monographs have been published. Works on the culture of world-famous Russian and foreign scientists have been published. There is no doubt that this “first wave” revealed many methodological, theoretical and historical problems. The unclear boundaries of the subject and area of ​​cultural studies, the uncertainty of the logic of constructing its structural sections, the relationship between morphology and the dynamics of culture, the specificity of methods and categories of research - these and many other problems require solutions.

Certain difficulties arise when clarifying the specifics of cultural history: the relationship between the history of society and the history of culture; between the philosophy of history and the philosophy of culture; historical process and theoretical modeling; cultural heritage and the mechanism of cultural transmission; between describing phenomena and understanding their meaning; between universal human universals, cultural values ​​and their historical, ethnic meaning and symbolization.

For cultural studies, understanding the history of culture is the main methodological principle of knowledge.

Outside of historical analysis, any constructions are unproductive, because they are not confirmed by reality. History allows us to identify the uniqueness and originality of culture, their local discreteness, regional and ethnic characteristics.

Culture is not only synchronous, but also diachronic. It is not for nothing that it is compared to a soil layer: sometimes thin, sometimes thicker; sometimes poor, sometimes rich. The multi-layered nature of a crop is the basis for the stability and stability of its root system.

The history of culture is evidence of the strength of man’s spiritual energy, his creative aspiration, mental anxiety and desire to improve the environment of his own arrangement and habitat. Creativity and innovation are necessary impulses for the dynamics of culture.

Culturology studies the history of culture in three aspects:

1. Differentiation of cultural phenomena, identification of their social and cultural significance, symbolic and iconic value.
2. Integration of phenomena in the context of culture, providing a systematic and holistic analysis.
3. Comparison and comparison of cultural phenomena of different regions, theoretical support for comparative studies for understanding the cultures of different peoples

Culturology appears as a complex of sciences about culture. Each of them has its own research area, preferred categories and terms, methods and source base.

The process of emergence of special cultural theories testifies to the development of science. Now it is moving at an accelerated pace, although somewhat chaotically. Obviously, the interests of researchers, accumulated material, and practical needs play an important role.

A number of the largest sections of cultural studies can be distinguished: cultural history; history of cultural studies; philosophy of culture; cultural theory; sociology of culture; anthropology of culture; applied cultural studies.

Each section has its own area of ​​research, interacts with a certain range of sciences, differs in the language of description, analysis of facts and phenomena, symbolic meanings and meanings. Along with this, differentiation occurs within general sections, when areas of cultural studies are distinguished and acquire an independent scientific status.

So, for example, from the philosophy of culture the “axiology of culture” or the science of values ​​emerged; from the theory of culture acquired the independent status of “semiotics of culture” or the science of signs, symbols and meanings, studying the language and text of culture.

“Historical culturology” includes the cultural genesis of phenomena; historical dynamics of cultural processes; storage and broadcasting of cultural heritage; historical typology of cultures of the peoples of the world; historical personology as a science about the realization of the creative potential of an individual in the process of life.

Also called “cultural ecology” as the science of interaction with nature, the environment and human development. “Regional cultural studies” is successfully developing, reflecting the specifics of the development of the cultural space of territories and urban complexes. It is closely related to local history.

Applied cultural studies reveals the mechanisms and technologies of familiarization with culture and determines the strategy of cultural policy.

The science of culture has many pseudonyms: cultural studies; fundamental cultural studies; general cultural studies; cultural studies; cultural theory; philosophy of culture; cultural anthropology; social cultural studies. The vagueness of the names reflects the level and stage of development of science. Upon closer examination, they differ little from each other and require terminological accuracy.

Culturology is in the process of formation, its contours are not yet clear enough. At the same time, this opens up great prospects for researchers, because it is open to creative research and innovation.

A fragmented world finds unity in culture. Humanity, more than ever before, has felt the need for dialogue, mutual understanding and communication, integration of cultural space as the basis for spiritual unity and harmony of peoples. There is an urgent need to hold the First Russian Cultural Congress dedicated to the 300th anniversary of St. Petersburg, which will contribute to the development of scientific research into the culture of the past, present and future.

Subject of cultural studies. Philosophy of culture and science of culture.

Subject of cultural studies:

In a broad sense, cultural studies is a complex of individual sciences, as well as theological and philosophical concepts of culture; in other words, all those teachings about culture, its history, essence, patterns of functioning and development that can be found in the works of scientists presenting various options for understanding the phenomenon of culture. Excluding the above, cultural sciences are engaged in the study of the system of cultural institutions, with the help of which the upbringing and education of a person is carried out and which produce, store and transmit cultural information.

From this position, the subject of cultural studies forms a set of various disciplines, which include history, philosophy, sociology of culture and a complex of anthropological knowledge. In addition to this, the subject field of cultural studies in a broad sense should include: history of cultural studies, ecology of culture, psychology of culture, ethnology (ethnography), theology (theology) of culture. Moreover, with such a broad approach, the subject of cultural studies appears as a set of various disciplines or sciences that study culture, and can be identified with the subject of philosophy of culture, sociology of culture, cultural anthropology and other middle-level theories. In this case, cultural studies is deprived of its own subject of research and becomes an integral part of the noted disciplines.

Its main tasks will be:

- the most profound, complete and holistic explanation of culture, its essence, content, characteristics and functions;

- study of the genesis (origin and development) of culture as a whole, as well as individual phenomena and processes in culture;

- determination of the place and role of man in cultural processes;

- interaction with other sciences studying culture;

- study of information about culture that comes from art, philosophy, religion and other areas related to non-scientific knowledge of culture;

- study of the development of individual cultures.

Functions of cultural studies:

The functions of cultural studies can be combined into several main groups according to the tasks being implemented:

cognitive function- study and understanding of the essence and role of culture in the life of society, its structure and functions, its typology, differentiation into branches, types and forms, the human-creative purpose of culture;

conceptual-descriptive function- development of theoretical systems, concepts and categories that make it possible to create a holistic picture of the formation and development of culture, and the formulation of description rules that reflect the peculiarities of the development of sociocultural processes;

evaluation function- carrying out an adequate assessment of the influence of the holistic phenomenon of culture, its various types, branches, types and forms on the formation of social and spiritual qualities of the individual, social community, society as a whole;

explanatory function- scientific explanation of the features of cultural complexes, phenomena and events, mechanisms of functioning of cultural agents and institutions, their socializing impact on the formation of personality on the basis of scientific understanding of the identified facts, trends and patterns of development of sociocultural processes;

ideological function- implementation of socio-political ideals in the development of fundamental and applied problems of cultural development, the regulating influence of its values ​​and norms on the behavior of individuals and social communities;

educational (teaching) function- dissemination of cultural knowledge and assessments, which helps students, specialists, as well as those interested in cultural problems, learn the features of this social phenomenon, its role in the development of man and society.

The subject of cultural studies, its tasks, goals and functions determine the general contours of cultural studies as a science. Let us note that each of them, in turn, requires in-depth study.

Cultural studies as a science

The historical path traversed by humanity from antiquity to the present time has been complex and contradictory. On this path, progressive and regressive phenomena were often combined, the desire for something new and adherence to familiar forms of life, the desire for change and the idealization of the past. At the same time, in all situations, the main role in people's lives has always been played by culture, which helped a person adapt to the constantly changing conditions of life, find its meaning and purpose, and preserve the human in a person. Because of this, people have always been interested in this sphere of the surrounding world, which resulted in the emergence of a special branch of human knowledge - cultural studies and a new academic discipline that studies culture. Culturology is primarily the science of culture. This specific subject distinguishes it from other social and humanitarian disciplines and explains the need for its existence as a special branch of knowledge.

Culturology and philosophy of culture

As a branch of knowledge that emerged from philosophy, cultural studies has retained its connection with the philosophy of culture, which acts as an organic component of philosophy, as one of its relatively autonomous theories. Philosophy as such strives to develop a systematic and holistic view of the world, tries to answer the question of whether the world is knowable, what are the possibilities and boundaries of knowledge, its goals, levels, forms and methods, and the philosophy of culture must show what place culture occupies in this general the picture of existence, seeks to determine the diversity and methodology of cognition of cultural phenomena, representing the highest, most abstract level of cultural research. Acting as the methodological basis of cultural studies, it determines the general cognitive guidelines of cultural studies, explains the essence of culture and poses problems that are significant for human life, for example, about the meaning of culture, about the conditions of its existence, about the structure of culture, the reasons for its changes, etc.

Philosophy of culture and cultural studies differ in the attitudes with which they approach the study of culture. Culturology considers culture in its internal connections as an independent system, and the philosophy of culture analyzes culture in conjunction with the subject and functions of philosophy in the context of philosophical categories such as being, consciousness, cognition, personality, society. Philosophy examines culture in all specific forms, while in cultural studies the emphasis is on explaining various forms of culture with the help of middle-level philosophical theories based on anthropological and historical materials. With this approach, cultural studies makes it possible to create a holistic picture of the human world, taking into account the diversity and diversity of processes occurring in it.