Generation in the Dimension of Growing Responsibility

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Generation in the Dimension of Growing Responsibility

Е.V. Shcherbenko, H. Skovoroda Institute of Philosophy, the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine

Purpose. The article is devoted to the study of the phenomenon of generation, which is a necessary condition for the birth of the modern open society, taking into account the risks that accompany this process. Theoretical basis. The research covers a wide range of concepts (K. Mannheim, J. Ortega y Gasset, M. McLuhan, B. Anderson, P. Connerton, etc.), which reveal the temporal aspect of the analysed phenomenon, in particular, the insecurity of its constitution (the risk of a "lost generation") in the horizon of modernity as an unfinished project (J. Habermas), and the growing degree of responsibility associated with the formation of the creative social class. Originality. For the first time in the research literature, the author analyses the connection between the study of the phenomenon of generation and the establishment of a consensus in the modern world on the observance of the rules of win-win games as the value foundation of Western civilization. One of the key points of this process is the processing of the traumas of modernization. The omission of this task in the agenda of the transition society, despite the warnings evident in retrospect, releases the element of resentment, with consequences that can be qualified as an anthropological catastrophe.

Conclusions. Ukrainian society, opening up to the world and working through the traumas of modernisation (Chornobyl, the Holodomor, the Fall of Lenin), which has become a kind of hermeneutical cycle of healing the "humanitarian aura of the nation" (L. Kostenko), in the process of which new layers such as the creative class appeared on the public scene, has demonstrated the European identity of the Ukrainian community. In the new horizon after 02/24, when, according to A. Yermolenko, it is no longer possible to talk about the postmodern situation, the Ukrainian agenda irreversibly acquires globality and should be rethought in the dimension of the "big time" and its global responsibility. This affects, in particular, the entire legacy of Russian-Soviet modernisation, to the extent that it has become an integral part of modern Ukrainian identity, including such controversial pages as the "Afghan" trauma.

Keywords: freedom; responsibility; generation; linguistic anthropology; temporality; trauma.

Генерація у вимірі зростаючої відповідальності

Е.В. Щербенко, Інститут філософії імені Г.С. Сковороди, Національна академія наук України

Мета. Стаття присвячена дослідженню феномена генерації, що постає необхідною умовою народження модерного відкритого суспільства, з урахуванням ризиків, які супроводжують цей процес. Теоретичний базис. Дослідження охоплює широке коло концепцій (К. Мангайм, Х. Ортега-і-Гассет, М. Маклюен, Б. Андерсон, П. Коннертон та ін.), у яких виявляється темпоральний аспект аналізованого феномена, зокрема негарантованості його конституювання (ризик "втраченої генерації") за доби модерну як незавершеного проєкту (Ю. Габермас) та зростаючої міри відповідальності, пов'язаної з формуванням креативного суспільного класу.

Наукова новизна. Уперше в науковій літературі проаналізовано зв'язок вивчення феномена генерації з утвердженням у сучасному світі консенсусу щодо дотримання правил ігор із ненульовою сумою ('win-win') як ціннісного підмурівку західної цивілізації. Одним із ключових моментів цього процесу стає опрацювання травм модернізації. Упущення цього завдання в порядку денному перехідного суспільства, попри попередження, очевидні в ретроспективі, які можна прослідкувати до початків модерної доби, вивільняє стихію ресентименту, із наслідками, що їх можна кваліфікувати як антропологічну катастрофу.

Висновки. Українське суспільство, відкриваючись світу й опрацьовуючи травми модернізації (Чорнобиль, Голодомор, "ленінопад"), що набуло характеру своєрідного герменевтичного циклу зцілення "гуманітарної аури нації" (Л. Костенко), у процесі якого на суспільній арені з'являлися такі нові верстви, як креативний клас, засвідчило європейську ідентичність української громади. У новому горизонті після 24 лютого, коли, на думку А. Єрмоленка, уже не випадає говорити про ситуацію постмодерну, український порядок денний незворотно набуває глобальності й має бути переосмислений у вимірі "великого часу" та його глобальної відповідальності. Це зачіпає зокрема всю спадщину російсько-радянської модернізації, наскільки вона стала невід'ємною складовою модерної української ідентичності, включно з такими контраверсійними її сторінками, як "афганська" травма.

Ключові слова: свобода; відповідальність; генерація; лінгвістична антропологія; темпоральність; травма

generation game trauma modernization

Introduction

In memory of Merab Mamardashvili

The problem of generation has long been a major issue in Western social science. Important stories of the "generation gap" or "lost generation" not only form the basis of reflection on modern society, but also have an applied aspect in terms of determining the target audience and optimal algorithms for the provision of services in demand by business or the state. In an era of unprecedented challenges, the notion of a new generation bridges the gap between expert and public opinion to develop a value consensus on the procedure of non-zero-sum (win-win) games for the optimal use of public resources. The most recent example of this was the "covid generation", when trust networks revealed an extraordinary potential for social mobilisation. Meanwhile, in Ukraine, this topic remains rather the subject of sporadic appeals by public intellectuals, mainly during outbursts of civic activity (the student "revolution on granite" or the Revolution of Dignity), which, of course, cannot replace the balanced approach of academic science.

Karl Mannheim is considered the "father" of the generational approach of the modern era. In his work "The Problem of Generations" (Mannheim, 1952), he conceptualised the idea of a certain "community of trial" that emerges in the horizon of unprecedented experience (for example, war and revolution), when representatives of strata that had no precedent of experience of cooperative efforts in the previous way of structuring society, acquire a new (including traumatic) set of behavioural norms, views, and feelings in the course of irreversible changes in the national agenda determined by the challenges of modernisation.

It is symptomatic that the work of the German researcher was duly recognised by the postwar expert community when it was translated into English, which shows the extent of the change in habitual perceptions that the introduction of a new research optic entailed. The pre-war work of J. Ortega y Gasset (n.d.) "The Theme of Our Time", where he assesses the problem of generation as a key one for the crisis period, is also being rediscovered.

The generation of 1968, which is considered the first global one, created a precedent for Western social science of the imagined community (B. Anderson), thanks to which it became possible to think of the modern era as complete, marking this moment as a milestone of the "postmodern situation", according to J. Lyotard (in the subsequent debate, J. Habermas will put forward the concept of modernity as an "unfinished project"). Having gained wide recognition in expert circles and given a theoretical impetus to the successful construction of macro-models of society, the idea of generational change served to create a non-antagonistic model of social interaction, cooperation of efforts of different cohorts in the dimension of non-zero-sum games, which was facilitated, among other things, by reaching a consensus on the moral unacceptability of militarism and racism (according to A. Touraine, powerful social movements change the so- cio-cultural codes of society).

In this case, the artefactual component of the process of creating a new imagined community, one of the first reflected by M. McLuhan ("media is message"), becomes intransitive. Further searches of Western social science, in particular, the approaches to changing paradigms and epis- temes proposed by T. Kuhn and M. Foucault, and in terms of more protracted processes of evolutionary changes in society, the concept of imagined communities by B. Anderson and the habit-memory by P. Connerton, which are built at the intersection of socio-cultural and political anthropology, were developed in this direction. The role of religion in the post-secular society is also reassessed in this horizon (C. Taylor), and in later years, the development of Ukrainian society in the spirit of tolerance of numerous denominations (H. Casanova) and the special role of Kyiv in the horizon of the concepts of diversity capital and "muse of urban frenzy" (B. Ruble) are highly appreciated by Western experts, which is echoed by Y. Hrytsak's thesis on the new role of the national creative class.

The most representative attempt to "universalise" the approach was Strauss and Howe's (1991) "Generations", in which the entire American history of the modern era is presented in a regular alternation of generations, each of which has its own name ("great", "silent", etc.). Having influenced mass culture, the work was criticised by the expert community because of the authors' marked tendency to stereotypes, which reduces its heuristic value. In the context of this study, I would like to note that the authors' "levelling" of the challenges of all generations, without taking into account the scale of responsibility and the risk of a "lost generation", contributes to the reader's illusion that progress is guaranteed, without preparing new cohorts for the challenges of trauma and resentment.

A precedent in this regard is the question raised by Merab Mamardashvili about the possibility of using the term "generation" in a totalitarian (post-traumatic) society where there is no free communication between young people, which ultimately limits their socialisation to the horizon of an atomised society of "eternal adolescents". He also draws attention to the consequences of this lack of social "agora", which he qualifies as an anthropological catastrophe (including the well-known phenomena of the Stockholm syndrome and the "banality of evil", according to Hannah Arendt). This is echoed by the interest of a new stratum of post-Soviet Ukrainian researchers in the "zombie" argument proposed by D. Chalmers.

In line with the hermeneutical turn that has been marked in national philosophy since 2014, this shift allows us to bridge the gap between the research horizons of the problem of generation, as it was studied in Western society under the "postmodern situation", where the traumas of modernization appear, as a rule, already settled in the course ( inter)national reconciliation and the Ukrainian transitional (post-traumatic) society, in which the treatment of similar traumas (Chernobyl, the Holodomor, the Fall of Lenin) appeared each time at the intersection of mutually exclusive positions, ultimately resolving in a peculiar hermeneutic cycle of healing the "humanitarian aura of the nation" (L. Kostenko), through the restoration of the inviolability of the basic foundations of civilization, which go back to the existence of the "axial time" (K. Jaspers).

The chosen slice of the problem has heuristic potential in view of the tectonic shifts of the current era. In the post-02/24 world, when the Ukrainian community has been tragically divided into those who respond to new challenges in a relatively safe globalised society and those who hold the frontline in the confrontation between civilisation and barbarism, it is not an easy task to find a common horizon of freedom and responsibility for citizens, millions of whom have found themselves in the role of "wandering philosopher" not by choice.

However, it is here that the way to the universal horizon opens up. Given the thematic immensity of contemporary publications on the issue, framing this space at the pole of everyday life by volunteering to study the value basis of refugee-host communication (Karakulak & Faul, 2024), and in the horizon of the future, through the interactive search for consensus on the teenage "selfie in Auschwitz", which unwittingly problematises the inviolability of the memory of the Shoah (Feldman & Musih, 2023), the researcher reaches the unreducible horizon of the universality of indifference: in today's "fluctuating" world, everyone has to learn every day, as symbolised by the ancient symbol of the second birth.

Purpose

In the context of the hermeneutical turn that has marked the national philosophy after 2014, the article examines the phenomenon of generation and substantiates the need for its conceptualisation, in particular through the explication of the temporal dimension, which is revealed in the global responsibility of man in the modern era, in particular in connection with the treatment of the traumas of modernisation.

Statement of basic materials

In line with the hermeneutic turn that has been marked in the Ukrainian philosophical literature since 2014 (special issues of the "Philosophical Thought" devoted to the topics of other experience, oral history of philosophy, and reception (Kebuladze, 2019; Khoma & Zborovska, 2019; Yosypenko, 2020), the moment of responsibility, especially of the intellectual class in the modern era, is problematized. A precedent for such a procedure is proposed in the famous work by J. Benda (1927) "The Treason of the Intellectuals". The author shows, in particular, that a layer called upon to perform a critical function in the unfolding of social pathos can de facto be influenced by new utopias.

The revision of the intellectual foundations of their own discursive practices affected, among other things, the influential deliberative theory, which in the post-Soviet era determined the mainstream in domestic studies of practical communication philosophy. For example, in N. Fialko's (2022) article "The Significance of Deliberation for the Legitimation of Social Institutions", the author, based on previous research by J. Cohen, distinguishes between three types of deliberation: the individual, the jury, and the oligarchs, of which only the first one contributes to the improvement of democratic procedures. The unproblematised notion of the non-hierarchical nature of language games, in the spirit of postmodern "anything goes", is thus questioned, and its origins can be traced back to Wittgenstein's original version of this concept.

While these first steps, which reveal the limits of the heuristics of this theoretical direction as purely normative, and thus overlook the temporal factor of the trauma of modernisation and its processing, are certainly necessary, they do not appear radical enough in the horizon of the 02/24 situation. A more detailed analysis reveals the notion of the inviolability of the social status quo that underlies this research programme. While retaining its relevance for stable democracies, in a transitional (post-traumatic) society, including Ukraine, where it was transferred in the face of the anticipation of the "end of history" (F. Fukuyama), this model does not allow reflecting on the challenges associated with processing the traumas of modernisation, in particular the risks of a part of the (counter)elites' bet on resentment.

A discussion between leading Ukrainian philosophers (A. Yermolenko, Y. Bystrytskyi) and one of the founders of communicative practical philosophy, J. Habermas (Yermolenko, 2022), which unfolded against the backdrop of the full-scale Russian invasion, testifying to the shift of the procedures of "last justification" (Apel) of values from the sphere of university everyday life to the field of "big time", and reminding that freedom, according to Kant, belongs to the regulative ideas of practical reason, drew attention to the few but significant voices of thinkers whose warnings are now perceived as prophetic.

Two "zombies"

In one of his recent speeches, Merab Mamardashvili warned that "rumours are exaggerated" regarding the death of the Soviet system:

Unlike in the West, where the later intellectual fashion for thought experimentation in terms of using the "zombie" argument appears after the publication of D. Chalmers (1996) and the discussions related to it revolve around the (un)validity of physicalism, retaining the character of games of theoretical mind, allowing participants to choose any possible position from the spectrum (for example, in 2020, the PhilPapers survey yielded the following results: 16 % considered the zombie figure "unthinkable", 37 % considered it conceivable but impossible, 24 % considered it metaphysically impossible, and 23 % considered it other (Weinberg, 2021)). In the first case, we are dealing with the sphere of practical reason, where the element of resentment unfolds in the face of unresolved traumas, which can also become institutionalised (including through the educational and media spheres), according to the formula that holy place is never empty.

At the same time, the temporal dimension of the zombie situation allows us to show that this challenge (the risk of it) is rooted in the very foundations of European civilisation as not guaranteed. Such an example is, in particular, Sophocles' "Antigone", in which an elementary cycle of violation/restoration of unwritten laws unfolds, over which the local "pro tem" ruler Creon tried to put his own order, causing catastrophic consequences (his figure, with its emphasis on trauma, can thus be seen as one of the first initiators of the "zombie" situation).

J. Steiner's (1986) work shows the fundamental importance of Sophocles' text for European identity in terms of completing the cycle of trauma treatment. A symptomatic gap in this regard is the evidence of a representative publication of the late Soviet period, "Myths of the Peoples of the World" (Tokarev, 1980), whose article "Antigone" mentioned more than thirty references to the story in the 20th century (Anouilh, Brecht, Cocteau, etc.), but not a single Russian (Soviet) one.

If, in light of the above, we include in the "Antigone horizon" the situation of the reburial of the fallen on the fronts of the Second World War, which was not completed in Soviet times and is still ongoing (the number whereof, according to Russian volunteers, was about 2 million in the mid-2010s, i.e. before the outbreak of aggression), shouldn't we, in the context of the above, consider the withdrawal of the USSR (the only "victorious state") from the historical arena in terms of an experiment set by history itself to try to ignore the unwritten law that distinguishes humans from zombies?

In this context, Mamardashvili's question, discussed above (in essence, "are you a zombie?") appears as an elementary act of philosophical imagination, comparable to the introduction of the idea of the radical evil of human nature (Kant), evil genius (Descartes) or Socratic, whether he was a creation like Typhon (this monster, I recall, was distinguished by the possession of all possible voices).

Accordingly, the discovery of a special moment in the context of the study, which I will designate as minus-temporality, or a step into the looking glass ("brothers and sisters" of 1941, crossed by the leader into "cogs" of 1945), allows us to consider this point of unguarded labelling of the "victorious people" in a new, dehumanised way as irreversible, after which, according to Mamardashvili's definition, it is always too late for Antigone.

At the same time, the discovery of this point allows us to see in the present retrospective the archetypal plot of the "unheard warning" in the horizon of the entire modernity, from "you only want freedom for yourself" (Pushkin) and "no man fights against freedom; he fights at most against the freedom of others" (Marx) to Nietzsche's prediction of the coming of nihilism. The question thus shifts towards the audience, which shows an inability to hear the warning.

In this light, the masterpieces of fiction that formed the canon of the Russian intelligentsia's lectures and later the core of the Soviet school curriculum for decades appear in a new light in the current rereading. Each time appearing on the eve of new challenges, depicting another version of the "Russian boy" type (Chatsky, Bazarov, Trofimov), a candidate for leadership, coming from the same privileged class ("How many souls does your father have?" Arkady suddenly asked. "The estate is not his, but his mother's; souls, I remember, fifteen." - "And twenty-two in all", Timofeich remarked with displeasure. "Fathers and Sons", Chapter 20), the classics have confirmed the well-known fact that the apple does not fall far from the tree.

The matter is complicated by the fact that the revolutionary ferment of the previous decades gave rise to a certain subculture, the component of which was self-sacrifice (including terrorist one). The matter could probably have been helped by a reminder of the Gospel's "I desire mercy, not sacrifice" (recall Pope John Paul II's famous "Do not be afraid" during his visit to Poland), but the Church at that historical moment obviously did not raise such an authoritative figure.

In view of the above, when discussing the phenomenon of the 1968 generation, the artefactual dimension of the problem comes into focus: a certain group constructs a "game" in which the other side is imagined to be forced by fear to perform the desired actions. In this interpretation, the "Russian boy" is not an isolated phenomenon (suffice it to recall the "Serbian boy" whose shot started the First World War). When the formula "I desire mercy, not sacrifice" creates a watershed between an adult and an adolescent, perhaps the "German boy" who drew the country into a war for the racial purity of the world can also be seen as a hostage of one of the utopias.

Let us pay attention to two interrelated points. Firstly, the teenager as an actor obviously fails to go beyond the horizon of the "neophyte scenario": when the conversion of another must necessarily take place here and now (it would seem that nothing prevents you from imagining that someone who is now actively protesting against your sermon will eventually turn into your most ardent supporter: cf. the story of the Apostle Paul). Secondly, this state of mind (I will use the figure of a "fanatic" to mark it) is marked by intolerance to certain words: for example, Tybalt in "Romeo and Juliet" says that he hates the word "peace" (Act 1, Scene 1). Probably, this also includes the Bolshevik leader's extremely indifferent attitude to "god".

In this sense, a small work by academician Pavlov (2009) "On the Mind in General and the Russian Mind in Particular" is of great importance, in which he, anticipating the later discoveries of neuroscience and linguistic anthropology, states that young cultures, including Russian, are characterised by a reaction not to things but to words.

Of course, only growing up can help. The traumatic experience itself, in this light, with the necessary reflection, if we recall Freud's "labour of sorrow", opens the way to a deeper understanding of humanity; obviously, of oneself.

Privatisation of modernity

The new cohort of "post-Soviet boys", as can be stated post factum, at critical moments of transition, to varying degrees, followed the prescriptions of the "Georgian Socrates" regarding "zombie" situations: as shown at the beginning, this now prompts philosophers as part of the national intellectual class to draw a watershed between the horizon of ideas marked by the postmodern "anything goes" and the world after 02/24 (according to A. Yermolenko, it is no longer possible to speak of a postmodern situation).

At the same time, as the literature of the last two years shows, the Western philosophical community is in no hurry to part with the usual paradigm. Thus, in a special issue of the Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, devoted to the topic of 'Postness' as a special state of humanity, it is stated:

Postmodern, postcolonial, postsocialist, postindustrial - the 'post' frequently occurs as a qualifier in historical and theoretical currents of the present day. The proliferation of the prefix might indicate that we live in an era of postness where obsolete temporal categories are not replaced by substantial new ones, but that we somehow linger in, remain attached to, and are reluctant to let go of preceding categorisations... More than simply recalling a world bygone or imagining a world yet to come, the category of the post describes a condition between no more and not yet which cannot be articulated in positive terms. (Pank & Schiedlowski, 2023)

(I would like to point out that, given the different speeds of change in the world, the sources of unreduced innovativeness of humanity's self-knowledge are becoming more and more apparent. The New Handbook of Linguistic Anthropology states that media and migration have been key drivers of globalisation and our imagination for more than a quarter of a century. "Linguistic anthropologists, among others, have been rethinking what it means to live in a globalized, mobilized, and often digitized world. We recognize that many efforts to "decolonize" any academic field continue to replicate colonial hierarchies and structures" (Duranti, George, & Riner, 2023, pp. 4-5). Given this warning, researchers emphasise the need to historicise the discipline and take into account paradigm shifts. In the context of this study, I would like to draw attention to the heuristic potential of the code switching model. As S. Hout (2021) notes, combining it with the concepts of memory and trauma allows us to clarify the interaction "[between] the past and the present, the present and the future, childhood and adulthood, and trauma and recovery".

Thus, while the 02/24 situation irrevocably marked the horizon of an unprecedented experience of growing up for a new cohort of Ukrainians, the rest of the world is still in the process of self-determination by the standards of the previous "hybrid" state. In this light, the aforementioned hermeneutical turn of 2014 paradoxically reveals the (un)demand for the concept of generation by the national intellectual class.

On the example of the 1968 generation, we saw the implicit components of apophaticity and artefactuality (rejection of hardened values and invention of new cultural practices) that record the progress of society along the main path of civilisation as a practice of complexity. By identifying similar changes in practices in the experience of the Ukrainian community in transition, which makes it anthropologically comparable (I recall the formula of the national spontaneous hermeneutic of transition about Moses, who led the people in the desert for forty years until those born in slavery died out), does it not turn out that without a "coined" term, the Ukrainian intellectual class and Ukrainians in general as an imagined community cannot give an account of their own experience of growing up?

K. Schlogel (2018) draws attention to the "end of an era" as a privileged moment of cognition. In this regard, rethinking the experience of the transition period, taking into account the processing of the traumas of modernisation, gives a chance to reinterpret the path travelled in the context of the post-Soviet era, with its main outcome of "farewell to the camp" (I will refer to it as the "Maidan generation"), but in the horizon of the great time of modernity, with the urgent, understandable traumas of modernisation and their processing ("Antigone generation").

Taking into account the work of linguistic anthropology, with its attention, within the framework of transit culture, to the construction of traumas (in particular, Chernobyl and the Holodo- mor) that reproduce the human dimension of the "price of modernity", we get the key to the divergence of trajectories of the Ukrainian and Russian communities, over two generations, to the polar "never again" (games with non-zero sum, "win-win") and "our grandfathers fought/we can do it again" (games with zero sum). Code switching, which allowed the Ukrainian "post-Soviet boys" to grow up, in the Russian scenario of lost temporality, returned the "teenage country" to a zombie situation, which can now be considered predictable.

(In passing, I would like to point out the possibility of clarifying the symptomatic nature of the "ourgrandfathersfought" meme within the generational approach. Placed in the chronological dimension, it obviously refers to the "trauma of Afghanistan" that was not healed during the Soviet era. At the same time, the field of study raises a whole range of problems related to its controversy in the context of the formation of the newest Ukrainian identity: it is not covered by the decommunisation programme).

Looking back at the moment when the USSR, a country of "eternal adolescence", entered the new era, which implied the urgency of the effort to grow up (a challenge reflected by the "Georgian Socrates"), we can now see the degree of weight of the (non-)acceptance by society of responsibility for the work of overcoming trauma. In the end, the "privatisation" of the legacy of modernity as its own history, including its painful pages, only leads to maturity, and its sign is the imperative "never again". Having once again "abandoned the heritage" (according to the formula of the teenage leader), we are captured by an infantile illusion that does not change with the axial time.

The first philosophical act of growing up is the following statement... this phrase was said by Ludwig Wittgenstein. 'The world has no intentions for us'. This is an adult point of view. And you know that adults can behave like children. Remember how one Persian king, who wanted to conquer Greece, sent a flotilla to Greece, and at that time the sea raged and drowned his entire flotilla. He ordered the sea to be cut out. A ridiculous act. And think about yourself, how many times do we cut out the sea or cut out the world in this way, because it seems to us that it had intentions towards us, like the sea towards Xerxes, which drowned his fleet. (FNK, 2020)

Originality

The article is the first to attempt to conceptualise the phenomenon of generation, in particular through the explication of its temporal dimension, which is revealed in the horizon of global human responsibility in the modern era as an "unfinished project", the non-reductive component of which is the treatment of the traumas of modernisation.

Conclusions

The introduction of the concept of generation in the context of the hermeneutical turn unfolding in the national philosophical literature after 2014 allows us to overcome the reduction of the research imagination of the expert community, revealing, in particular, the prospects of using the heuristic potential of linguistic anthropology (including the model of "code-switching"), which not only makes it possible to integrate the experience of processing the traumas of modernisation, but also opens up a new horizon for the reflection of intensive migration processes.

References

1. Benda J. (1927). La Trahison des clercs. Paris. (in France)

2. Chalmers D. (1996). The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory. Oxford University Press. (in English)

3. Duranti A., George R., Riner R.C. (Eds.). (2023). A New Companion to Linguistic Anthropology. Wiley Blackwell. (in English)

4. Feldman J., Musih N. (2023). Selfies in Auschwitz: Popular and contested representations in a digital generation. Memory Studies, 16(2), 403-420. (in English)

5. Fialko, N. (2022). The significance of deliberation for the legitimation of social institutions. Filosofska Dumka (Philosophical Thought), (3), 185-197. (in Ukrainian)

6. FNK. (2020, March 1). Merab Mamardashvili - Pochemu my ne vzrosleem. Kak byt vzroslym [Video]. YouTube. (in Russian)

7. Hout S. (2021). Multilingualism, Trauma, and Liminality in The Bullet Collection: Contact Zones, Checkpoints, and Liminal Points. Arab Studies Quarterly, 43(1), 5-25. (in English)

8. Karakulak O., Faul M.V. (2024). Value Creation for Refugees by Social Partnerships: A Frames Perspective. Business & Society, 63(1), 18-59. (in English)

9. Kebuladze V. (2019). The other experience: to comprehend the incomprehensible: The "Philosophical Thought" Round Table. Filosofska Dumka (Philosophical Thought), (3), 6-59. (in Ukrainian)

10. Khoma O., Zborovska X. (2019). Oral history of philosophy: written format: The "Philosophical Thought" Round Table. Filosofska Dumka (Philosophical Thought), (4), 6-52. (in Ukrainian)

11. Mamardashvili M. (1990). Soznanie i tsivilizatsiya. In Kak ya ponimayu filosofyu (pp. 107-121). Moscow: Progress. (in Russian)

12. Mannheim K. (1952). The Problem of Generations. In P. Kecskemeti (Ed.), Essays on the Sociology of Knowledge (pp. 276-322). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. (in English)

13. Ortega y Gasset J. (n.d.). Tema nashoi doby (V. Sakhno, Trans.). (in Ukrainian)

14. Pank J.F., Schiedlowski F. (2023). 'Postness', a contemporary human condition? Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute. (in English)

15. Pavlov I.P. (2009, September 15). Ob ume voobshche, o russkom ume v chastnosti. ImWerden. Retrieved from https://imwerden.de/publ-2037 (in Russian)

16. Schlogel K. (2018). Arkheolohiia komunizmu (I. Vytrykush, Trans.). Kyiv: Dukh i Litera. (in Ukrainian)

17. Steiner G. (1986). Antigones: How the Antigone Legend has Endured in Western Literature, Art, and Thought. Oxford University Press. (in English)

18. Strauss W., Howe N. (1991). Generations: The History of America's Future, 1584 to 2069. New York: William Morrow and Company. (in English)

19. Tokarev S.A. (Ed.). (1980). Mify narodov mira: Entsiklopediya (Vol. 1). Moscow: Sovetskaya entsiklopediya. (in Russian)

20. Tolts V. (2010, October 23). Golosa ushedshikh: Aleksandr Pyatigorskiy, Merab Mamardashvili, Dmitriy Sezeman iMikhail Geller o zhizni i smerti. Radio Svoboda. (in Russian)

21. Weinberg J. (2021, November 1). What Philosophers Believe: Results from the 2020 PhilPapers Survey. Daily Nous. (in English)

22. Yermolenko A. (2022). Resistance Instead of Argument: Answer of the Ukrainian philosopher Anatoly Yermolenko to Jurgen Habermas. Filosofska Dumka (Philosophical Thought), (3), 59-63. (in Ukrainian)

23. Yosypenko S. (2020). Reception and influence in the history of philosophy: an approach to the problem. Filosofska Dumka (Philosophical Thought), (2), 6-23. (in Ukrainian)

List of reference links

1. Benda J. La Trahison des clercs. Paris, 1927. 259 p.

2. Chalmers D. The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory. Oxford University Press, 1996. 432 p.

3. A New Companion to Linguistic Anthropology / ed. by A. Duranti, R. George, R. C. Riner. Wiley Blackwell, 2023. 640 p.

4. Feldman J., Musih N. Selfies in Auschwitz: Popular and contested representations in a digital generation. Memory Studies. 2023. Vol. 16, Iss. 2. P. 403-420.

5. Фіалко Н. Значення деліберації для легітимації соціальних інституцій. Філософська думка. 2022. № 3. С. 185-197.

6. ФНК. Мераб Мамардашвили - Почему мы не взрослеем. Как быть взрослым. YouTube. 2020. 1 мар.

7. Hout S. Multilingualism, Trauma, and Liminality in The Bullet Collection: Contact Zones, Checkpoints, and Liminal Points. Arab Studies Quarterly. 2021. Vol. 43, Iss. 1. P. 5-25.

8. Karakulak O., Faul M.V. Value Creation for Refugees by Social Partnerships: A Frames Perspective. Business & Society. 2024. Vol. 63, Iss. 1. P. 18-59.

9. Кебуладзе В. Інакший досвід: збагнути незбагненне: Круглий стіл "Філософської думки". Філософська думка. 2019. № 3. C. 6-59.

10. Хома O., Зборовська К. Усна історія філософії: письмовий формат: Круглий стіл "Філософської думки". Філософська думка. 2019. № 4. C. 6-52.

11. Мамардашвили М. Сознание и цивилизация. Как я понимаю философию. Москва : Прогресс, 1990. С. 107-121.

12. Mannheim K. The Problem of Generations. Essays on the Sociology of Knowledge / ed. by P. Kecskemeti. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1952. P. 276-322.

13. Ортега-і-Гасет Х. Тема нашої доби / пер. В. Сахна.

14. Pank J.F., Schiedlowski F. 'Postness', a contemporary human condition? Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute. 2023.

15. Павлов И.П. Об уме вообще, о русском уме в частности. ImWerden. 2009. 15 сентября.

16. Шльогель К. Археологія комунізму / пер. І. Витрикуш. Київ : Дух і Літера, 2018. 120 c.

17. Steiner G. Antigones: How the Antigone Legend has Endured in Western Literature, Art, and Thought. Oxford University Press, 1986. 328 p.

18. Strauss W., Howe N. Generations: The History of America's Future, 1584 to 2069. New York : William Morrow and Company, 1991. 538 p.

19. Мифы народов мира: энциклопедия: в 2 т. / гл. ред. С.А. Токарев. Москва : Советская энциклопедия, 1980. Т. 1. 672 с.

20. Тольц В. Голоса ушедших: Александр Пятигорский, Мераб Мамардашвили, Дмитрий Сеземан и Михаил Геллер о жизни и смерти. Радио Свобода. 2010. 23 октября.

21. Weinberg J. What Philosophers Believe: Results from the 2020 PhilPapers Survey. Daily Nous. 2021. November 1.

22. Єрмоленко А. Спротив замість перемовин: Відповідь українського філософа Анатолія Єрмоленка Юрґену Габермасу. Філософська думка. 2022. № 3. С. 59-63.

23. Йосипенко С. До проблеми рецепції та впливу в історії філософії. Філософська думка. 2020. № 2. С. 6-23.

Размещено на Allbest.ru