t. 1. Domarksistskai︠a︡ teorii︠a︡ poznanii︠a︡ --t. 2. Sot︠s︡ialʹno-kulturnai︠a︡ priroda poznanii︠a︡.

Purpose. The article is aimed to substantiate the view on the phenomenon of laughter as a subject of semiotic analysis, which leads to the following tasks: to reveal the possibilities of semiotics application in the study of laughter nature; to analyze the phenomenon of laughter as a cultural and natural phenomenon, as a sign and as an attribute; to consider the place of laughter in culture, which is understood as a sign system. Theoretical basis. The semiotic approach proceeds from the (...) fact that human lives in the world of signs, all the surrounding reality can be interpreted as a sign system. The basic concept of semiotics is the concept of a sign. The theoretical basis of the article is understanding the culture as a sign-symbolic system. Laughter is considered as a phenomenon ontologically rooted in human culture. At the same time, laughter is on the edge of culture. The research is based on the work of semiotic authors, cultural researchers, and the researchers of laughter. Originality. The originality lies in the application of the semiotic method to the research of laughter phenomenon, consideration of the dialectics of natural and cultural, signedness and non-signedness, manifested in the phenomenon of laughter. Conclusions. Laughter is considered as a psychophysiological phenomenon and as a cultural phenomenon. Laughter acts as an emotional manifestation, a physiological reaction, but socially and culturally mediated. In any case, laughter indicates an emotional or cognitive state of a human. Laughter acts as a process and result of the interpretation of a sign, a reaction to a sign. Laughter is a form and a means of communication. Being a natural phenomenon, in the process of social evolution, laughter acquires signedness, is integrated by culture as a sign system, and, at the same time, maintains a connection with nature. Thus, laughter occupies an ambivalent position between nature and culture. In the phenomenon of laughter, the dual state of human is revealed. In laughter, boundaries are blurred, the unity and opposition of natural and cultural, biological and social, soul and body, thought and feeling, sign and attribute are manifested. (shrink)

The purpose of the present article is not an excursion into the history of philosophy. It is not a story of the adventures of Immanuel Kant on Russian soil, and even less does it pretend to expound systematically the perception of Kantian philosophy by Russian metaphysics. The author's interest is strictly philosophical. Russian religious thought, insofar as it has an appetite for philosophizing, consciously enters into the life of classical European philosophy, into that living communication of minds by which truth (...) is sustained, moved, and nourished among people and nations.2 A clarification of its personal relations with the central figures of this philosophical drama will help us to understand the strictly philosophical significance of Russian metaphysics more accurately than even sometimes the most dedicated description of it in itself succeeds in doing. (shrink)

Since the moment when the first attempts to cognize the world were made by man, more than once it was noted and it was recognized that man can use two basic methods of cognition. The characteristics of each of the methods allow us to conditionally divide them into intuitive and rational, traditionally attributed to religion and science, respectively. Each of these types of knowledge has various grounds for it, which gives rise to a different vision of the world. Before proceeding (...) to their comparison, it is necessary to give a brief description of the changes that have shaped the modern scientific vision of the world. (shrink)

Already at the early stages of the development of human civilization, a set of various ideas emerged and developed, representing the most important elements of the identified military-political versions of ideology as one of the theoretical forms of social consciousness. Qualitatively a new stage in the development of ideology and its interrelations with various wars should be considered the era of the emergence and establishment of world religions. Although each of them did not carry in itself any militant principles, but, (...) on the contrary, in every possible way emphasized its peace, the history of Judaism, Christianity, Islam and Buddhism is associated with military violence. First, the religions themselves were the object of severe persecution and persecution by the pagan majority and the authorities. For Christians, their symbol was the burning of Rome in 64, after which the emperor Nero massacred and executed the followers of the new faith. (shrink)