Synergetic Approach in the Study of the Axiosphere

Aim. To examine the interpretation of the concept of “value”, which is considered interdisciplinary. First, the humanitarian anthropomeric dimension of “values” is analyzed.

Methodology. The axiosphere is analyzed from the point of view of synergetics – as a complex, open self-organizing system that has various interconnected and interdependent levels of organization, is characterized by emergence and the ability to self-build. The axiosphere is a dissipative system in which temporarily stable configurations of meanings and values are formed as a slice in a nonequilibrium, dynamic environment. The synergetic approach involves the study of the axiosphere as a complex self–developing system – multidimensional, influenced by various factors that determine the dynamics of its development, its emergence and bifurcation, connected and interacting with many other systems and subsystems.

Results. In the Russian tradition there are three main approaches to the phenomenon of “value”. The first one considers the ability of values to satisfy the material and spiritual needs of a person. The second one refers to the highest social ideals as values. The third one synthesizes the first and second approaches. In essence, values as objects of a value relationship can be considered all the diverse manifestations and products of human activity, social relations and natural phenomena involved in the spectrum of their production and functioning. All of them can be evaluated in the context of due and improper, good and evil, just and unfair, beautiful and ugly, truth and error, etc.

Research implications. A person always perceives values subjectively, as an individual develops as a person, he acquires the ability to critically analyze and creatively revise previously perceived values, as a result of which he forms a certain, deeply individual, personally special set of axiological categories, orientations, as well as ideals, norms, etc. The axiosphere is a world of values and a person’s value attitude to the world. The axiosphere is determined by ontological, geographical and historical factors. Hence its ethnocultural specificity. The axiosphere as such is a syncretic quintessence of many personal, individually oriented axiospheres. The axiosphere, by virtue of its ideal nature, is a dialectical unity of the subjective and the objective, the individual and the universal, the individual and the collective.

1. Bulgakov S. N. Filosofiya hozyajstva [Philosophy of Economy]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1990. 412 p.

2. Valickaya A. P. [Axiosphere: the content of the concept and its instrumental status]. In: Aksiosfera sovremennosti: filosofsko-esteticheskij analiz i nravstvennoe obosnovanie sociokul’turnyh praktik [Axiosphere of modernity: philosophical and aesthetic analysis and moral justification of socio-cultural practices]. St. Petersburg, Asterion Publ., 2023, pp. 5–14.

3. Vedeneeva G. I. [Axiosphere of local history and its role in the moral education of primary school students]. In: Nachal’naya shkola plyus. Do i Posle [Primary school plus], 2021, no. 3, pp. 77–80.

4. Vyzhlecov G. P. Aksiologiya kul’tury [Axiology of culture]. St. Petersburg, St. Petersburg State University Publ., 1996. 148 p.

5. Inglehart R. F. Democracy versus Modernization: a dilemma for Russia and for the world (Rus. ed.: Modernizaciya – cennosti – schast’e: Rossiya i mir. In: Kontekst: mezhdunarodnyj lektorij. Available at: http://www.contextfound.org/events/y2012/m12/n79 (accessed: 11.06.2024)).

6. Kagan M. S. Filosofskaya teoriya cennosti [Philosophical Theory of Value]. St. Petersburg, Petropolis Publ., 1997. 205 p.

7. Kiryakova A. V. [Value Theory - a Methodological Basis for the Axiology of Education]. In: Aksiologiya i innovatika obrazovaniya [Axiology and Innovation in Education], 2020, no. 1, pp. 2–32. Available at: http://www.orenport.ru/axiology/?doc=3 (accessed: 09.06.2024).

8. Kozmenko M. V. [Syncretic nature of transcendence of cultural axiosphere]. In: Studia Humanitatis, 2013, no. 1. Available at: www.st-hum.ru (data obrashcheniya: 11.06.2024).

9. Sagatovsky V. N. [Activity as a philosophical category]. In: Filosofskie nauki [Philosophical sciences], 1978, no. 2, pp. 47–55.

10. Suvorova I. M. [Axiosphere of culture as a synergetic system]. In: Istoricheskaya i social’no-obrazovatel’naya mysl’ [Historical and socio-educational thought], 2014, no. 2, pp. 352–355.

11. Faktor A. M., Kamolov S. G., Nikandrova A. A. [Human values in the digital age]. In: Modelirovanie, optimizaciya i informacionnye tekhnologii [Modeling, optimization and information technology], 2019, no. 2 (21), pp. 86–103. Available at: http://moit.vivt.ru (accessed: 08.06.2024).

12. Fromm E. On Psychoanalysis and Ethics (Rus. ed.: Gurevich P. S., Levit S. Ya., comps. Psihoanaliz i etika. Moscow, Respublika Publ., 1993. 415 p.).

13. Hayek F. The Fatal Conceit: The Errors of Socialism (Rus. ed.: Osipova E., transl. Pagubnaya samonadeyannost’. Oshibki socializma. Moscow, Novosti Publ., Catallaxy Publ., 1992. 304 p.).

14. Yuzhaninova E. R. [Axiology of the Internet and its morphology]. In: Vestnik Orenburgskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta [Bulletin of the Orenburg State University], 2023, no. 1 (150), pp. 80–86.

15. Rolston Н. Philosophy Gone Wild. New York, Prometheus Books Publ., 1989. 269 p.