being

Introduction. The article is devoted to consideration of the state of modern ontological thought. It is no coincidence that after Heidegger there is virtually no systematic consideration of the concept of being in philosophy. Does this mean that the problem of being has lost its relevance? Or does this indicate that the concept of being continues (albeit in a negative way) to determine the face of modern philosophy?

The paper is devoted to the formation of the philosophical conception
of the institutional person. The paper considers the existing scientific
theories of the institutional person, analyses a possibility of using new
categories and stresses a necessity for working out new conceptions
of the description of social realia of the modern word. The formation
and direction for the development of the philosophical conception
of the institutional person as a conception of the correspondence of

This article is about the investigation of temporological foundations of the philosophical conception of Taoism. The main religions and philosophical treatises of Taoism are under analysis in this aspect. Tao and Te are interpreted as two fundamental Temporological characteristics. Tao defines the temporology of the event of realizing of being, and Te defines the temporology of presence of already realized being.

The article deals with the problem of interpretative transformation of Heidegger’s understanding of being in postmodern thought. This transfotmation takes somewhat unpredictable conceptual forms as, for example, in Derrida’s «ontologies of differance and supplement» and in Baudrillard’s «ontology of branchments». The postmodern investigation of Heidegger’s notion of «being» has changed our understanding of main ontological approaches and problems.

Article argues that «metaphysics of universal unity»`s paradigm is general base of Russian religious philosophy. Author proves that problems of forming of «metaphysics of universal unity»`s paradigm consolidated creative energies of famous Russian philosophers as V.Soloviov, S.Frank, L.Karsavin, P.Florenskiy, S.Bulgakov. Article emphasized Russian philosophers’ common positions in methodology and ontology.

Our work is dedicated to the philosophical analysis of the "limit" phenomenon. The author considers the "limit" as a clear symbol devoid of content, which expresses the essential sense of the Symbolic. The "limit" is viewed as a base abstraction - the source of reflection of the cognitive and epistemological instrument and the basis of plurality (the perception of the material world variety).

In article are discussed questions of the correlation subjective and subjectivity with position of the socializations of personalities, shaping space of being. It is analysed their place and role in shaping the subjective well-being of personalities.

The article’s aim is to investigate human existence through the notion of writing, using philosophical concepts of J. Derrida and J.-L. Nancy. Any of our actions or thoughts can be interpreted as acts of writing, located on the surface of touching, in the area, where oneself is opening to the Other. Our existence doesn’t “have sense”, but it itself becomes the sense, being written out. The paper also raises the issue of the idea of self.

The article explores the moral nature of philosophy. The source of philosophy is the duality of human existence. Philosophy is moral in its essence, being a way of life which actualizes the contradictory unity of the dual human nature in thoughts and deeds. Historically, there were three types of understanding the philosophy: the Sophia type, the epistemic type and the technematic type. The Sophia type, first formulated by Pythagoras, comes from the idea of love of wisdom. Being the fullness of knowledge, wisdom is accessible only to God.

The article is devoted to the question of being in Heidegger’s fundamental ontology, namely, his claim to understand the ancient idea of being. In his work “Contributions to Philosophy (From Enowning)”, Heidegger distinguishes between the understanding of being as the being of everything that exists and his own understanding of being as such, out of connection with things. He calls the first point the “leading question” and attributes its authorship to Aristotle, the second one – “the main question”.