Corresponding Member of the NAS of Ukraine, Doctor of Economics, Full Professor, Vice President of the NAS of Ukraine, Head of the Section of Social Sciences and Humanities of the NAS of Ukraine
Doctor of Philosophy, Full Professor, Leading Research Fellow, Skovoroda Institute of Philosophy of the NAS of Ukraine
Abstract. The article addresses the issue of Ukraine’s civilisational agency in the modern world. The authors state that a civilisational destiny of a state is determined by geopolitical actors claiming a superpower status, the state’s own choice, people’s will, its political and intellectual elite. Then, a state becomes a unit of international relations and law, world geopolitics, science, art; a civilisational actor of history, the present, and the future.
Ukraine strives to become such an actor, have its civilisational project, and implement it. Our country is located between the Euro-Atlantic and Eurasian civilisational societies, thus its capacity to be an actor in the modern globalised world is contingent on efficient cooperation with both of the societies. The authors believe that the implementation of the civilisational project of Ukraine as an actor and not as an object of modern world lies in systemic cooperation with the international actors which accept freedom and dignity of a human being as fundamental values. The authors single out the civilisational measures of such a society, which is a society of trust, social and political partnership, and balanced interaction of the rule of law and civil society. In its civilisational project of the 21st century, Ukraine should stand for a society of innovations and information, where a person can live up to her full potential. It is about the worldview transformation of consciousness and relations among people, countries, civilisations, and civilisational worlds. The implementation of this project is a fundamental condition for ensuring the national security and existence of Ukraine as an independent state. That is indeed a noble cause of Ukraine and its people in the multifaceted world of the 21st century.
Keywords: Eurasian civilisational society, Euro-Atlantic direction, agency of Ukraine, independent state.
1. Vernadskyi, V. (1991). Nauchnaya mysl kak planetnoye yavleniye [Scientific Thought as a Planetary Phenopenon]. Moscow: Nauka. [in Russian]
2. Kortunov, S. (2008). Innovatsyonnyi put razvitiya i mobilizatsyya – eto puti, kotoryye kardinalno protivorechat drug drugu, Svobodnyy mir, 12 September [online]. Available at: http://www.liberty.ru/groups/experts/Innovacionnyj-tip-razvitiya-i-mobilizaciya-eto-dva-puti-kotorye-kardinal-no-protivorechat-drug-drugu [in Russian]
3. Kremen, V. (2009). Filosofiia liudynotsentryzmu v strategiiakh osvitnogo prostoru [The Philosophy of Anthropocentrism in Strategies of Educational Space]. Kyiv: Pedahohichna dumka. [in Ukrainian]
4. Krylova, S. (2019). Krasa liudyny v zhyttevykh praktykakh kultury. Dosvid sotsialnoi ta kulturnoi metaantropolohii i androhin-analizu: monohrafiia [The Beauty of a Human in Life Practices of Culture: A Monograph], 2nd ed. Kyiv: KNT. [in Ukrainian]
5. Pyrozhkov, S. (1992). Trudovoy potentsyal v demograficheskom izmerenii [Labour Potential in Demographic Dimension]. Kyiv: Naukova dumka. [in Russian]
6. Pyrozhkov, S., Khamitov, N. (2016). Tsyvilizatsiynyy proekt Ukrainy: vid ambitsii do realnykh mozhlyvostei [Ukraine’s Civilisational Potential: From Ambitions to Real Abilities]. Visnyk NAN Ukrainy, no. 6, pp. 45-52. [in Ukrainian]
7. Pyrozhkov, S., Khamitov, N. (2017). Ukrainske suspilstvo na shliakhu konsolidatsii [Ukrainian Society on the Way to Consolidation]. Visnyk NAN Ukrainy, no. 11, pp. 43-52. [in Ukrainian]
8. Pyrozhkov, S., Khamitov, N. (2018). Noosferna tsyvilizatsiia: vid potentsii do novoi realnosti [Noospheric Civilisation: From Probabilities to New Reality]. Visnyk NAN Ukrainy, no. 2, pp. 71-82. [in Ukrainian]
9. Pyrozhkov, S., Khamitov, N. (2019). Yevroaltantychnyi vektor Ukrainy: realni perspektyvy ta nebezpeky [Ukraine’s Euro-Atlantic Vector: Real Prospects and Threats]. Visnyk NAN Ukrainy, no. 6, pp. 71-82. [in Ukrainian]
10. Rafalskyi, O., Samchuk, Z. (2018). Tsyvilizatsiini perekhrestia suchasnoho suspilstva [Civilisational Crossroads of the Modern Society]. Kyiv: IPiEND im. I. F. Kurasa NAN Ukrainy. [in Ukrainian]
11. Khamitov, N. (2017). Filosofskaya antropologiya: Slovar [Philosophical Anthropology: A Dictionary], 4th ed. Kyiv: KNT. [in Russian]
12. Fukuyama, F. (2004). Doveriye: sotsialnyye dobrodeteli i put k protsvetaniyu [Trust: The Social Virtues and The Creation of Prosperity]. Moscow: OOO ‘Izdatelstvo AST’: ZAO NPP ‘Yermak’. [in Russian]
13. Khamitov, N. (2017). Filosofiya, bytiye, chelovek, mir. Ot metafiziki k metaantropologii [Philosophy, Being, Human, World. From Metaphysics to Meta-Anthropology], 4th ed. Kyiv: KNT. [in Russian]
14. Khamitov, N. (2019). Filosofska antropolohiya: aktualni problem. Vid teoretychnoho do praktychnoho povorotu [Philosophical Anthropology: Current Problems. From Theoretical to Practical Aspects], 3rd ed. Kyiv: KNT. [in Ukrainian]
15. Nye, J. (2004). Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. New York: Public Affairs Group. [in English]