Traditional cross methodological forward glass (part I: justification)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32461/2226-3209.1.2019.166515Keywords:
traditions, transformations, innovations, culture, Forsyth methodologyAbstract
The purpose of the article is to substantiate the feasibility of using the Forsyth methodology to preserve traditions as an important element of the intangible cultural heritage. Given the interdisciplinary nature of the problem, the methodology of the study is based on the complex-integrative combination of theoretical approaches of a number of sciences, in particular, cultural studies, public administration, as well as general scientific methods of system analysis, synthesis, abstraction, generalization, and sub. Scientific novelty is connected with an attempt to outline theoretical and practical aspects of the importance of Forsyth's methodology in preserving the traditions from the projection into practical measures of the state in this sphere. Conclusions. The gap between traditionalist and innovative socio-cultural guidelines will continue to grow, provoking new challenges, which not only the cultural community but also the state authorities and the scientific community must respond effectively to. As they are more social institutions, they understand the importance of preserving traditions as the basis of cultural diversity and the collective identities formed on their basis. Addressing the problems of communication between traditions and innovations is an important task of any society and is increasingly being projected into the field of prediction of their future combination in order to identify and create a mockup of the most acceptable future and to safeguard the national culture from possible internal and external disasters. Therefore, the study of the feasibility of using Forsyte's methodology in the socio-cultural field is an actual direction of research for Ukrainian science, which is projected into the practical sphere of state activity, in particular, to determine the priorities of cultural policy.
References
Анохина В. В. Культурная традиция в контексте современной социальной динамики. Гуманітарний вісник ЗДІА. 2010. Вип. 42. С. 90–101.
Бассей М. Концептуальные основы и эффекты Форсайт-исследований: классификация и практическое применение. Форсайт. Т. 7. 2013. № 3. С. 64–71.
Боков М. Специфика и процедуры получения прогнозного знания в форсайте. Социологические исследования. 2013. № 3. С. 74–84.
Гохберг Л. Будущее как стратегическая задача. Форсайт. Т. 1, № 1. 2007. С. 4–5.
Капінос М. С. Форсайтні методи дослідження як інструмент визначення конституційного устрою. Вісник Нац. академії держ. упр. при Президентові України. 2014. №2. С. 18–24.
Келлер Я. Модернизация – гуманизация общества или коррозия бытия? Критические заметки о теории модернизации. СОЦИС. 2002. № 7.
Костюк К. Архаика и модерн в российской культуре. URL: http://www.nir.ru/sj/sj/sj3-4–99kost.html.
Мартино Дж. Технологическое прогнозирование. М. : Прогресс, 1977. 591 с.
Мир по Йоргену Рандерсу. 2014. URL: http://www.iso.org/iso/ru/ news.htm?refid=Ref1880.
Паин Э.А. Новации как продолжение традиции : о социокультурных условиях модернизации России. Независимая газета. 2010 (9).
Пекар В., Пєстєрніков Є. Людський капітал України 2025. Підсумки форсайту. URL: http://wikicitynomica.org/future/lyudskiy-kapital-ukraini-2025- pidsumki-forsaytu.html.
Поппер Р. Мониторинг исследований будущего. Форсайт. 2012. Т. 6, № 2. С. 56–75.
Про охорону культурної спадщини : Закон України від 8 червня 2000 року N 1805-III. URL: http://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1805-14
Рудакевич О., Біскуп В. Особливості використання форсайту в передбаченні та розв’язанні проблем у соціальній сфері. URL: http://esnuir.eenu.edu.ua/bitstream/123456789/9982/1/socst_2015_2.
Семигіна Т. Між минулим і майбутнім: українське суспільство в час трансформацій. Соціальна політика і соціальна робота. 2001. № 3 (19). С. 22–40.
Серегина С. Ф., Барышев И. Закономерно ли появление форсайта? Форсайт. 2008. Т. 2. № 2. С. 4–12.
Смирнов С. Новые идентичности человека: анализ и прогноз антропологических трендов. Антропологический форсайт. 2013. №4. С.14–19.
Соколов А.В. Форсайт взгляд в будущее. Форсайт. Т. 1, № 1. 2007. С. 8–15.
Федулова Л. І. Форсайт: сучасна методологія технологічного прогнозування. Економіка і прогнозування : наук.-аналіт. журн. 2008. № 4. С. 124–138.
Форсайт економіки України: середньостроковий (2015–2020 роки) і довгостроковий (2020–2030 роки) часові горизонти / наук. кер. проекту акад. НАН України М. З. Згуровський. К. : НТУУ «КПІ», 2015. 136 с.
Цвек А. та ін. Международный Форсайт 2000-х годов: сопоставительный анализ Форсайт. Т. 8, № 2. 2014. С. 6–15.
Шевченко Л. Форсайт вищої освіти: актуальність для України. Україна: аспекти праці, 2014. № 3. С. 21–27.
Шелюбская Н. Практика Форсайта в странах Западной Европы. Альманах РИЭПП «Наука. Инновации. Образование». Вып. 5: «Форсайт: основы и практики применения». М., 2008. С. 10–24.
Georghiou L. Third Generation Foresight-Integrating the Socio-economic Dimension. Paper presented at the International Conference on Technology Foresight, Japan, March 2001. URL: http://www.nistep.go.jp/achiev/ftx/eng/mat0.
Anokhina, V. V. (2010). Cultural tradition in the context of modern social dynamics. Humanitarian Bulletin, 42. P. 90-101 [in Russian].
Bassei, М. (2013). Conceptual Foundations and effects of Foresight studies: classification and practical application, Foresight, Vol. 7, No. 3, Pp. 64–71 [in Russian].
Bokov, М. B. (2013). Specificity and procedures for obtaining of a predictive knowledge in a Foresight, Sociological Researches, No. 3, Pp. 74–84 [in Russian].
Hokhberh, L. М. (2007). The future as a strategic task, Foresight, Vol. 1, No. 1, Pp. 4–5 [in Russian].
5.Kupinos, М. S. (2014). Foresight methods as a tool to determine the constitutional order, Bulletin of National Academy of Public Administration under the President of Ukraine, No. 2, Pp. 18–24 [in Ukrainian].
Keller, J. (2002). Modernization - the humanization of society or the corrosion of life? Critical notes on the theory of modernization. SOCIS. № 7 [in Russian].
Kostyuk, K. Archaic and modern in Russian culture. URL: http://www.nir.ru/sj/sj/sj3-4-99kost.html [in Russian].
Martino, J. (1977). Technological Forecasting. M.: Progress. 591 p. [in Russian].
The world by Jorgen Randers (2014), http://www.iso.org/iso/ru/news.htm?refid=Ref1880 [in Russian].
Pain, E.A. (2010). Novations as a continuation of the tradition: on the socio-cultural conditions of Russia's modernization. Independent newspaper, 9 [in Russian].
Pekar, V., Piestiernikov, Ye. (2012). “Human capital of Ukraine 2025. Consequences of Foresight, http://wikicitynomica.org/future/lyudskiy-kapital-ukraini-2025-pidsumki-forsaytu.html [in Ukrainian].
Popper, R. (2012). “Monitoring of study of future”, Foresight, Vol. 6, No. 2, Pp. 56–75 [in Russian].
On the Protection of the Cultural Heritage: Law of Ukraine of June 8, 2000. № 1805-III. URL: http://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1805-14 [in Ukrainian].
Rudakevich O., Biskup V. (n.d.). Features of using foresight in anticipating and solving problems in the social sphere. URL: http://esnuir.eenu.edu.ua/bitstream/123456789/9982/1/socst_2015_2 [in Ukrainian].
15.Semygina, Т. (2001). “Between past and future: Ukrainian society in a time of transformation”, Social policy and social work, No. 3, Vol. 19, Pp. 22–40 [in Ukrainian].
Seredina, S. F., Baryshev, I. А. (2008). “Does the emergence of foresight is regularity?”, Foresight, Vol. 2, No. 2, Pp. 4–12 [in Russian].
Smirnov, S. (2013). New human identities: analysis and forecast of anthropological trends. Anthropological foresight. № 4. Pp. 14-19 [in Russian].
Sokolov, А. V. (2007). “Foresight: a vision of the future”, Foresight, Vol. 1, No. 1, Pp. 8–15 [in Russian].
Fedulova, L. І. (2008). “Foresight: Modern technological forecasting methodology”, Economics and Forecasting, No. 4, Pp. 124–138 [in Ukrainian].
The foresight of Ukraine’s economy: mid-term (2015-2020 years) and long term (2020-2030 years) of time horizons (2015), Science. Project Manager Acad. NAS of Ukraine M. Z. Zghurovskyi, Kyiv: NTUU «КPІ», 136 p. [in Ukrainian].
Tsvek, А., Braun, А., Rikers-Defrasne, S. (2014). “International Foresight in 2000’s years: a comparative analysis”, Foresight, Vol. 8, No. 2, Pp. 6–15 [in Russian].
Shevchenko, L. (2014). “Foresight of higher education: relevance to Ukraine”, Ukraine: aspects of labor, No. 3, Pp. 21–27 [in Ukrainian].
Sheliubskaia, N. V. (2008). “The practice of Foresight in Western Europe”, Science. Innovation. Education, Issue 5: «Foresight: fundamentals and practices of implementation», Moscow, Pp. 10–24 [in Russian].
Georghiou L. (2001). Third Generation Foresight-Integrating the Socio-economic Dimension. Paper presented at the International Conference on Technology Foresight, Japan, March 2001. URL: http://www.nistep.go.jp/achiev/ftx/eng/mat0 [in English].
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).