Select your language

Urgency of the research. Modern globalization covers all spheres of human life–social, economic, political, cultural, environmental, technological. On the one hand, it has led to future shock, a gap in time when a person does not have time to realize the ultra-rapid social changes around him and adapt to them. On the other hand, the relationship and communication between different ethnic groups has gained a planetary scale and formed a world society in which intercultural dialogue between Western culture and the cultures of other ethnic groups begin to play a dominant role. Moreover, Western culture seeks to absorb the national identity of different peoples under the banner of Westernization, imposing on the rest of the world Western institutions and socio-cultural orientations. This, in turn, exacerbates the confrontation of cultures and causes a large number of conflicts. These circumstances highlight the research topic and the importance of solving the problem of intercultural communication between the West and other countries in the process of globalization.

 Target setting. The need to establish intercivilizational dialogue and integration of humanity at the highest spiritual principles in the era of globalization is a signal of a serious protracted crisis that has developed in relations between Western and Eastern civilizations as major players in the world political arena. That is why the problem of finding ways to overcome this crisis requires a serious socio-philosophical analysis of the role of intercultural dialogue in resolving modern world conflicts, as well as those deep (archetypal) factors that determine the specific behaviour of different types of cultures.

 Actual scientific researches and issues analysis. The development of modern philosophy of dialogue is associated with such outstanding philosophers as M. Bakhtin, M. Buber, V. Bibler, V. Kuchinsky, who studied the nature of dialogue - its features, structure and functions. The dialogical nature of thinking was analyzed by L. Vygotsky, A. Leontiev, S. Rubinstein, A. Sokolov and others. Role-based dialogical interaction in communication was the subject of research by A. Dobrovich, V. Myasishchev, J. Yanoushek. The problem of dialogue in the context of intercultural communication was studied by S. Huntington, S. Krymsky, Y. Pavlenko, Y. Pakhomov and other scientists. The works of A. Ermolenko, V. Paniotto, S. Osipenko, M. Mikhal-chenko, L. Gubersky and other scientists are devoted to the study of the specifics of modern dialogue in the context of the global civilizational crisis, who emphasize the need to form a culture of dialogue and develop readiness for effective communication even with ideological opponents.

The research objective.  Evaluate the role of this euristic potential for dialogue in the context of global problems of participation. Analyze S. Gantington's ideas about the day-to-day dialogue in the context of the multicultural community. To show the euristic potential to the method of archetypes for the development of the mentality of different ethnic groups.

The statement of basic materials. The article analyzes the global multipolar processes, to which representatives of all cultures of the world are involved today. There is an opinion that only intercultural dialogue in the near future should help to create a world solidary society, truly free and fair for all peoples, nations and countries, and not only for the "golden billion". In this context, the main task of the dialogue is to reconcile the representatives of different cultures and coordinate their efforts in joint activities to resolve political, environmental, socio-economic and demographic problems, to help all civilizations achieve social stability and socio-economic growth. Special attention is paid to the analysis of S. Huntington's ideas about the confrontation that exists in intercultural communication between the West and other countries, as well as the determining factors of cultural identity (blood and faith, language, religion and family). People associate with those with whom they are in common and seek those with whom they are different. The article also analyzes the method of archetypes (proposed by S. Krymsky) as a mechanism for resolving conflicts arising in the intercultural communication of various ethnic groups. Its essence boils down to the fact that in ethnic conflicts that relate to the archetypal level of mentality of a certain people, representatives of different cultures should be bred. Ethnic groups, historically already have a common positive experience (in solving economic and political problems), it is much easier to understand each other and resolve any future conflicts on the way of integration.

 Conclusions. The solution to the problem of dialogue between Western and Eastern cultures lies in the search for a global idea, for the sake of which representatives of these cultures will be able to unite their actual needs, interests and values. Such a common goal as the desire to achieve stability and socio-economic growth, today can become an incentive for intercivilizational dialogue, which can unite efforts to overcome the systemic crisis in the context of globalization. In the modern globalized world, the psychological readiness of people for dialogue, reconciliation and harmony must be formed. The world political elite, which is clearly aware of its responsibility to its citizens, can become the main participant in these processes.

 Keywords: globalization, dialogue, intercultural communication, the method of archetypes, archetypes of the Ukrainian mentality.

References:

  1. Gramshi, A 1980. ‘Izbrannye proizvedeniya (Selected works)’, Per. s ital., Pod obsh. red. IV Grigorevoj i dr.; Vstupit. statya GP Smirnova; Primech. IV Grigorevoj, KF Miziano, : Politizdat, 422 s.
  2. Krimskij, SB 2006. ‘Arhetipi ukrayinskoyi mentalnosti (Archetypes of the Ukrainian mentality)’, v Problemi teoriyi mentalnosti, vidp. red. Popovich, MV, Kiyiv: Naukova dumka, s. 283-301.
  3. Krimskij, SB 2010. ‘Pro sofijnist, pravdu, smisli lyudskogo buttya (On sophistry, truth, meanings of human existence)’, Zbirnik naukovo-publicistichnih i filosofskih statej, Kiyiv: In-t filosofiyi im. G.S. Skovorodi, 464 s.
  4. Pahomov, YuN, Krymskij, SB & Pavlenko, YuV 1998. ‘Puti i pereputya sovremennoj civilizacii (Paths and crossroads of modern civilization)’, Kiev: Blagotvoritelnyj Fond sodejstviya razvitiyu gumanitarnyh i ekonomicheskih nauk “Mezhdunarodnyj delovoj centr”, 432 s.
  5. Spivak, VM 2016. ‘Socialnij dialog v umovah globalizaciyi: tendenciyi transformacijnih zmin (Social dialogue in the minds of globalization: tendencies of transformation changes)’, Visnik APSVT, №3-4, s. 16-22.
  6. Hantington, S 2003. ‘Stolknovenie civilizacij (Clash of civilizations)’, Per. s angl. T. Velimeeva, Yu. Novikova,   M. : OOO “Izdatelstvo AST”, 603 s.