Был ли Хаджетлаше мусульманином? Одно странное конструирование идентичности в поздней Российской империи
The paper reconstructs, in the context of actual problems of Russian historical memory and basing on archives of various provenance and the then publications, a biography of M.-B. Hadjetlaché (aka Yu. Kazi-Bek Akhmetukov, G. Ettinger, etc., ca 1868–1929) – a Circassian writer, Muslim journalist, Russian adventurist and double-dealer; the arguments for his being born Jewish are provided. In comparison of this biography with his self-narratives, his constructing of Circassian and Muslim identity is analyzed. In particular, ideas (and their sources) of what Muslim belonging means, both inside and outside the Muslim milieu (that of Russian Muslim intelligentsia), are investigated; the role of mass Orientalism and the crossovers of different cultural spaces in the formation of Muslim self-representations is emphasized, as well as the perception of ‘being Muslim’ as culture rather than religion. The question of whether Hadjetlaché was a Muslim is taken on the brink of forgery and forging, imposture and invention of identity, and his using the latter politically as his ‘symbolic capital’ is demonstrated.
In March 2011 scholars met in Prague at the conference Interculturalism, Meaning and Identity. This event revitalised this important theme related to Diversity and Recognition. The terms 'interculturalism' and 'integration' are experiencing a renaissance. As the extent of human movement between nations increases attempts are made to balance cultural difference and social cohesion. In some contexts immigration and settlement policies are becoming more draconian in response. Because of this, interculturalism can take on many meanings. However, pivotal to the way interculturalism is understood is identification. As the relationship between nation, ethnicity and language becomes more complex so too do the ways in which people represent them selves. The cultural resources drawn on and the processes used to form identities are examined in this truly international collection. So too are the implications of these developments for how we theorise culture, meaning and identity.
In this paper we introduce distinction between “ontologically non-fregean” logics and “pragmatically non-fregean” ones; by means of such distinction a classification of non-fregean logics is presented as well. We believe that NFL must be considered as a many-leveled structure; each level taken separately may vary in different way – from classical to non-classical. It is not these levels themselves that we should call “fregean” or “non-fregean”, but the ways they are stuck together within the whole system. The more levels a system has, the more kinds of “fregean” and “non-fregean” we can find in it.
The paper treats the issue of identity of the ego, which constitutes the central problem of personology. The skeptical approach to this problem, which sees it as not being subject to be resolved by means of science, began with D. Hume's work. Contemporary personologists (P. Ricoeur and others) approach this problem through study of culture, which imparts the ego with «narrative identity». Cultural historic psychology is a «Bridge of interpretations», upon which philosophy of culture meets psychology, and psychological data associated with «personality» are interpreted on the basis of some specific cultural philosophic theory. The «conflict of interpretations» plays and essential role in personology, which participates in the processes of emergence and overcoming of the cultural crisis. Philosophical and methodological problems that define the near term perspective development of personology are formulated: whether there are any «ego invariants» that remain regardless of any possible cultural determination; whether the ego possesses any rigidity in relation to cultural determination and, if it does, what is the nature of this rigidity; whether ego identity is destroyed when cultural determination diminishes or ceases, etc.
This paper investigates the language situation in Moscow schools with an ethnocultural component – a new form of national schools. The analysis is based on interviews which were recorded in 2007, in two Moscow schools, one of them with Armenian ethno-cultural component, and the other, with Azeri. The sample included ten students from each school (five boys and five girls).
In the paper the process of linguistic integration of Azeri and Armenian children into modern Russian society is analyzed. The comparison between these two groups is particularly appealing, because the effects of Soviet Russification, and the language situations in general, were different in Armenia and in Azerbaijan. I show that this difference influences the use of language by Azeri and Armenian children.
In article features of national and confessional self-identification of the Russian youth as parts of the title nation are considered. Ethnic and national consciousness are analyzed as significant components of process of individual and group self-identification. Research covers the studying and working youth which is arrived and which initially living in the city. The youth is the object which studying allows to predict regularities of social development in the future. Consideration of a problem considers multi-confessional, multi-ethnic and boundary in the geographical relation character of Ural as region. The emphasis is placed on specifics of behavior of representatives of title nation, as youth considerably defining a social portrait. The concept of the big city is used as steady, allocated with a number of characteristic features. Authors establish the reasons of the reduced interest to a religious and ethnic identification of with group at the young people belonging to different social groups and united by residence in the large city. The conditions necessary for an intensification of process of identification are defined. Means of updating of processes of formation of identity of youth are offered.
The article examines special politically-legal and social status of Muslim community in the USA. Not only positive experience of ethnopolitical integration is described, but also a number of problems connected to this situation.
This chapter proposes an unfolding view of the EU as a sort of post-modern neo-medieval empire, in which narratives of othering towards Central and Eastern Europe preserve their salience.