Meagan Haluk

The term "civilization" emerged in Europe only at the turn of the 18th-19th centuries, but over time, it has been used in diverse approaches that seem contradictory. Initially denoting the opposite of barbarism and a certain level of societal development, it transformed into a global concept unifying various cultures. Among the characteristics of such a global civilization, one can highlight the vector of development and prioritization of values outlined by French philosophers: freedom, rights, and justice. Scholars commonly synonymize and contrast "civilization" and "culture" in their interpretations. In seemingly different approaches by Immanuel Kant and Oswald Spengler, civilization appears as something external, constant, and mechanical against the living, dynamic culture. The approach of local civilizations, represented by scholars like N. Danilevsky, Oswald Spengler, Arnold J. Toynbee, S. F. Huntington, etc., remains popular and debatable. It reflects the peculiarities of individual cultures, their interactions, factors, and the cycle of development. The article suggests departing from the usual opposition and synthesizing the global and local approaches to civilization, where global civilization is not cultural unification but a space of cultural interactions with common, universal values. By comprehensively examining the crises faced by society at each of these levels, the interrelatedness of these levels can be traced, revealing factors influencing international security that are not apparent for local problem-solving. In the second part of the work, the context of the history of the Orthodox civilization is provided, emphasizing the importance of a thorough and comprehensive study of the formation of state civilization identity to understand local civilization and its core.