The philosophical and methodological issues of Mongolia’s civilization in the multi-polar world

Introduction. The article is devoted to the evaluation of topical ideas of Inner Asia civilization in the multi-polar world. Without doubt, in contemporary global world it is essential for each country to creatively explore ideas and scientific civilizational theories to define its place in modern global community. Today the Mongols actively explore these theories and doctrines which have linkage to Western origin, but the research deserves a creative approach and does not fit properly the national reality and specifics.

Material and methods. To define the specific features of Mongolian civilization the authors study philosophical doctrines of existence in harmony, doctrine of duality, time, Buddism – all the ideas that influenced the Mongolian views on “nation” and “democracy”, historical lessons and geopolitics.

Results. At present Mongolia has a tough choice in pursuing foreign policy. Three main world development centers- the USA, China and Russia- have emerged and the threat of a potential conflict between them have increased. It is apparent that this process in the future will strongly influence the present and further development of each region and country in the world. Thus the fundamental issues concerning the methodological approach in development philosophy as well as in civilizational philosophy appeared alongside the changes in world situation. The issue of national identity should not be excluded from the political agenda as well as historical and development issues from policy analysis.

Discussion and Conclusions. Mongolia in respect to its geographical location belongs to the Asia-Pacific region. In the civilizational aspect Mongols are nomadic nation. These two factors are fundamental conditions for the shaping of national identity. In context of civilizational affinity and national identity Mongols are more close to the Central Asian space. In this area such regional organizations as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and APEC operate. However, Mongolia is not a member of these organizations and cannot efficiently participate in big regional and world projects and programs having the status of observer. Hence the membership in these regional organizations and the significant economic growth are strategically important for Mongolia.

1. Badaraev D.D., Vinokurova A.V., Litvinova T.N., 2017. The сreation of eсonomiс сorridors «Сhina – Mongolia – Russia» as an alternative to the «Silk Road». Ojkumena. Regional Researches. No. 2 (41). P. 7-17.

2. Bira, Sh., 2007. Tüüver zokhioluud. [Selected works]. Ulaanbaatar.

3. Changes in the Democratic Governance in Mongolia. 2006; 2008; 2010; 2013. IPSL, SPAI, UNDP, «Sansudai» Printing house. «Bembi-san LLC». Ulaanbaatar.

4. Chibilev A.A., 2009. Landscapes of Eurasian steppes as the object of historical steppe science. Geography and Natural Resources. No. 30. P. 219-223.

5. Dash-Yondon, B., 2012. Setgelgeegee shinechlekh ni khyamralaas garch devjikhiin ündes mön [Updating of thinking is a way from crisis to growth]. Tsag üye: setgel bodrol, filosofi [Time: thoughts and philosophy]. Ulaanbaatar.

6. Dash-Yondon, B., 2012. Töv üzel-setgekh arga [Teaching of the Middle way is the way of thinking]. Tsag üye: setgel bodrol, filosofi [Time: thoughts and philosophy]. Ulaanbaatar.

7. Goldman, M. & Goldman, M., 1992. To Leninism and back. From Leninism to Freedom: The challenges of Democratization. Edit. Margaret L. Nugent. San-Francisco: Boulder, Oxford: Westview Press.

8. Hegel, G.W.F., 2001. Philosophy of History. Ontario: Batoche Books Kitchener.

9. Huntington, S. P., 1997. After twenty years: the future of the third wave. Journal of Democracy. Volume 8 (4). Р. 3-12.

10. Litvinova, T.N., 2017. The Idea of Mongolian Civilization as a Concept of a Multipolar World Order. Polis. Political Studies. No. 5. P. 187-191.

11. Litvinova, T.N., Zheleznyakov, A.S. 2019. Vzaimnoye vospriyatiye obrazov Rossii i Mongolii v kontekste transtsivilizatsionnogo vzaimodeystviya [Mutual perception of images of Russia and Mongolia in the context of transcivilization interaction]. Sotsiologicheskie Issledovaniia [Sociological Studies]. No 5. P. 129-138.

12. Lkhagva, O., 2011. Munkh tengerii i golografichyeskaya vsyelyennaya. [Munkh tengri and golographic univers]. Tengerizm ba mongolchuud. [Tengerism and Mongols]. Ulaanbaatar.

13. Luvsantseren, G., 2008. Buddyn gün ukhaany onol, tüükhiin asuudlaas. [Issues of Buddhist philosophy and history]. Ulaanbaatar.

14. MongolUlsyn tüükh [History of Mongolia], 2003. Volume 1. In V volumes. Ulaanbaatar.

15. MongolUlsyn tüükh [History of Mongolia], 2003. Volume 2. In V volumes. Ulaanbaatar.

16. Mongolyn filosofiin tüükh (ХVII-ХIХ zuun) [History of Mongolian philosophy for XVII-XIX cc.], 2001. Volume 4. Ulaanbaatar, Institute of Philosophy, Sociology and Law, Mongolian Academy of Sciences.

17. Møller, J. & Skaaning, S.E., 2010. Post-Communist regime types: Hierarchies across attributes and space. Communist and Post-Communist Studies. No. 43. P. 51-71.

18. Oyuunlag tanin medekhüi [Spiritual cognition], 2011. Joint work. Institute of Philosophy, Sociology and Law, Mongolian Academy of Sciences. Ulaanbaatar.

19. Rong, Jiang, 2010. Wolf totem. Translated Boldbaatar D., Edited by Mend-Ooyo G., Ulaanbaatar: «Mon sudar» Prinitng LLC.

20. Rossiya i Mongoliya: tsivilizatsionnyye aspekty modernizatsii (sravnitel’nyy analiz) [Russia and Mongolia: civilizational aspects of modernization (comparative analysis)], 2016. /edited by A.S. Zheleznyakov, T.N. Litvinova. Moscow: Institute of Sociology RAS. [Electronic resource] URL: http://www.isras.ru.

21. Tsanjid, A., Chuluunbaatar, G., Ganbat, D., 2008. Democratic principle and integration on the National characteristics and culture. Report on the Grant project on Scientific. Ulaanbaatar.

22. Tsanzhid, A., 2011. Tör barikhui mongol ukhaan [Mongolian art of state management]. «Admon» Printing Company. Ulaanbaatar.

23. Tseveen, Zh., 2000. Tüüverz okhioluud [Selected works]. Ulaanbaatar.

24. Zhelezniakov, A.S., 2012. The Civilisational Dimension of Identity in Multipolar World. Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences. No.11. P.11-21.

25. Zhelezniakov, A.S., 2016. Mongol’skaya tsivilizatsiya: istoriya i sovremennost’. Teoreticheskoye obosnovaniye atlasa. [Mongolian Civilization: History and Modernity. Theoretical Justification of the Atlas]. Moscow.

26. Zhugder, Ch., 2006. Mongolyn niigem uls tör, filosofiin setgelgeenii khögjil. [Development of Mongolian social-political and philosophical though]. Ulaanbaatar, «Bembi san» Printing Company.