Ідеї Просвітництва та особливості їх сучасних трансформацій

The purpose of this research is to carry out a comparative analysis of the proposed variants of Enlightenment ideals in order to demonstrate the complexity of this problem and the diversity of approaches to its resolution. It aims to clarify the boundaries of classical Enlightenment thought and its explications, the Second Enlightenment and the New Enlightenment in particular, and to identify the points at which a transition into a new qualitative stage becomes possible. Theoretical basis. The analysis deals with conceptual approaches that need paradigmatic shifts in the fundamental orientations of humanity. The study draws on interpretations of the classical paradigm of Enlightenment ideals, particularly those by Immanuel Kant, as well as contemporary attempts to support or rehabilitate these ideals under present-day conditions (S. Pinker). Originality. The growing technological and sociocultural transformations have reached a level at which the idea of humanity’s linear development appears increasingly untenable, thereby intensifying the demand for new basic principles of development. The expansion of what may be described as a Nietzschean "Age of the Will" calls into question how the ideals of classical Enlightenment can be implemented in contemporary realities. As there is a substantial shift toward authoritarianism and the decline of liberal democracies, the threat of destabilizing the global international order is becoming increasingly evident. The philosophical analysis therefore focuses on possible strategies for counteracting the rise of authoritarian tendencies, understanding the prospects for combining the volitional dimension with a rational approach. Conclusions. Any assessment or reassessment of the Enlightenment legacy must primarily take into account the current radical transformations in the modern world, including changes of a wide range of fundamental concepts. On the one hand, the values of the Enlightenment is a civilizational achievement that humanity cannot reject, on the other hand, each historical phase requires its own values, regulative principles, and worldview orientations. This gives rise to an urgent question: do contemporary global crises signal a qualitative shift in the interpretation of human value, rationality, and progress, or are they merely temporary obstacles within a potentially progressive trajectory of human development? A fundamental dilemma emerges – either to preserve earlier values or to renew by creating a new set of virtues that could serve as guiding principles for the future development of humanity.