The ternary model of Juri Lotman as the social and cultural basis of education in Russia

Lyudmila A. Klyukina, D.Sc. in Philosophy, Professor, Institute of History, Political and Social Sciences, Department of Philosophy and Cultural Studies, Petrozavodsk State University, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4843-9357, e-mail: klyukina-la77@yandex.ru

Modern philosophers of education tend to recognize that there is a dialectic connection between education and culture — and that interaction between them is imbued its own value and meaning. Juri Lotman gave a name to the space of meaning-making: the semiosphere. Consequently, his ideas of semiotic approach have been used as the philosophical foundation of the connection between Russian culture and education. This article claims scientific novelty as it offers the ternary model of Juri Lotman as the social and cultural basis of education in Russia. It demonstrates that this system makes it possible to resolve every controversy in modern Russia’s education. The principal advantage of this model is that it helps shape the constructive and proactive substance of education, which corresponds with Russian mentality and Russia’s national interests.

Keywords: binary structure, Juri Lotman, education, semioshpere, ternary structure

References

1. Afanasyeva, A.B. The ethnocultural education as a phenomenon of the cultural field: monograph. St. Petersburg: FGBOUVPO “SPBGUTD” Publ., 2014. 188 pp.

2. Bolshakov, S.N., Bolshakova, Yu.M. On the issue of society values: dialogue or conflict? Alma mater (Vestnik vysshey shkoly). 2025. No. 12. Pp. 19–30. https://doi.org/10.20339/AM.12-25.019

3. Verkhovin, V.I., Ionov, A.A. The sociological and cultural interpretation of two civilizational systems in the works of Ju. Lotman. Vestnik of Moscow University. Series 18. Sociology and political science. 2009. No. 3. Pp. 125–142.

4. Gilmeeva, R.Kh. Mutual influence and integration of education and culture. Pedagogical Journal of Bashkortostan. 2025. No. 3 (109). Pp. 97–108. https://doi.org/10.21510/ 1817-3292-2025-109-3-97-108

5. Kargapolova, E.V., Shtykhno, D.A. The Mission of a Modern Russian University: The Transformation of Meanings. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. 2026. Vol. 35. No. 1. Pp. 10–34. https://doi.org/10.31992/0869-3617-2026-35-1-10-34

6. Korol, A.D., Bushmanova, E.A. Artificial Intelligence in the Mirror of Education: The Problem of Dialogue. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. 2025. Vol. 34. No. 2. Pp. 125–135. https://doi.org/10.31992/0869-3617-2025-34-2-125-135

7. Leontiev, D.A. Psychology of Meaning. The Nature, Structure, and Dynamics of Meaningful Reality. Moscow: Smysl, 1999. 486 pp.

8. Lipovetsky, M.N. Tertium Non Datur: A Problem of the Ternary System in Yuri M. Lotman’s Semiotics. Philological Class. 2022. Vol. 27. No. 1. Pp. 63–67. https://doi.org/10.51762/1FK-2022-27-01-07

9. Lotman, Ju.M. Culture and Explosion. Moscow: Gnosis, Progress Publishing Group Publ., 1992. 272 pp.

10. Lotman, Ju.M. Semiosphere. St. Petersburg: Art – SPB, 2000. 704 pp.

11. Polozhikhina, M.A. Science and Education in Russian Uni versities (on the Example of the Direction “Economics and Manage ment”). Science Governance and Scientometrics. 2019. Vol. 14. No. 2. Pp. 84–203. https://doi.org/10.33873/2686-6706.2019.14-2.184-203

12. Reznik, S.D., Kholkina, O.V. Management of the higher education system in Russia: key guidelines for planned transformations. Alma mater (Vestnik vysshey shkoly). 2025. No. 12. Pp. 9–18. https://doi.org/10.20339/AM.12-25.009

13. Sayganova, V.S. Education as an attribute of human being in a globalizing world. Social education. 2021. No. 1 (15). Pp. 4–11.

14. Stepin, V.S. Theoretical knowledge. Moscow: Progress-Tradition Publ., 2003. 744 pp.