The article settles the task of the research and testing of new effective forms of development of humanitarian knowledge. Such cinema technologies are the film seminar, interactive lectures, video seminars, prepared discus- sion on the film, etc. Authors analyze humanitarian and moral sphere of man and society through analysis of cultural and moral determinants, reflected in the works of cinema. The relevance of the article is determined with the obvious crisis of the institutional forms which still develop the fundamental cultural and philosophical education, and which leads to the obsolescence of the translation forms of generalized knowledge. The authors believe that the intensification of the modernization process of the forms of humanitarian knowledge development will contribute to more efficient formation of common cultural and professional competences of future specialists. Outdated knowledge paradigm is supplanted by a system of methods of students’ creative abilities activation. In the broad context of culture visualization the perception of the thematic blocks of the various Humanities disciplines through active viewing and interpretation of movie passes effectively. Film seminar provides an opportunity to convey educational material in the form of an artistic image; to see the diversity of social and cultural explication of the ideas and values of modernity. The Central concept of the article is built around the creation of new forms of presentation of the lecture material and practical training, which must be problematic and must have the search character to develop the students’ mental activity, to form their cultural competence. The aim of the article is to study and disclosure of the volume meaning and the functional versatility of the cinematic image in the context of the development of the content of the Humanities in higher education. Scientific novelty of the article is opened in the integrative nature of the study. Simultaneously the authors consider, classify, and formulate in the form of methodical recommen- dations: 1) the variety of interpretive practices in the process of understanding the film text; 2) the ability of the cinematic image to accumulate and transmit knowledge about culture, society and man; 3) specific procedures for mastering humanitarian knowledge in the context of global imaging culture.
visual culture, visual anthropology, screen culture, interpretation, interactive methods of teaching, film seminar, competency-based education, cinema technology, self-understanding, personality, general cultural competence
1. Averincev S., Beauty as holiness. Kur’er, July, 1988, pp. 12–13. (In Russ).
2. Aronson O.V., Cinema-Text and Texts about Films, International Journal of Cultural Research, 2012, no. 2 (7), pp. 21–24. (In Russ).
3. Aronson O., Kommunikativnyj obraz. Kino. Literatura. Filosofija (Communicative appearance. Movie. Literature. Philosophy). Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2007. (In Russ).
4. Bugaeva L.D., On Kino-Narrative. International Journal of Cultural Research, 2012, no. 2 (7), pp. 6–10. (In Russ).
5. Romanov P., Jarskaja-Smirnova E., Vizual’naja antropologija: gorodskie karty pamjati (Visual anthropology: urban memory cards). Moscow: ООО «Variant», CSPGI, 2009. (In Russ).
6. Romanov P., Jarskaja-Smirnova E., Vizual’naja antropologija: nastrojka optiki (Visual anthropology: setting up the optics). Moscow: ООО «Variant», CSPGI, 2009. (In Russ).
7. Romanov P., Jarskaja-Smirnova E., Krutkin V., Vizual’naja antropologija: novye vzgljady na social’nuju real’nost’: Sb. nauch. st. (Visual anthropology: new views to social reality: Collection of scientific articles). Saratov: Nauchnaja kniga, 2006. (In Russ).
8. Romanov P., Jarskaja-Smirnova E., Vizual’naja antropologija: rezhimy vidimosti pri socializme (Visual anthropology: re- gimes of visibility under socialism). Moscow: ООО «Variant», CSPGI, 2009. (In Russ).
9. Grey G., Cinema: Visual anthropology. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2014. (In Russ).
10. Ikonnikova I.K., Nikolaev N.G., Program of «Visual sociology as an investigating means of contemporary culture. Cinema as a sociological text. Minor «In the labyrinths of culture: a sociological guide to modern societies.» Sec. 4, Moscow: Higher school of Economics, 2016. (In Russ).
11. Koreckaja M.A., Screen versions of mythological texts: lost in translation. Vestnik Samarskoj gumanitarnoj akademii. Serija «Filosofija. Filologija», 2010, no. 1 (7), no. 13–32. (In Russ).
12. Kurennoj V.A., Filosofija povsednevnyh veshhej (Philosophy of everyday things). Moscow: ООО «Junajted Press», 2011, 253 p. (In Russ).
13. Kurennoj V.A., Filosofija fil’ma: uprazhnenija v analize (Philosophy of film: exercises in the analysis). Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2009. (In Russ).
14. Lotman Ju.M., Semiotika kino i problemy kinojestetiki (Semiotics of cinema and problems of cinema aesthetics). St. Peters- burg: Iskusstvo-SPB, 1998. (In Russ).
15. Metz C. Le signifiant imaginaire. Psychanalyse et cinema. St. Petersburg: Izd-vo Evropejskogo un-ta v Sankt-Peterburge, 2010. (In Russ).
16. Morozov I.A., Fenomen kukly v tradicionnoj i sovremennoj kul’ture. Kross-kul’turnoe issledovanie ideologii antropomorfizma (The phenomenon of dolls in traditional and modern culture. Cross-cultural study of the ideology of anthropomorphism). Moscow: «Indrik», 2011. (In Russ).
17. Saenko N.R., From Ignorance to Cognition (the film by J. Jarmusch «Dead Man»). Grani poznanija, 2013, no. 6 (26), pp. 32–46. (In Russ).
18. Saenko N.R., Shheglov I.V., Routines of «Implantation» of the screen in life of the modern person. Kaspijskij region: poli- tika, jekonomika, kul’tura, 2012, no. 4 (33), pp. 275–282. (In Russ).
19. Smirnov I.P., Videorjad. Istoricheskaja semantika kino (Video. Historical semantics of cinema). St. Petersburg: Izd. do «Petropolis», 2009. (In Russ).
20. Hessmondhalgh D. Cultural Industries. Moscow, 2014, pp. 311–319. (In Russ).
21. Sharikov A.V. Mediaobrazovanie: Mirovoj i otechestvennyj opyt (Media education: World and domestic experience). Mos- cow: Izd-vo Akademii pedagogicheskih nauk, 1990. (In Russ).
22. Shcheglova L.V., Apocalyptic aesthetics of Luchino Visconti (film «Death in Venice»). Grani poznanija, 2013, no. 6 (26), pp. 1–14. (In Russ).
23. Shcheglova L.V., The importance of ethics in the era of aestheticism. Izvestiya Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo peda- gogicheskogo universiteta, 2003, no. 2 (03), pp. 3–9. (In Russ).
24. Shcheglova L.V., Shipulina N.B., Val’kovskii A.V., The use of innovative interactive learning technologies in teaching dis- ciplines of the Department of theory and history of culture. The use of innovative technologies in the educational process. Scientific-methodical Council of the University. Volgograd: Izdatel’stvo VGPU «Peremena», 2011, pp. 38–48. (In Russ).
25. Shcheglova L.V., Heuristic potential of culturology and philosophy of culture. Izvestiya Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta, 2011, no. 8 (62), pp. 170–176. (In Russ).
26. Yampol’skii M., Vidimyi mir. Ocherki rannei kinofenomenologii (The rest of the world. Essays on early cinema phenomenol- ogy). Moscow: Kinovedcheskie zapiski, 1993. (In Russ).
27. Yampol’skii M., Demon i labirint. Diagrammy, deformatsii, mimesis (The demon and the labyrinth. Diagrams, deformations, mimesis). Moscow: NLO, 1996. (In Russ).
28. Yampol’skii M., Muratova. Opyt kinoantropologii (Muratova. Experience of Movie anthropology). St. Petersburg: Seans, 2008. (In Russ).
29. Yampol’skii M., Nablyudatel’. Ocherki istorii videniya. Izdanie vtoroe (Observer. Essays on the history of vision. Second edi- tion). St. Petersburg: Seans, 2012. (In Russ).
30. Yampol’skii M., Nablyudatel’. Ocherki istorii videniya (Observer. Essays on the history of vision). Moscow: Ad Marginem, 2000. (In Russ).
31. Yampol’skii M., O blizkom. Ocherki nemimeticheskogo zreniya (About the close. Essays about non-mimetic view). Moscow: NLO, 2001. (In Russ).
32. Yampol’skii M., Pamyat’ Tiresiya. Intertekstual’nost’ i kinematograf (The Memory Of Tiresias. Intertextuality and cinema). Moscow: РИК Культура, 1993 (Ad Marginem). (In Russ).
33. Yampol’skii M., Skvoz’ tuskloe steklo: 20 glav o neopredelennosti (Through a dim glass: 20 chapters on uncertainty). Mos- cow: NLO, 2010. (In Russ).
34. Yampol’skii M., Tkach i vizioner. Ocherki istorii reprezentatsii, ili O material’nom i ideal’nom v kul’ture (The weaver and the visionary. Essays on the history of representation, or about material and ideal culture). Moscow: NLO, 2007. (In Russ).
35. Yampol’skii M., Khichkok / Tryuffo (Hitchcock / Truffaut). Moscow: Eizenshteinovskii tsentr issledovanii kinokul’tury, 1996. (In Russ).
36. Yampol’skii M., Yazyk – telo – sluchai: Kinematograf i poiski smysla (Language – body – case: Cinema and the search for meaning). Moscow: NLO, 2004. (In Russ).
37. Bacon H., How Direct is our Perception of Film? International Journal of Cultural Research, 2012, no. 2 (7), pp. 11–20.
38. Baudry J.-L. Ideological Effects of the Basic Cinematographic Apparatus. Film Quarterly, 1974, vol. 28(2), pp. 39–47, p. 40.
