Scientific paradigm changes are frequently accompanied by the reconsideration of central terms and ideas. This article demonstrates how this process is currently underway in Russian anthropological studies [narodovedenie] as part of a broader move away from ethnography to theoretical ethnology. The article also shows lines of succession and divergence between various paradigms currently dominant in Russian anthropology, including primordialism and constructivism, and presents the author’s vision of a definition of “ethnicity”, instruments needed to study ethnicities, the nature of “ethnicity,” the underlying axioms on which ethnicities are conceptualized. An initial attempt has been made in the article to outline the central positions that would provide for a principally new ethnological paradigm by way of a new definition of the phenomenon of ethnicity.

Scientific paradigm changes are frequently accompanied by the reconsideration of central terms and ideas. This article demonstrates how this process is currently underway in Russian anthropological studies [narodovedenie] as part of a broader move away from ethnography to theoretical ethnology. The article also shows lines of succession and divergence between various paradigms currently dominant in Russian anthropology, including primordialism and constructivism, and presents the author’s vision of a definition of “ethnicity”, instruments needed to study ethnicities, the nature of “ethnicity,” the underlying axioms on which ethnicities are conceptualized. An initial attempt has been made in the article to outline the central positions that would provide for a principally new ethnological paradigm by way of a new definition of the phenomenon of ethnicity.

„Art disappearance” (2012)2 is a film by Bartosz Konopka and Piotr Rosołowski, qualified by the authors of the document, but not entirely located within the traditionally understood documentary3. „Art disappearance” combines various genres: classic dokument, found footage and mocumentary. The axis, around which the narrative of the film focuses, is in fact a romantic concept of messianism of the Polish nation by Adam Mickiewicz. Less obviously, however, it is inspired by anthropological reflection of Ryszard Kapuscinski. The author analyzed those topics, associations and inspiration appearing in the film which allow the reader to include „Art of disappearing” among the works of the complicated structure of intertextual references.

The paper aims at reconstructing the fundamentals of the sophistic anthropology. Contrary to the recognized view of the humanistic shift which took place in the sophistic thought, there is evidence that the sophists were continuously concerned with the problems of philosophy of nature. The difference between the sophists and their Presocratic predecessors was that their criticism of the philosophical tradition and the transformative answers given to the old questions were the basis and the starting point of the “ethical” and “rhetorical” part of their intellectual activity. This naturalistic perspective is reflected in their research in the field of medicine and biology, in the discussion about “the human nature”, and in their interest in the individual physiological and mental conditions, which determine the state of the human body and the behaviour of a man. The sophists pioneered in linguistic, rhetorical, and philological studies. To enhance the power of persuasion, they investigated how various mental conditions influenced cognitive processes and physiological reactions. Thus they started a thorough examination of the human psyche, initiating the field of psychology. Although the originality of the sophists in each of the aforementioned aspects is undeniable, a complete picture of the sophists can only be achieved by examining the sources of their thought: the Presocratic philosophical tradition, Hippocratic medicine, and earlier literary tradition.

The study tries to define the anthropology of dialogue as a specific way of thinking on human being; it grounds mainly in Tzvetan Todorov's findings. It comments basic theses of Buber, Levinas, Bachtin, Habermas and Todorov while underlining their mutual interpretability as well as similarity. Because of possible significance of this anthropological conception for professional teacher training, it recommends to reserve some space for the anthropology of dialogue in the area of the philosophy of education thus enabling it to come out of the shadow of more influential anthropological conceptions.