Home – Home – Jornals – Professional Education in the Modern World 2019 number 1

Introduction. In the XXI century, society experiences the processes of globalization seen as objective and subjective ones. The first background is based on the general achievements of natural and technical and technological sciences. The second background is determined by the vectors of the most active social interests and forces, according to which different global concepts, strategies of social transformations are developed, priorities for development of socio-humanitarian knowledge and types of socio-humanitarian education are changed. The article identifies the main global strategies of leading social actors, on which the objectives of socio-humanitarian knowledge and education depend. Methodology and research method are seen as follows:. system-structural, structural-functional and prognostic approaches. Methods of analysis, comparison, analogy and integration of results in relation to science and education of the XXI century. Results. The objective processes of globalization as a whole are universal, determined by the general level of global communications on the basis of the achieved scientific and technological progress. Subjectively defined globalization, on the contrary, is differentiated depending on the basic interests of global social forces. The latter develop global strategies for the formation and change of the sociosphere, dictate priority directions of knowledge and education . Identification of modern global social strategies is necessary for understanding sociospheric transitional processes, for determining the current and future states of socio-humanitarian knowledge, education, and life prospects of people on the planet. The author singled out and proposed for discussion two leading modern sociospheric strategies: ethos and centris- tism. Since their implementation should be carried out in different areas of the planet, in regions of the planet, regionalism as an educational and cognitive direction becomes important in the study of these strategies. Accordingly, regionalism is also differentiated into essentially different directions: state regionalism and global regionalism (transregionalism). However, in regional knowledge and education, these forms of regionalism often mix, do not differ, which leads to a misunderstanding of the main perspectives and results of regionalism in different sociospheric strategies. Conclusion. Differential, comparative and prognostic approaches are needed to study the strategies of etacentrism and globocentrism, different forms of regionalism - state and global, analysis of the results of different forms of regional knowledge and identify the fundamental differences of socio-humanitarian education in the noted strategies and forms of regionalism.