“CROSSROADS” OF CULTURE AND EDUCATION AS A METHODOLOGICAL BASIS FOR MODERN PEDAGOGY CONTENT FORMATION

. The article deals with various aspects of culture and education combination in order to seek methodological basis for the formation of new pedagogy content. Particularly, the following aspects which combine culture and education are analyzed: ontological unity of man and society, the common evolution of culture and spirituality and, namely, the dialectical character of connection between phenomena of culture and education. The authors, who base on philosophical and pedagogical sources focus on the thesis about the necessity of developing fundamental approaches to the development of educational content in general. However, researchers consider the contradiction that exists between expediency of rapid contents transformation and their culture stipulated gravitation - the key issue of the current state of affairs. Authors find the solution to this problem in common conceptual and dynamic characteristics of culture and education, which form a specific unity - cultural and educational space. This phenomenon, in its turn, has the ability to generate culture appropriate contents of both modern education and pedagogy.


INTRODUCTION
Modern education is characterized by instability and uncertainty, above all, in its content and principles that received several dimensions, including personal, social and scientific. The reasons for this are the general trends of human society development, which, in its turn, were the result of scientific and technological revolution that had leveled the boundaries of states, nations, professions, personalities. The problems of pedagogical principles are not considered in the article, as the purpose of writing is the search of common, stable principles of formation of modern pedagogy contents. The attempts to solve this problem through the praxeological approaches led to the appearance of a large number of individual concepts, the difference between which is equivalent to the difference between their authors. That is why, the search of methodological principles of studying the unity between culture and education in semantic terms, to our mind, is appropriate to conduct in the context of philosophical ideas, pedagogical concepts and theories. Instead, their specification requires the analysis we face a problem of moral improvement as a separate individual, as well as a separate society and the entire human community. At last, moral perfection will have the ability to overcome intolerance, hatred, alienation. In such a way, according to Kant, the idea of "morality" acquires higher reveletion of human culture. "Through art and science, we have achieved a high level of culture. We are too civilized in terms of any tolerance and attentiveness in communication with each other. But we still lack a lot to be considered morally perfect. In fact, the idea of morality belongs to culture, but the application of this idea, which is only limited to likeness of morality in love, to honor and to outward decency, is only civilization" [17, p. 18]. According to Kant, two lines of human development as if have crossed in culture: the need of physical perfection, which is the "culture of all abilities for the facilitation of the mind-given aim" [18, p. 326] and the necessity of moral perfection "culture of morality in us", which implies "to fulfill your moral obligation, and, due to, the sense of duty (in order to make a law not only a rule, but also a motive of deeds)" [18, p. 327].
So, considering culture as a content of "public value of a man", the philosopher developed a teleological method, which was the basis for the analysis of all the phenomena and processes similar to a purposeful free human activity, that is a priori grounded on the pure principles of mind. In addition, Kant's works about teleological character of nature, where a man is one of its units, and at the same time is a phenomenon and noumenon, then it proves that culture -is not only its ultimate goal, but a tool that is able to liberate it from a purely physical, empirical conditions of daily existence [1, p. 222].
Culture is a special existence of a man and society, not only because of their humanization, but also creativity, said Kant. The development of creative skills of man and society, mutual enrichment of value systems are on the basis of real culture. Thus, in the field of goal-setting, a man assumes a divine function of creation in the sphere of culture. People create culture as a living organism and contemplate the deeds of their hands and mind, manifested intuitive ability that captures particular in general and general in particular. Such cognition is possible only as a culture-creating activity and is inherent to human activity and to the activities of collective entities -universities, which also perform goal-setting and culture creation.
The ontological approach to the nature and content of culture is also inherent to G. Hegel (1770-1831). Instead, the scientist largely denies the subjectivism of Kant and proves that the appearance and development of culture is objective and historical by its nature. The manifestation of culture of individual and society -is the manifestation of absolute spirit. Cultural development of an individual reproduces all levels of self-knowledge of world spirit, starting with the most primitive subject consciousness and ending with absolute knowledge, that is the knowledge of all the shapes and laws that rule the process of spiritual development from inside. This process becomes a conscious selfknowledge of the world spirit, and therefore the essence of culture can be understood just from the path that the human spirit has passed in order to understand its own organization, which is identical to the organization of the Universe. Such formula of culture is considered to be axiomatic "Culture -is a man-made 'second nature'" [12, p. 83]. The philosopher believed that culture is the foundation of life, the absolute value of man and society.
Contrary to the rational views of G. Hegel, F. Shelling and others, who are the representatives of irrational direction (F. Nietzsche, A. Schopenhauer) also argued that culture is a special existence of human being and society. However, according to their understanding, the ontological aspects of culture are not in the mind of man and in the universe mind, but -in a will. Culture -is a global will, it is the inner strength, which encourages the mankind to active culture creation. The higher the degree of objectivity of will, the more it reveals itself as the idea of culture, and its existence in itself resembles the Platonic world of ideas. At the level of an individual -a man is guided by motives and culture needs, at the same time, revealing the freedom of will. Where there is a low exposure of will, there is a low level of culture, which tragically affects human life, society and humanity. The expression of barbarism is man's selfishness, jealousy, aggression and so on. It is culture, which is able to overcome evil, make us human, to inoculate us conscience, justice, compassion, empathy and so on. And, after all, a man is a man to the extent he creates himself: "What the individual is like and what he has inside, so, his identity and his dignity -are the only things, which are directly connected with his happiness and prosperity. All the other conditions are only of mediated nature..." [24, p. 365].
The philosophy of Schopenhauer made a significant impact on the "philosophy of life", which was set up by F. Nietzsche . Exactly this scientist largely determined a new cultural and philosophical orientation of the late XIX -early XXI centuries. The style of thinking, methodology and language paradigms, which were specified by Nietzsche, has become samples and standards of European culture for a long time. Nietzsche claimed that all the problems of modern culture are related to the fact that it focuses on science, and the last one is based on unnatural (strange, instinctive in its core) mind. Taking all the above mentioned into account, about understanding of the origination of culture, Nietzsche created his own doctrine. For this thinker, the central issue was the following one: in what way to create such a culture, subordinating to which a person could improve his inner world and educate himself. The philosopher devotes such works to the development of this idea: "The birth of Tragedy", "Human too human", "Morning Star", "Also Zarathustra said" and others. Namely, in the last of the mentioned works F. Nietzsche asserts the supreme value of human cultural improvement, the result of which will be a man, who surpasses modern man with his moral and intellectual qualities. The role of the cultural and ethical ideal F. Nietzsche offers to a supreme man. This idea is one of the main in the design of his teachings. A supreme man -is a person who has overcome his physical nature, thanks to his will, self-creation, has reached new spiritual qualities.
Nietzsche believed that there existed the morality of slaves and officials in every culture. Servants, who seek universal equality, create cultural ideals are responsible for the current low state of culture. So, not only criticism is necessary, but a radical reassessment of European cultural values on the basis of dynamics of real life. Life itself becomes an important part of the global process, where the main thing is the will to power. "Not poverty, not passion -no! Love to power -wrote F. Nietzsche -is the demon of men. Give them everything -health, food, housing, education -and they will be unhappy, dissatisfied because the demon waits, waits and strives for pleasure. Take everything from them and satisfy all their demons, and they will be happy, so happy, as only the men of demon can be" [19, p. 117].
The implementation of Nietzsche's ideas in the philosophy of the XX century was carried out in different directions. On the one hand -these are a variety of literature versions associated with the names of M. Blanshot, P. Klossovskyy, A. Camus. On the other -very influential philosophical interpretations of G. Gadamer and P. Ricoeur, M. Heidegger, G. Deleuze and J. Derrida, J.-P. Sartre, K. Jaspers and others.
In particular, the representatives of existentialism (A. Camus, J.-P. Sartre, M. Heidegger, K. Jaspers, etc.), justifying the idea of culture as a special existence of human being and society, stressed that existence of the human race beyond culture is either impossible, or becomes inferior and tragic. Man is able to realize his fundamental-specific place at the universe providing the existence of freedom and culture. For example, according to J.-P. Sartre, man is "condemned to be free", otherwise his life is already non-existence. A person can only realize his own project of humanity in freedom and culture. "... We want to emphasize -wrote Sartre -that first of all, man exists, that man -is a creature who strives for future and understands that he projects himself into the future. Man -is primarily a project that is experiencing subjectively, but not moss, not mold and not a cauliflower. Nothing exists to this project in the sky, that is perceived by mind, and a man will become a man according to his project of life. ... So, existentialism gives every person his life in possession and makes him fully responsible for his existence" [21, p. 323].
Hermeneutic interpretation of culture, as a special existence of man and society (G. Gadamer, P. Ricker, W. Dilthey, F. Schleiermacher, J. Habermas, etc.), basically comes to ontological nature of the hermeneutic circle, that expresses the specific feature of the process of understanding related to its cyclical nature. In this sense, the representatives of hermeneutics pay great attention to providing cultural dialogue and to mutual understanding of nations. To their mind, only culture makes possible moral and social solidarity among its members. Dialogue becomes a common way of the interpretation "Crossroads" of Culture and Education as a Methodological Basis… 43 of the world: as any "world" is able to cognize the other, it is also able to expand its own image of the world; and it, eventually, becomes available to other worlds.
The problem of dialogue is inseparable from the ways and methods of interpretation the text of culture, from the position of an interpreter. The thing is about mastering the information contained in the text, about understanding and interpretation of the vision of the world, which is typical for it. Dialogue involves joining different cultures, their mutual understanding and enrichment. This path often runs through debate and discussions. These ideas ground on phenomenologically-hermeneutic approach in the study of cultural and educational space at Pedagogical University [27]. Thus, hermeneutics is, firstly, the ontology of understanding; secondly, it limits the principle of reflection to the principle of understanding; thirdly, it considers that the primary reality of the human being is his existence in language. "In language environment -G. Gadamer wrote -real historically-vital relationships take place, which can be called understanding, also in the case with the interpretation of texts. The linguistic nature of understanding, the core, the specificity of effective historical consciousness" [7, p. 452-453].
Native philosophical and pedagogical thought has also made a significant contribution to the justification of the idea, according to which culture is a special existence of a man and society. One of the leading thoughts of G.S. Skovoroda is the following: where there is no freedom, there is no culture, and -and vice versa. Free man looks for himself inside himself, but not only for himself, but also for others: "Gather thoughts within yourself and seek inside for real blessing. Dig a well inside yourself to water both your house and your neighbor's. ... Only then the heart becomes saturatedwhen educated" [25, p. 169-174].
Existential-existent tradition of philosophical and pedagogical thought was thoroughly developed by native philosopher P.D. Yurkevych, who believed that spirit is the absolute foundation of existence and human activity. The idea, as a perfect substance, is not only the basis for cognition, it permeates cultural experience of both man and society [30, p. 25].
The idea of P.D. Yurkevych is supplemented with the concept of "philosophy of the heart". According to this scientist, the center of each life is the heart. It arises as a profound basis of human truth, moral and spiritual source of cultural identity. Heart -is the center of man's spiritual life. Knowledge can be well gained, only penetrating into the heart.
Brilliant poet and thinker T.G. Shevchenko also believed that the sense of human existence is freedom. The existence of Ukraine is considered through the prism of contradictions by this culturaleducational activist. The lack of culture, enslaving of Ukrainian people by foreigners, he perceives as a tragedy to contemporaries and, at the same time, optimistic for future generations.
This position is also present in the works of the giant spirit of Ukrainian people -I.Ya. Franko. According to the philosopher, the spiritual ideal for society is a free nation as a cultural organism that is able to adopt universal cultural values; overcoming spiritual alienation concerning national cultural traditions; preservation of national and cultural identity. I. Franko fought for his opinion, according to which: a free individual -free society, and vice versa: free, democratic society -free, cultural identity. D.I. Chyzhevsky considered existence as an integral substance. "Ontological stability", according to the philosopher -is a way of human existence in cultural environment. The main condition of "ontological stability" -is the relationship of an individual with "here-existence", respectively -the separation of a man from "here-existence" is the reason for "ontological instability", lack of culture, the loss of himself. D.I. Chyzhevsky was one of those, who first applied conceptual apparatus and methods of European science in the history of Ukrainian culture and interpreted Ukrainian culture in the context of European cultural process, discovered achievements of Ukrainian Baroque to the world science [2].
Hermeneutic problems of culture as a special existence of man and society were thoroughly studied in the national philosophical and pedagogical thought in the works of M.S. Grushevsky, I.I. Ohiyenko, O.O. Potebnia, Lesia Ukrainka and many others.
The eminent language philosopher O.O. Potebnia proved that language is a key element of culture, that human and national existence acquired cultural sense thanks to language. Mutual understanding among nations becomes possible through language and, at the same time, language represents originality and identity of a nation. Such hermeneutic approach allows O.O. Potebnia to formulate the idea of the unity of culture, education, thinking and language. Berdiayev thinks that the main attribute of spirituality is freedom that connects the human and the divine and reveals itself in the creation not only of cultural objects, but also of own life, which is constantly developing. In modern domestic philosophical and pedagogical thought horizons of spirituality are outlined through such triads: imagination-intuition-mind; belief-conscience-will; love-joy-hope and others [29, p. 35-43].

CULTURE AND SPIRITUAL DEVELOPMENT
Besides others, culture has the peculiarity that it is always aimed at the development of the spiritual world of the individual. In this context, culture expresses subjective-personal aspect of history, because of an active influence of the culture of the past on the culture of the future. This impact on the development of spirituality of an individual and society can be regarded according to the own selfdetermination. Without taking this aspect into account, it's impossible to explain the progress of culture in human history. That is why, it is vitally important for every person living in a society, to strive consciously for mastering culture, creating it with his activity, spiritually organizing the world. The lack of spirituality of an individual and society -is the death of humanity. Concerning this aspect, the thought of E. Husserl is extremely important "... revolutionization of whole culture, revolutionization of all culture-making way of human existence" [11, p. 638].
Education is aimed at helping in this process -creating a new culture and spirituality. As Russian philosopher I.O. Ilyin emphasized that both culture and education fulfill their mission when they realize "... spiritual examination of our soul acts and our subject matter: in separate people and in small groups, in religious circles, philosophical societies and whole cultural movements, people will unite viewing sacred origins of their lives, they will contemplate the life of their heart and judge about it -as it should be and as it actually is, and what it lacks. ... Mankind needs renovation of spirit and culturing the instinct, returning to the evangelic faith, and not "clean gloves", which were promised by antichrist" [14, p. 402].

CULTURE AND EDUCATION
These two phenomena are dialectically connected with each other, as well as with the aims of society and every individual. Emphasizing this idea, I. Kant accentuates that it is important for pedagogy, "that man must be intelligent, appropriate for society, pleasant and influential" [15, p. 454], and that a high level of individual culture can be achieved through education and self-education, where the first layer -is "the culture of the skill", which is the ability to act, "to assist in achieving the goals" [16, p. 464], and the second one -is "the culture of education", which is the exemption of will from the influence of desires, instincts that "make us incapable of self-reliant choice" [16, p. 465], the possibility of independent goal setting. Exactly, through the joint aiming at freedom of choices in culture, improving of human nature, the ideas of culture and education, which are connected by Kant, who acknowledged that education is, at the same time, the art (expression of culture), which was developed by all human generations, on the basis of predecessors' experience, "proportionally and purposefully", improving natural skills that "will lead mankind to its purpose" [15, p. 450]. So, the realization of functionality by pedagogy should take place not just on the border of culture and education, but in their interconnection and interaction.
The supporter of this idea was J.-G. Fichte, who argued that the leading role in the relationship between culture and education belongs to the teacher, as it is he, who connects cultural and educational functions in his practical activity, in the process of learning and education, inoculates the culture of relations, consciousness to his pupils [5, p. 753]. Uniting cultural and educational goals with the development of society, the philosopher and educator understands that the direction of education is not towards the actual level of the development of culture, but towards "the height to which it can rise from here and what means it will use" [5, p. 760]. Such approach is an attempt to ground logically the principle of culture expediency in pedagogy, which was proved by J. Pestalozzi, K.D. Ushynsky and especially -by A. Diesterweg. The last one, who emphasized the primacy of the principle of nature conformity, wrote: "The principle of nature conformity has been established since the primordial times on pedagogical horizon, as a bright light that never fades, never changes its position of leading light. It is the Pole, the axis around which all the others pedagogical and methodological rules revolve, that gravitate towards them. They form a circle, set ..." and further: "... there is another principle, which limits the principle of nature conformity, though it is in its subordination. This is the principle of culture conformity, whose rights can not be denied, thus it can not have a claim on universality, such as the principle of nature conformity" [4, p. 227-228].
J. Pestalozzi, who dedicated his life to the education of unfortunate children and the poor, had, unconventional for his time, solution to the idea of interconnection between culture and education. An outstanding educator and humanist based his views on the criticism of Kant and argued that it is the state to be blamed for the low level of culture and education of people. The authoritarian state is not able to ensure properly the high level of culture and education of the individual. It can only be done by a lawful state, built on the principles of humanism and democracy. As the educator considered, the destructive consequences of the illegal state, slavery of the individual are evident. "Dreadful altar of social depravity of mankind is brightly burning, and the sacred flame of spiritual life extinguished to the last spark" -sadly noted J. Pestalozzi [20, p. 145].
The author of the idea of "developing education and training" emphasized: the society, in which legal concepts -are empty sounds, the society, in which legal entities -are conceited people, who seek power only in order to eat and drink deliciously, such society gives no possibility to an individual to realize himself, neither in culture, no in education. To our mind, this principle of a humanist and an educator is extremely important today. Current national pedagogical community suffers greatly from the fusion of political and pedagogical, on conditions of the leading role of political. The negative impact of political on cultural and educational processes leads to lack of spirituality, immorality, demoralization of personality, professional burning out of a pedagogue.
F.-W. Schelling believed that the main content of culture is art, which he understood not only as creative works of art, but as the reflection of the Absolute in a certain work, giving it a transcendental character. The philosopher linked the origin of culture and real opportunities for its development with mythology, claiming that myth is as "a grand gene", is central in the functioning of all cultures. It is the leading principle of the initial unity of culture and education, the unity of mankind, the symbolic expression of reality, which is outlined in the "Historical and critical introduction to the philosophy of mythology" [29]. According to F. Schelling, external relation between culture and education is organizing: general organization of science, that exists in cultural and educational space of the university, as properly organized tradition, which is passed to pupils by the means of education. In such a way, F. Schelling states that culture and education are connected both with internal, relations of organically continuing education and external relations of the historic retelling [23, p. 16] The source, the conditions of the existence of culture are myths, and the role of their content transmitter is well performed by the organized education.
The most consistent in the reflection and implementation of the philosophical ideas of F. Schelling and J. Pestalozzi was J.-F. Froebel, who was a German teacher, theorist of preschool education, he believed that the idea of cultural and educational unity has to be actively implemented since the preschool age of a child. To that purpose, he created kindergartens, where children had to be brought up in different spheres, but taking into account their age and physiological characteristics. The pedagogue created a system of didactic games (the so called -six Froebel's Gifts), with the help of which children acquainted themselves not only with the culture of the native people, but also with the culture of other countries. The ideas and practical results of education of pre-school children were widely popular in Ukraine at the beginning of the XX century and under present-day conditions of the functioning of educational system [6].
The problems of cultural and educational unity were actively investigated by J.-G. Herder. In his book "The ideas to the philosophy of the mankind's history" [13] scientist argued that cultural and educational space is historical by its nature. According to him, the determinant factor of culture and education interrelation and essence is the presence of history of development and collectively-unitary nature. Language occupies a special place in this relationship. "Every language -is a mould, where national ideas and concepts are formed, stored and transmitted" -wrote J. Herder [13, p. 297]. Reflecting on the relationship of education and culture, applying the category of development to them, J. Herder explained their common evolution in human dimension: "A man is brought up only by imitation and practice: the prototype turns into reflection, it is best to call this retelling or tradition... The education of the human race -is the process both genetic, and organic; genetic -due to the transfer of traditions, organic -through adoption and application of the transferred. We can call this process ... the culture, which is etymologically, cultivation, and we can recall the image of light and call it enlightenment, then the chain of culture and education will stretch to the end of the earth" [13, p. 230]. Regarding the process of culture evolution, J. Herder did not consider possible its progressive forward motion, as changes in the culture can not happen smoothly, only having been accumulated, they cause its relative movement, which is not quantitative, but qualitative: "Culture is moving forward, but it does not make it perfect; the new place develops new skills; previous, being developed at the old place, irrevocably disappear" [13, p. 426]. To our mind, this conclusion is important for analyzing the innovative susceptibility of cultural and educational space at Pedagogical University and for the development of general approaches to the study of innovations in culture, including -pedagogical activity. Internal co-ordination of cultural conceptions of J. Herder and G.S. Skovoroda is evident. R.Yu. Danilevski wrote about it: "Both thinkers stick to peculiar idealistic monism -understanding of the world as a single, reasonable, thought in detail and well-organized unity" [3, p. 713-714]. However, culturally, there is a man in the center of G.S. Skovoroda's concept: "Man -is a heart" [26, p. 317 In particular, K.D. Ushynsky at his work "Man as the subject of education. An attempt of pedagogical anthropology" wrote that culture, as art, and education -is sisters and their interaction is a primary factor of human development, his interests, needs, spirituality, creativity and so on. Expanding this statement, a scientist argued that culture and education determine the content of human life, not only by means of cognition and self-knowledge, but also by means of overcoming their own narrowmindedness, making the individual universal, they must serve the idea of nationality, which is the main component of the educational system. Nevertheless, a prominent pedagogue was not only limited to purely national approach, he always emphasized: "Every educated nation is of great importance in science only, when it enriches it with the truths that remain stable and invariable for all nations" [28, p. 194-195]. And then asked: "in what way, the nation that created its own national science, incomprehensible to other nations can be useful for other nations? Could the science eventually move forward if every nation created its own special science, without mastering the results, gained by its predecessors and contemporaries?" [28, p. 195]. However, this does not concern the system of education: "Despite the similarity of educational forms of all the European nations, each of them has its own, special, national education system, its own special aim and its specific means for achieving it",stressed K.D. Ushynsky [28, p. 198].
Such scientists as S.F. Rusova, A.V. Dukhnovych, Ya.F. Chepiga, I.M. Yushchyshyn, G.G. Vashchenko, V.O. Sukhomlynsky and other domestic pedagogues follow these views and prove that national culture does not deny multiculturalism. They stressed that national education has to coincide with the education of the individual, his freedom. On this occasion, B.D. Grinchenko wrote: "Always and everywhere show children that their nation is a member of a large family, and young readers must acquaint themselves with this big family, though, of course, not as in details, as with their nation. Fighters for the weal of mankind will be especially interesting here: Garibaldi, Lincoln, Howard, Hetenberg, Galileo" [10, p. 48].
In his work "Jean Masse and French League of national education", B.D. Grinchenko stressed on the unifying power of culture and education, "Is there any other thing that would favour fraternal unity of nations, as a matter of national education. And this fraternal unity -is the hope of all humanity, and also ours" [9, p. 80].
It is easy to see that the idea of the famous Ukrainian teacher and educator is quite clear: the dialogue of cultures, educations contribute to the spiritual development of every nation and people.
The interaction of culture and education is controversial. An outstanding Russian pedagogue S.J. Gessen stressed that these contradictions occur both inside each phenomenon, and in their interaction. Contradictions must be opportunely detected and resolved, but not ignored, which is very important. Education has always been a problem of culture, as it always gives a person means to identify these meanings. "If the problem of culture is a problem of education, then it is obvious that the denial of culture is associated with the denial of history and leads to the denial of education", -wrote S.J. Gessen [8, p. 38].
The attitude of those in power to the culture and education, to the needs of development, society and the individual is clearly not adequate in our country and it extremely hinders our progress in all fields and spheres of life. And even a new law "About higher education ", which was adopted by the Supreme Council of Ukraine on July 1, 2014, left a lot of unanswered questions in the sphere of relationship between culture and education. One of them is that educational institutions have not become the centers of culture and qualitative education of the individual yet. As P.Yu. Saukh fairly writes: "Trying to improve the Ukrainian education system, we didn't care and don't care that the medicine that is used can be even more dangerous than the disease itself. Having begun "experimenting" with education, we didn't manage to make an objective audit of its condition, didn't diagnose exactly and immediately began to move with the world. We are too concerned to keep up with the fashion. The depth of the reforms, which are required by an innovative society, as if doesn't concern us" [22, p. 4]. The author emphasizes that many problems that exist at different levels of modern national education -are not only the lack of funds, but rather a deformation of educational strategies, values, cultural and educational space of universities, deterioration of the quality of education, which is associated with the poor professional training of teaching staff and making higher education of mass character. Today, education, more than ever, needs a cultural and civilizational selfidentification, the balance of the educational process, proper social status of a teacher, that is clearly emphasized by I.D. Bekh, G.P. Vasyanovych, I.A. Zyazyun, S.B. Krymsky, V.O. Kudin, M.O. Otych, O.P. Rudnytska and other modern scientists. On this way the important task of culture and education is, firstly, to teach people humane relationships, ability to coexist harmoniously, education and culture should not move away from each other, but powerfully interact for the weal of a man and humanity.

CONCLUSIONS
Taking into account the formulated thematic framework, we can come to the conclusion that problem of culture and education unity was comprehended by philosophers, educators, sociologists, culture workers at all stages of human development. Culture, as a special existence of a human being and society has a contradictory tendency of its development. Together in a dialectical unity with education, it consolidates the idea of spiritual and moral growth not only of the individual, but also of the society and it actively reacts to its civilization challenges. Culture and education are powerful phenomena of communication and understanding among people; they make modern informational world more humane, form a cultural and educational space, which is much needed by a man. This phenomenon combines the senses of tradition and innovation in the content of modern pedagogy that is fundamental both in the creation of new meanings and in the reinterpretation of the existing ones.