{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027829313543599257, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00927643784786642, 'mean_word_length': 5.536363636363636, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Towards the Conceptualization of Occupations and Professions’ Explosion

The paper proposes the mainstreaming of the conceptual potential of Yu. M. Lotman (1922–1993) and M. K. Petrov (1923–1987) scientific and philosophical heritage relating to the theory of explosive complexity, increasing diversity and instability, which our society has recently been observing in occupational, vocational and professional spheres and the related social institutions (professional associations, professional education, professional guidance, etc.). Heterogeneous and heteronomic being-in-common (Fr. partage) in light of the works of J.-L. Nancy (b. 1940) is the most important heuristic intuition of the proposed updating. It allows one to think through a single, but flexible, multi-directionally transformable and polysemantic framework for the future theory of rapidly updated professional diversity, its explanation, forecast of likely development scenarios and strategies for self-determination within it and management strategies in relation to it. The authors present the conceptual unfolding of the intuition of being-in-common (partage) to be compatible with both the theoretical provisions of the semiotics of culture of Yu. М. Lotman and the socio-cultural dynamics of M. K. Petrov. Professionology is still searching for a methodological platform that would complement its retrospective generalizations and interdisciplinary discontinuity. The actualization of the potential of the concept of compatibility allows it to consolidate multidisciplinary research and its results and to guide them along the path of careful and, at the same time, bold theoretical construction in accordance with what social processes declare themselves to be. The authors observe the readiness of today’s multidisciplinary discourse to unite on such a methodological platform that allows for not to being lost in it under the influence of priorities and presumptions that are inevitable for the methodology, but, at the same time, focusing the collective efforts of occupational researchers on the most promising and practice-oriented aspects of the subject of their research.