Russian philosophy of the middle of the 19th century. Abstract of lectures on philosophy. Philosophical teachings of Westerners and Slavophiles

The problematic field of Russian philosophy of the 19th century is divided into three relatively autonomous, but closely interacting spheres: consciousness (faith-knowledge), values ​​(altruism-egoism), action (apolitism-revolutionism). Russian philosophy is presented as a variety of philosophical doctrines, systems, schools and traditions organized around two poles: the philosophy of totality (integrity, collectivity) and the philosophy of individuality. This is a specific feature of Russian philosophy of the XIX century. However, being an organic part of world philosophy, it includes its problems developed within the framework of the main currents of new European philosophical thought.

The beginning of independent philosophical thought in Russia in the 19th century is associated with the names of the Slavophiles I.V. Kireevsky(1800-1856) and A.S. Khomyakov(1804-1860). Their philosophy was an attempt to refute the German style of philosophizing on the basis of a new interpretation of Christianity, based on the writings of the Eastern Church Fathers and arising as a result of the national identity of Russian spiritual life.

Slavophilism as a peculiar trend in Russian philosophy includes the views of K.S. Aksakov (1817-1860), Yu.F. Samarina (1819-1876), N.Ya. Danilevsky (1822-1885), N.N. Strakhova (1828-1896), K.N. Leontiev.

All the main spheres of philosophical constructions of the Slavophiles gravitate towards the pole of "totality". Orthodoxy is interpreted by them as the foundation of worldview and knowledge, which provides the possibility of harmonizing all human abilities in a single "integral knowledge"; monarchy - as an ideal form of society, protecting society and the people from political and formal legal relations (and even more so from revolutionary violence). The peasant community acted in their scheme as an ideal " moral world”, within which only a truly moral subject is possible, harmoniously combining the personal and collective principles. They substantiated the originality of the path of Russia's historical development.

In the controversy and struggle against Slavophilism, a philosophy of individuality developed, gravitating towards Westernism. The most notable representatives of Westernism are: P.Ya. Chaadaev, N.V. Stankevich, V.G. Belinsky, A.I. Herzen. They were guided by the ideals of Western European civilization and criticized Orthodoxy. P. Annenkov in his "Literary Memoirs" noted that the dispute between the Slavophiles and the Westernizers is a dispute between two different types of the same Russian patriotism. The Westernizers never rejected the historical conditions that give a special character to the civilization of each people, and the Slavophils suffered in vain when they were reproached for their inclination to establish immovable forms for the mind, science and art.

Many of the Westerners developed the philosophy of the Russian revolutionary democrats. The most notable representatives of this trend are V.G. Belinsky (1811-1848), A.I. Herzen (1812-1870), N.G. Chernyshevsky (1823-1889), N.A. Dobrolyubov (1836-1861). Through the efforts of these revolutionary democrats, a number of significant shortcomings of the German classical philosophy, philosophical ideas are connected with the practice of struggle for the implementation of the anti-serfdom people's revolution that has matured in Russia.

The main features of this philosophy are materialism and atheism, a dialectical approach to reality and the process of cognition. Herzen and Chernyshevsky came close to a materialistic understanding of history. This direction of philosophy was not of an academic nature, but, being integral part literary-critical and journalistic activity, reflected the actual problems of our time in the relationship of philosophical, aesthetic, ethical and political problems.

The immediate successors of the Slavophile "philosophy of totality" in the 60-70s. spoke soil workers. Arguing with the "theoreticism" of the Slavophiles and the nihilism of the revolutionary democrats, they turned to the sphere of the intuitive-artistic and even the irrational-subconscious, which is especially pronounced in the work of F.M. Dostoevsky(1821-1881) - the great Russian writer. He was not a professional philosopher, but explored areas of human existence that are directly related to philosophy. The writer thinks, first of all, as an artist. The dialectic of ideas is embodied in him in clashes, disputes and actions of various literary heroes. Creativity F.M. Dostoevsky is centered around questions of the philosophy of the spirit: anthropology, philosophy of history, ethics, philosophy of religion. The writer's philosophical and artistic reflections are characterized by deep antinomianism and existential intensity of spiritual and moral quests, in which he anticipated many key philosophical ideas of the 20th century.

The great writer was the founder of the dystopia genre, continued and developed by philosophers and writers of the 20th century. This genre is characterized by the language of a parable, a confession, a sermon, a rejection of academic forms of theorizing, a purely rationalistic method of proving and substantiating truths felt by the heart, experienced, and suffered. The complex plot of his novels is the disclosure of a person in different aspects, from different angles. In the depths of human nature, he reveals God and the devil and infinite worlds, but always reveals through man and out of interest in man. The most important contradiction in man is the contradiction between good and evil. The moment of moral choice is the impulse inner world man and his spirit. The essence of man and his value lies in his freedom. The true path of human freedom consists in following God, who is the basis, substance and guarantee of morality. Freedom is the essence of man and an indispensable condition for human existence. Freedom is the highest responsibility of a person for his actions and at the same time suffering and burden. Freedom is intended for people of strong spirit, capable of being sufferers and embarking on the path of the God-man. Dostoevsky's social ideal is Russian socialism. He saw the purpose of Russia in the Christian reconciliation of peoples.

L.N. Tolstoy (1828-1910) - writer and philosopher who had a significant impact on world culture its appeal to the problems of the psychology of the soul, religious morality and self-improvement. The outstanding thinker carried out a rational criticism of Orthodoxy and showed that religious dogmas contradict the laws of science, logic, and reason. Tolstoy believed that the task of a person is love for one's neighbor. In the implementation of this setting, the most important role belongs to religion, but not the official Christian one, but one that would affirm the happiness of man on Earth. Having set himself the task of creating a new practical religion, L.N. Tolstoy devoted his whole life to this work. He put his views, doubts, searches into the images of the heroes of the works. The new religion was based on Christian ideas: the equality of people before God, love for one's neighbor, non-resistance to evil by violence, i.e. the main precepts of morality. True religion was seen by Tolstoy as agreement with the mind and knowledge of a person, the relationship he established with the infinite life around him, which connects his life with this infinity and guides his actions. He considers the essence of the deity in a moral context. God is love, perfect good, which is the core of the human "I". God given is the highest law of morality and knowledge of it is the main task of mankind, i.e. the understanding of the meaning of life and its structure depends on this. L.N. Tolstoy believes that life is a striving for the good, accompanied by a feeling of pleasure and suffering. The purpose of life is moral self-improvement. This is achieved not by asceticism, but by loving treatment of people, by establishing the kingdom of God within us and outside of us. A practical means to this is the principle of non-resistance to evil by violence. Tolstoy developed a whole program of non-participation in state and other violence. The main provisions of the social concept of religious anarcho-socialism are: the rejection of all forms of violence by state structures, the orientation towards the peasant community as the basis of a society built on the principles of kindness and love.

Abstract on the topic:

RUSSIAN PHILOSOPHY OF THE 19TH CENTURY

Introduction

Philosophy is not only the product of the activity of pure reason, not only the result of the research of a narrow circle of specialists. It is an expression of the spiritual experience of the nation, its intellectual potential, embodied in the diversity of cultural creations.

To understand the peculiarities of Russian philosophy, one must look into the history of the development of philosophical thought in Russia.

This work helps to consider the main issues of the period of development of Russian philosophy. It is divided into four sections:

1. The first section discusses the initial period of the formation of philosophy in Russia during the 19th century, its features and functions.

2. The second section tells about the philosophical teachings of Westerners and Slavophiles and the main philosophers of these trends.

3. On the attitude to the philosophy of P.Ya. Chaadaev is mentioned in the third section.

4. Solovyov's worldview, his philosophical ideas of God-manhood and unity, his philosophical thoughts are considered in the last, fourth chapter.

At the end of the work, the problematic issue of the essence of the idea of ​​God-manhood is considered.

1. Sociocultural development of Russia during the 19th century

Philosophy is not only the product of the activity of pure reason, not only the result of the research of a narrow circle of specialists. It is an expression of the spiritual experience of the nation, its intellectual potential, embodied in the diversity of cultural creations. Synthesis of philosophical and historical knowledge, which aims not to describe historical facts and events, but the disclosure of their inner meaning. The central idea of ​​Russian philosophy was the search for and justification of the special place and role of Russia in the common life and destiny of mankind. And this is important for understanding Russian philosophy, which really has its own special features, precisely due to the originality of historical development.

To understand the peculiarities of Russian philosophy at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, one needs to look into the history of the development of philosophical thought in Russia.

The initial period of formation of Russian philosophy - 11 - 12 century. From the very beginning of its inception, it is characterized by a connection with world philosophy, but at the same time, it is characterized by originality. Russian philosophy arises in Kievan Rus and is closely connected with the process of Christianization, the beginning of which was laid by the baptism of Rus' in 988. In its emergence, on the one hand, it adopted a number of features and images of the Slavic pagan worldview and culture, on the other hand, the adoption of Christianity closely connected Ancient Rus' with Byzantium, from which it received many images and ideas. ancient philosophy. In addition, through Byzantine mediation, Russia adopted many provisions of Eastern Christian philosophy. Thus, Russian philosophy did not arise away from the main road of the development of philosophical thought, but absorbed the ideas of ancient, Byzantine, ancient Bulgarian thought, although not in a pure, but Christianized form. At the same time, from the very beginning she used her own written language, created in the 9th century by Cyril and Methodius.

Philosophical knowledge performed not only an ideological function, but also the function of wisdom, and since it was the monasteries that were the concentration of spiritual life Ancient Rus', then this primarily influenced the nature of philosophical teachings. Philosophical and historical thought in general was based on the principle of Christianity.

In the philosophical understanding of the fate of mankind and the Russian people from the very beginning there is patriotism and historical depth. The further development of Russian philosophical thought took place in line with the development of moral and practical instructions and the rationale for the special purpose of the Orthodoxy of Rus' for the development of world civilization. The idea of ​​a special mission for Russia led to the appearance in the early 16th century of the "Moscow-Third Rome" doctrine, expounded by the monk. The doctrine stated that the highest calling Soviet power is to save Orthodox Christianity as a truly true doctrine.

In Russian philosophy, thought was formed in line with the so-called "Russian Idea". The idea of ​​a special fate and destiny for Russia appeared in the 16th century and was the first ideological formation of the national self-consciousness of the Russian people. In the future, the Russian idea was developed in the period of Russian philosophy in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Its founders during this period were P.Ya. Chaadaev, F.M. Dostoevsky, V.S. Berdyaev.

Features of Russian philosophy at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries consisted in the fact that from the very beginning of its inception it proclaimed the idea of ​​the originality of the development of Russia, in the key of primordially Russian traditions. hallmark Russian philosophy was also that the identity of Russia is seen in the so-called "Russian idea" - the proclamation of the special messianic role of Russia, which should unite the entire Christian world on the basis of Christianity, in particular Orthodoxy. In other words, Russian philosophy developed the idea of ​​originality and, as a condition for this originality, its religious beginning.

Russian philosophy embodies the inconsistency of the cultural and historical development of Russia, complex forms of interaction with European socio-philosophical thought.

The geographical position of Russia at the crossroads of Western and Eastern civilizations led to the formation of a culture in the conditions of not only charitable enrichment with the achievements of other peoples, but also the forcible imposition of alien values. The Russian consciousness constantly existed in a situation of “split”: between East and West, between Christianity and paganism, between “us” and “them”. At the same time, Russian culture was able to create its own special type of thinking, which cannot be unambiguously attributed to either Asian or European variants. The problem of attitudes towards East and West is one of the constant problems of Russian philosophy.

Russia has always been a multinational and multicultural social organism, which, perhaps, determined such an orientation of philosophical thought as the search for unity, the foundations of the integrity of culture, universality.

An important feature of Russian philosophy is its religious orientation, associated with the special role of Orthodoxy in the history of Russia. It was the religious direction that was always leading, defining and most fruitful.

The peculiar utilitarianism of Russian philosophy was expressed in its social and ethical orientation, which is associated with its development in the context of acute economic, political and ideological processes. That is why she was not characterized by holo-escholastic theorizing, philosophical concepts always reflected the specific socio-political situations in the country.

Philosophical thought in Russia has become a crystallization of the spiritual intentions of Russian culture as a whole, the uniqueness of the historical path of which at the same time determines the special demand for the Russian philosophical heritage in modern discourse. The elements of the Eastern type here are: a) the rural community and the lack of expression of private interest; b) a powerful centralized state based not on the rule of law, but on the personal authority of the monarch. The West is concretized in the spiritual priority of Christianity, which emphasized the unique creative status of man in nature, his authority for a radical transformation of reality.

It is with Christianity in its Greco-Byzantine variant that the first philosophical searches of Orthodox-Russian culture are connected. For almost a thousand years of development of Russia, philosophical knowledge was subordinated to religious practice. Writing and literacy came here along with Christianity, which led to a special, different from the Western standard of truth and wisdom. During this period, basic ideological attitudes are formed, which later received theoretical expression in the systems of Russian philosophy. These include:

ontologism (consideration of the world not in its passive subordination to man, but as spheres of realization of Divine Wisdom, Sophia);

· anthropologism and psychologism as an interest in the inner experience of the individual, an emphasis on her ascetic status in the world;

Subordination of truth to the ideals of justice (truth not as a fact, but as truth);

· eschatologism as an attitude not so much to the world of existence, but to the proper, renewed by the light of Divine truth and justice;

messianism ("Moscow-Third Rome", the guardian of the true faith and the guarantor of the future salvation of mankind).

The formation of proper Russian philosophy dates back to the middle of the 19th century, when, on the one hand, there was a wide acquaintance with Western culture and philosophy, and on the other, there was an increase in national-patriotic self-consciousness. The impulse was "Philosophical Letters". P.Ya. Chaadaev (published in 1836), where Russian history (timelessness, lack of progress) and reality (external borrowing of Western models of at the same time internal inertia and complacency) were sharply criticized from pro-Western positions. By declaring our "dark past, meaningless present and unclear future", Chaadaev provoked a controversy between Westerners and Slavophiles (40-60s) about the historical uniqueness of Russia and its status in human culture.

Westerners (radical direction - V.G. Belinsky, A.I. Herzen, N.P. Ogarev, moderate - T.n. Granovsky. P.V. Annenkov, liberal - V.P. Botkin, K.D. Kavelin, E. Korsh) called for the reformation of Russia according to the Western model with the aim of liberalizing social relations (primarily the abolition of serfdom), the development of science and education as factors of progress. Russian populists and Marxists became the heirs of the ideology of Westernism.

Slavophiles (“senior” - I.V. Kireevsky, A.S. Khomyakov, K.S. Aksakov, “younger” - I.S. Aksakov, A.I. Koshelev, P.V. Kireevsky and others, “ later "- N. Ya. Danilevsky, N. N. Strakhov) criticized the West for the narrowly technical orientation of culture, which was the result of the oblivion of God and the absolutization of the mind, which led to the rupture of organic ties with life, tradition, and society. Idealizing Russian, they believed that Russia, as the guardian of Orthodoxy, Autocracy and Nationality (community, morality), was called upon to show Europe and all mankind the path to salvation.

The philosophical and religious concepts of the Slavophiles were further developed in the philosophy of unity by V.S. Solovyov, which at the same time became an attempt to unite the West and the East, Orthodoxy and Catholicism, reason and intuition.

All-unity acts as a basic ontological principle based on the simultaneous accentuation of both the Divine-one and the concrete-multiple, through which the one manifests itself. Sophia, symbolizing Divine Wisdom and Love, acts as the force that directs the divine to the earthly, and the earthly to the divine. Returning the world to God, Sophia “gathers the Universe”, coming at the human level to the integration of what is in thought, consciousness. goodness and beauty. Being the goal of history, God-manhood must be provided by the people themselves, where “world theocracy” (reunification of churches) as a guarantor of the conciliar unity of mankind acts as its most important condition.

He characterizes the turn of the 19th-20th centuries as the "golden age" of Russian philosophy ("Russian philosophical renaissance"). The most striking phenomenon of this period was the subsequent development of philosophy in the work of P.A. Florensky, S.N. Bulgakova, N.O. Lossky, L.P. Karsavin, S.L. Frank, V.F. Erna and others. The original current of thought was Russian cosmism (N.F. Fedorov, V.I. Vernadsky, K.E. Tsiolkovsky and others). At the same time, almost all the strategies of world philosophy are represented here: phenomenology, existentialism, personalism, structuralism, Positivism, Neo-Kantianism, Marxism.

The development of Russian philosophy was interrupted by the events of 1917. The dictatorship of the proletariat did not need polyphony of thought, and by decision of the Bolshevik government, the overwhelming majority of philosophers were expelled from the country, continuing their activities already in exile. The development of philosophy in the USSR was predominantly subordinated to the ideology of Marxism. Modern stage is characterized by a return to the rich heritage of Russian thought, reinterpretations of its content in the context of the integrative processes of modernity.

2. Philosophical teachings of Westerners and Slavophiles

In the 19th century in Russian philosophy, the problem of determining the essence of national self-consciousness, the place and role of national culture in world history, the correlation of elements of identity and commonality of cultures took shape different peoples. In solving this problem, two currents emerged: Westerners and Slavophiles. Slavophilism is an integral organic part of Russian social thought and culture of the 19th century. As a socio-political trend, Slavophilism, together with its constant opponent - Westernism - constituted a stage in the formation of Russian socio-political consciousness, actively contributed to the preparation and implementation of the reform of 1861. At the same time, Slavophilism is a non-political party or group. The leaders of the Slavophil circle did not create and did not strive to create anything resembling a complete political program, the meaning of their philosophical and social views can not always be expressed in terms of political liberalism or conservatism

Slavophiles(P.V. Kirieevsky, A.S. Khomyakov, the Aksakov brothers and others) focused their attention on the originality and uniqueness of Russian culture. They idealized the social structure of the Slavs in the pre-Petrine period, advocated the preservation of the peasant community, believed that the political culture of the West was unacceptable to Russia.

The Slavs retained spiritual integrity in contrast to the West, which lost it due to the worship of rationalism, the unity and vitality of the spirit (includes the ability to logic, reason, feelings and will).

A special type of worldview of the Russian people, a special type of national psychology, consists in the knowledge of life not so much with the mind, as in the West, but with the heart and soul; intuitive knowledge is not imprisoned in the vice of formulas and concepts; it is one, integral and multifaceted as life itself. Spirituality of this kind is inseparable from religious faith. The Russian faith, on the other hand, has the "purest" source - Byzantine Orthodoxy. This type of religion is characterized by "cathedralism" (unification of people on the basis of love for God and each other). Khomyakov believed that the Western religion - Catholicism and Protestantism - are utilitarian, where a person's relationship to God and to each other is considered based on the calculation of benefit, and not love.

All this leads them to think about the great and lofty mission of Russia, which will give the world new culture, a separate civilized path of the Russian people.

Westerners(A.I. Herzen, N.P. Ogarev, T.A. Granovsky and others), analyzing the economic, political, cultural lagging behind of Russia from world civilization, tried to find out the reasons that hinder its general progressive development, and saw them in national features and traditions. Therefore, the only possibility for the further development of Russia is to repeat the path of Europe. Westerners propagandized and defended the idea of ​​"Europeanization" of Russia. It was believed that the country should, focusing on Western Europe, in a historically short period of time overcome the age-old economic and cultural backwardness, become a full member of European and world civilization.

In polemics with the Westerners and in disputes among themselves, the leading Slavophiles often defended ideas that were definitely conservative, close, according to the most politically active of them Yu.F. Samarin, to Western conservatism. But, as a rule, this was not a narrowly political conservatism, and such ideas (monarchism, anti-constitutionalism) must, firstly, be evaluated concretely historical. It is clear that monarchism is by no means an alien element in the ideology of not only conservatism, but also European liberalism of the middle of the last century .Secondly, it must be considered in the context of the general cultural role of the Slavophiles as consistent “originalists” and traditionalists who defended the need for the independent development of Russian cultural and social life, its independence from the influence of foreign models. The anti-constitutionalism of the Slavophiles is connected, first of all, with their dream of a state structure in the “Slavic spirit” and is not at all equivalent to anti-democratism: the Russian “Tories” (as Y. Samarin called himself and his associates) constantly defended freedom of speech and press, freedom of conscience, opposed censorship , recognized the inevitability of development in Russia of elective, representative institutions.

In their dispute with the Russian Westernizers and in their criticism of the contemporary West, the greatest Slavophiles A.S. Khomyakov, I.V. Kireevsky, brothers K.S. and I.S. Aksakovs, Yu.F. Samarin relied on his own deep knowledge of the Western spiritual tradition, and on the accumulated experience of critical reflection on the paths of the development of European civilization.

In the person of the Slavophiles, post-Petrine Russian culture actively and passionately joined in the all-European dispute-dialogue about the meaning of history, real and imaginary progress, national and universal in culture. And closely following any trends in European philosophy and sociology, the Slavophils quite consciously and purposefully used, and, if necessary, criticized the ideas of Hegel, Schelling, European romanticism and many other trends. The originality of Slavophile assessments and conclusions was ultimately determined not by Western, but by Russian "roots": the general social situation in the country, the specifics of the domestic spiritual tradition. In the latter, the Slavophils, being religious thinkers, assigned a special role to Orthodoxy, and their religious and theological experience, their appeal to patristics, had a significant impact on the whole complex of ideas they developed. In the future, the religious and philosophical searches begun by the Slavophiles were continued, becoming a serious tradition of Russian literature and philosophy.

The leading representatives of Slavophilism were not the creators of complete philosophical or socio-political systems. Slavophilism has little in common with Western-style philosophical schools and trends. In addition, each of the Slavophiles had his own, independent position on many philosophical and social issues and resolutely defended it. Nevertheless, Slavophilism, as a trend of thought, certainly had an internal unity and was in no way an outwardly formal association of separate, alien thinkers in the name of achieving certain political or ideological goals. And the fact that this unity was contradictory, in many respects ensured the ability of the Slavophil circle to exist and develop over several decades.

3. Historiosophy of P.Ya. Chaadaev

Russian Westernism in the 19th century has never been a single and homogeneous ideological trend. Among the public and cultural figures who believed that the only acceptable and possible development option for Russia was the path of Western European civilization, there were people of various convictions: liberals, radicals, conservatives. Throughout their lives, the views of many of them changed significantly. Thus, the leading Slavophiles I.V. Kireevsky and K.S. Aksakov in his younger years shared Western ideals. Many of the ideas of late Herzen clearly do not fit into the traditional set of Western ideas. The spiritual evolution of P.Ya. Chaadaev, of course, one of the most prominent Western thinkers.

Pyotr Yakovlevich Chaadaev (1794-1856) is one of the brightest Russian thinkers. He formulated the problems of human philosophy, social history, which subsequently influenced both Westerners and Slavophiles. He was the first to connect the issues of consciousness, culture and the meaning of history into a single problem of human existence, which has a hierarchical structure. At the top of this hierarchical ladder is God. The step of his emanation is the universal consciousness. The next step is individual consciousness. The lowest level is nature as a phenomenon of human perception and activity.

From the famous "Letters" and other works it is clear that Chaadaev knew ancient and modern philosophy well. At various times he was influenced by the ideas of various European thinkers. He had his own path in philosophy, a very difficult one, but he always followed it consistently and uncompromisingly.

Chaadaev undoubtedly recognized himself as a Christian thinker and strove to create a Christian philosophy. "The historical side of Christianity," he wrote, "contains the whole philosophy of Christianity." In "historical Christianity" the very essence of religion finds expression, which "is not only a moral system, but an important divine force acting universally ...".

The cultural-historical process had a sacred character for Chaadaev. Divine revelation plays the main role in the development of society. The significance of the historical mystery unfolding on Earth is universal and absolute, because in the course of it, despite all the tragic contradictions, the spiritual creation of the Kingdom of God takes place. The Russian thinker defended precisely the historical cause of the Christian church, arguing that "in the Christian world, everything should contribute - and indeed contributes - to the establishment of a perfect order on earth - the Kingdom of God." He was convinced that there is a genuine religious and moral progress in history, therefore the main means of establishing a just system is religious education, led by the World Will and the Supreme Reason, and this deep faith largely determined the pathos of his work. Keenly feeling and experiencing the sacred meaning of history, Chaadaev based his historiosophy on the concept of providentialism. For him, there is no doubt the existence of "the divine will, ruling over the ages and leading the human race to its final goals." The future "Kingdom of God" is characterized by equality, freedom and democracy.

Assessing the providential nature of Chaadaev's historiosophy, it must be taken into account that in his works he constantly emphasized the mystical nature of the action of this "divine will", wrote about the "mystery of Providence", about the "mysterious unity" of Christianity in history, etc. Chaadaev's providentialism is by no means based on rationalistic premises. For him, far from everything that is real is reasonable. Rather, on the contrary, the most important and decisive thing - the action of Providence - is fundamentally inaccessible to reason. The Russian thinker was also critical of the "superstitious idea of ​​God's daily intervention." Nevertheless, it is impossible not to see that the rationalistic element is present in his worldview and plays a rather significant role. The apologia for the historical Church and the providence of God turns out to be a means that opens the way to the recognition of the exceptional, almost non-self-sufficient, absolute value of the cultural and historical experience of mankind, or rather, of the Western European peoples.

In his Eurocentrism, Chaadaev was not original. Eurocentrism, to one degree or another, suffered almost all European philosophical and historical thought of his time. There is nothing specific in his recognition of the enormous spiritual significance of the European tradition. But if for the Slavophiles the highest value of the cultural creativity of the peoples of the West did not at all mean that the rest of mankind did not have and there is nothing of equal value and that future progress is possible only when moving along a single historical highway already chosen by Europeans, then for the author of the Philosophical Letters, the situation was largely the same. So. Moreover, in this case it is not necessary to talk about some kind of naive, superficial, or even more ideologized-non-independent Westernism. Chaadaev had no desire to idealize Western European history, let alone European modernity. He was not inclined towards progressivism, i.e. to the type of worldview that later dominated Western ideology. But, like all other somewhat deep Russian Westerners, he was primarily inspired by a truly majestic historical picture of a centuries-old era of cultural creativity. The Western path, with all its imperfections, is the fulfillment of the sacred meaning of history, it was the western part of the European continent that was chosen by the will of Providence for the implementation of its goals.

In essence, Chaadaev's sympathy for Catholicism is also determined by this attitude of history. Probably, such a (not mystical and not dogmatic) perception of Catholicism played a role in the fact that Chaadaev, despite all his hobbies, did not change his faith.

Historiosophical views of the author of the "Philosophical Letters" directly associated with his criticism of Russia, which, in his opinion, fell out of the historical path that the Christian West followed. “Providence has excluded us from its beneficial effect on the human mind ... completely leaving us to ourselves,” states the first “Philosophical Letter”, the publication of which had such a fatal significance in the fate of the thinker. The grounds for such a truly global conclusion are Russia's isolation from the historical path that the Christian West followed. Chaadaev’s assessments of Russian history were very harsh: “We didn’t care about the great world work,” “we are a gap in the moral world order,” “there is something in the blood of Russians that is hostile to true progress,” and so on.

There is a deep connection between Chaadaev's historiosophy and his anthropology, which also has a religious character. The thinker proceeded in his understanding of man from the traditional idea of ​​the presence in him of two principles: natural and spiritual. The task of philosophy is to comprehend the higher, spiritual sphere. “When philosophy,” Chaadaev wrote, deals with animal man, then, instead of human philosophy, it becomes the philosophy of animals, becomes the chapter about man in zoology.” The object of philosophical research - mental activity - is originally social. “Without communication with other creatures, we would peacefully pluck the grass,” the author of the Philosophical Letters asserted. Moreover, intellectual activity has a social nature not only in its origin, but also in content, in essence: “If you do not agree that the thought of a person is the thought of the human race, then there is no way to understand what it is.”

Westerner Chaadaev was a resolute opponent of individualism, including in the field of epistemology. His cruel, one might even say, total rejection of any subjectivism was reinforced by a consistently negative assessment human freedom. “The omnipotence of the mind, all means of knowledge rest on the humility of man”; “there is no truth in the human spirit, except that which God has put into it”; “all the good that we do is a direct consequence of our inherent ability to obey an unknown force”; “If a person could “completely abolish his freedom”, then a feeling of world will would awaken in him, a deep consciousness of his actual involvement in the entire universe”, such statements quite clearly characterize the position of the thinker. And it should be noted that such consistent anti-personalism is a rather unusual phenomenon for Russian religious and philosophical thought.

In Chaadaev, the provincialist attitude acquires clearly fatalistic features, both in historiosophy and in anthropology. Freedom for him is inextricably linked with individualism, inevitably leads precisely to an individualistic type of worldview and an appropriate course of action. Thus understood, freedom really turns out to be a "terrible force." Chaadaev, acutely sensing the danger of self-satisfied and selfish individualism, warns that "every time, being involved in arbitrary actions, we shake the whole universe every time." such an assessment of human activity may seem extremely pessimistic, unless, of course, one forgets that for him man and humanity in history are by no means "left to themselves."

Denying individualism, Chaadaev also denied freedom, its metaphysical justification, believing (unlike the Slavophiles) that another, "third way" in philosophy is impossible. In the history of philosophical thought, fatalism in the sphere of historiosophy and anthropology has often been associated with pantheism in ontology. Such a connection can also be found in Chaadaev's understanding of the world. “There is absolute unity,” he wrote, “in the totality of beings – this is exactly what we are trying to prove to the best of our ability. But this unity, objectively standing completely in reality that we do not feel, throws an extraordinary light on the great Everything - but it has nothing in common with the pantheism that most modern philosophers preach. Indeed, Chaadaev was not inclined either to the pantheism of the natural-philosophical, much less to the materialistic. To a greater extent, the peculiarity of Chaadaev's pantheism is associated with the tradition of European mysticism. Hence, the motive of the highest metaphysical unity of all that exists, the doctrine of the "spiritual essence of the universe" and "higher consciousness, the germ of which is the essence of human nature" originates from this. Accordingly, in "the fusion of our being with the universal being" he saw the historical and metaphysical task of mankind (let's not forget that the historical process itself had a sacred character for him), "the last limit of the efforts of a rational being, the final destination of the spirit in the world."

Chaadaev remained a staunch Westernizer until the end of his life. The idea of ​​the West is called upon to create a direction and a space of prospects for the movement of the national whole in Russia, i.e. for its "meaningful" history. The West for Chaadaev, as a standard of civilization, is not a real-life conglomerate of national states, ways of life, social norms, but is a symbol of positive human existence, never really achievable, under which no specific culture can be substituted. This conclusion of P. Chaadaev for a long time remained "a temptation for the Westerners, madness for the Slavophiles." But there has undoubtedly been a change in his understanding of Russian history. His general understanding of history as a consistent design, in fact, has not changed. Now, however, Russia was also included in this providential plan: she still had to play a world-historical role in the future.

Thus, a kind of mystical pantheism in Chaadaev's worldview is most directly connected with the providentialism of his historiosophical concept. In Russian Westernism, Chaadaev represents the tradition of religious and philosophical thought. What he said in the field of philosophy, history and culture, of course, was of significant importance for subsequent Russian philosophy. And in the future, the focus of attention of domestic thinkers remains the problem of the metaphysical meaning of history and freedom, the West and Russia, the purpose of man. Those figures of Russian Westernism who, unlike Chaadaev, did not represent his religious direction, also turn to these problems.

4. Philosophy V.S. Soloviev and its place in the Russian religious and philosophical tradition

In the history of Russian thought, Vladimir Sergeevich Solovyov (1853-1900) is one of the most remarkable figures. He is a remarkable thinker, whose original philosophical ideas have become an important and integral element of the Russian and world intellectual tradition. In addition, the role of the philosopher in Russian culture is so significant that, without having a fairly complete idea of ​​the scale of V. Solovyov's personality and his creative heritage, it is difficult to count on a truly realistic understanding of very, very much in our, in general, recent historical past. Let us recall, for example, that V. Solovyov, who brought to life with his philosophical work a number of directions in the subsequent Russian philosophy, and as a poet who had an undeniable influence on the brilliant galaxy of Russian poets at the beginning of the century, he was a close friend of F.M. Dostoevsky and, perhaps, the most serious opponent of Tolstoy the thinker, with whom he also maintained very close relations. However, it would not be an exaggeration to say that of the major figures of Russian culture in the last decades of the 19th and first 20th centuries, hardly everyone experienced the influence of the philosopher's personality and his ideas to one degree or another.

The beginning of the creative path Solovyov is characterized by a firm belief that the "union" of Christianity and modern philosophy not only realistically possible, but also historically inevitable. Thus, in one of his letters, the philosopher declares that “it is clear to him, as two times two is four, that all great development Western philosophy and science, apparently indifferent and often hostile to Christianity, in reality only worked out for Christianity a new, worthy of its form. The intonation has changed in modern times, there has been a reassessment of many of the original ideas, but the meaning of one’s own activity was still seen in the creation of a religious (Christian_) philosophy, designed to “justify” the faith of our fathers, raising it to a new level of rational consciousness.

The unity of everything - this formula in Solovyov's religious ontology means, first of all, the connection between God and the world, divine and human existence. God is everything - the thesis, according to Solovyov, finally "eliminates dualism." The philosopher associated the ideas of Christianity with a certain philosophical tradition of building an ontology based on a certain unified principle. Such a position has more than once given rise to reproaches of pantheism. The thinker himself in the article "The Concept of God", denying the legitimacy of this kind of reproaches, spoke about the influence exerted by Spinoza's doctrine of a single substance on the formation of his worldview.

The Russian philosopher often and quite sharply spoke out against the Western European rationalistic tradition. The result of it - Hegel's system, he characterized as "a system of empty abstract concepts." In his own ontology, Solovyov solved the problem of overcoming "abstractness" rationalist philosophy. He hoped to give a new meaning to the dialectical method itself, speaking of the need for "positive dialectics", which should apply "the great logical law of development, in its abstraction, formulated by Hegel, to the universal human organism in its entirety."

Solovyov could not agree with the absolutization of reason on the basis of this principle and introduced the concept of "existing" as a "subject of being." In accordance with the idea of ​​"all-unity", "existent" in Solovyov's system means not one or another aspect of metaphysical reality, but its general basis ("absolutely existing"). In the doctrine of "existent" he saw the main difference between his own ontology and Hegel's, that which gives the dialectical method a "positive" meaning. The thinker, criticizing the ontology of Hegel, undoubtedly defended the idea of ​​God as a higher and independent being.

The postulate of the transcendental nature of "existing" at first glance contradicts the principle of "all-unity", i.e. the very essence of the ontology developed by Solovyov. And the philosopher sought to prove that this is only an apparent contradiction. For which he used, in particular, Hegel's criticism of Kant's transcendentalism. According to Hegel, essence exhausts itself in appearance. The very idea of ​​transcendence, even of God, is absurd. He wrote that "the question of whether God should appear must be answered in the affirmative, because there is nothing essential that would not appear." The Etagegel formula in the concept of the Russian philosopher has been significantly transformed. He insisted only on the existence of a "certain relationship" between the transcendent (after all) "existing" (God, the Absolute) and reality. Solovyov was convinced that such a position is very far from pantheism and corresponds to the very essence of Christian teaching.

The philosopher attached exceptional importance to the idea of ​​development, insisting on the compatibility of the latter with the biblical picture of the world. Evolution, according to Solovyov, has a universal character and consists of three main stages: cosmogonic, theogonic and historical. The first of them represents the development of physical nature and ends with the emergence of man. Solovyov defines the theogonic process as a period associated with the formation of ancient mythological systems, resulting in “the self-consciousness of the human soul, as the beginning of the spiritual, free from the power of natural gods ... This liberation of human self-consciousness and the gradual spiritualization of man through the internal assimilation and development of the divine principle forms the actual historical process of mankind.

Solovyov did not seek to connect the picture of the world of the Christian religion with the specific principles of evaluation of the evolutionary process available in natural science. For him, the idea of ​​development is important as a general philosophical principle, the fact of using which in science is only an argument confirming the significance of this principle. Describing Solovyov's views on the nature of evolution, we go beyond the limits of the ontology he created. After all, development in his concept is universal in nature and is associated with a relationship that is central to the ontology of "all-unity" - the relationship between God and reality. Along with creationism, the history of the fall also undergoes a peculiar interpretation. This is connected with Solovyov's developed doctrine of the "soul of the world".

In the doctrine of the “world soul”, Solovyov, undoubtedly, was closest to the religious philosophy of Schelling. Both Schelling and Solovyov consider the fall as a necessary moment of development, since the latter is possible only in the presence of opposites. The basis (“the soul of the world”), “falling away from the deity”, thereby gives rise to development. She, the “world soul” (“ideal humanity”), should eventually historical evolution appear already in the form of "God-manhood", "Sophia". For the Christian consciousness, the main event in world history - the coming of Christ - has already happened. Solovyov considered the appearance of the God-man as determining the entire further course of history. In the resurrection of Christ, he saw the expression of the meaning of world development, the subsequent stages of which are reduced to the gradual disclosure and affirmation of this meaning in the history of mankind.

In such a radical convergence of the supernatural with the rational-empirical sphere of natural and historical life, the pantheistic motives that are present in the metaphysics of "all-unity" are especially clearly manifested.

Many leading representatives of Russian religious and philosophical thought of the 20th century saw and appreciated in the metaphysics of V. Solovyov’s “all-unity” not the mood of philosophical pantheism, but something completely opposite: the justification of the exceptional significance of human creativity, capable in its highest manifestations of a genuine religious transformation of the world.

If in Solovyov's ontology three types of being are distinguished: phenomena, the world of ideas, absolute being, then in his epistemology three main types of knowledge are distinguished respectively: experimental, rational and mystical. In his early works, the philosopher argued that mysticism is absolutely necessary for philosophy, because without "mystical knowledge" "it in consistent empiricism and in consistent rationalism equally comes to absurdity."

Solovyov's philosophical thought is ontological and remains so even when defining the main task of cognition, which, according to the thinker, is “moving the center of human existence from its nature to the absolute transcendent world.

Criticism of philosopher-rationalism and empiricism from the very beginning in no way meant their unconditional denial. Rather, on the contrary: this criticism of the European philosophical tradition ultimately pursued the goal of “justifying” it, substantiating the importance of the results achieved and determining the prospects for further development. Philosophy, according to the Russian thinker, for this development first of all needs faith. Without faith, according to Solovyov, knowledge is generally impossible. Like the earlier Slavophiles, he considered faith not only in its religious meaning, but also as a constant element of empirical and rational knowledge: faith in the reality of an object or idea.

IN last years Soloviev began work on the creation of an integral epistemological system. However, he did not succeed in completing this work.

The problems of morality are considered in the most diverse works of Solovyov. Solovyov built his ethical system, guided by the belief in the absolute significance of moral values. “The moral principle,” he said, “is an integral part of human nature and constantly reveals itself both in the life experience of the individual and in the historical experience of mankind.”

Deep faith in the absolute value of moral ideals, their real significance are characteristic of all of Solovyov's work. The ethicism of his philosophy is undeniable. The thinker's faith in the unity of Truth, Goodness and Beauty most significantly determined the nature of his aesthetic views.

In the works on Solovyov very often, one might say, traditionally there is a motive of regret that the thinker, for certain reasons, could not fully realize himself as a philosopher. Solovyov defended dissertations, lectured, translated philosophical classics, but he never "engaged" in philosophy. In other words, he always remained a philosopher, not only in professional status, but in essence. With all the diversity and even, as it were, scattered creative searches, it is impossible not to see in his work that exceptional consistency of thought, which is traditionally recognized as an integral feature of true philosophy.

V. Solovyov argued that philosophy is by no means an impersonal process, it is a matter of personal, subjective creativity, the business of a philosopher. Naturally, all this had nothing to do with subjectivism. The founder of Russian metaphysics of all-unity, having defined man as a metaphysical being very early (already in Sophia), will insist until the end of his life that philosophizing is the most fundamental condition for the existence of personality. For him, the subject, the individual, if he is not striving for the truth, in a metaphysical sense, simply does not exist.

Recognizing such a universal meaning behind metaphysics, Solovyov and in his own work, no matter how diverse it was and no matter how far it deviated from the “classical” models of philosophizing, always remained precisely a metaphysician, always strove for metaphysical knowledge. Solovyov was an extremely consistent thinker. In his early work Sophia, which is very contradictory and breaks off precisely on the actual love theme, he formulates a number of ideas to which he will remain true in the future. This applies in particular to the statement that "real and all-powerful love is sexual love."

On the other hand, the philosopher no less resolutely rejected the view of sexual love as a force exclusively on this side, devoid of metaphysical meaning, natural necessity.

The meaning of Solovyov's metaphysics of love is often, but, it seems, not quite justified, reduced to the so-called erotic utopia. Solovyov absolutely definitely recognized that it was impossible to overcome the tragedy of sexual love only by individual, human efforts. Marriage and monasticism remain for him the highest historical forms of the human relationship to love. It can be said that the originality of Solovyov's position, who throughout his life strove to build a Christian philosophy, is largely due to the fact that he did not believe that sexual love has nothing to do with eternity and was convinced of the opposite.

Philosophical ideas Solovyov are deeply rooted in the universal spiritual tradition. The appeal to the experience of world philosophical and religious thought has always been considered by the Russian thinker as a natural and necessary condition for a truly free and fruitful search for truth. In the history of philosophy, he saw a lively and continuous dialogue of ideas, which is impossible and unacceptable to be reduced to a mechanical change of various schools and trends, especially to the ideological confrontation of hostile philosophical "camps", at the heights of speculation remaining faithful to party or class interests.

This approach of the historical-philosophical tradition, multiplied by an exceptional personal gift for synthesis, allowed Solovyov not only to uphold the ideal of "all-unity", but also to directly implement it in his own philosophical work. At various stages of spiritual evolution, he experienced and assimilated the ideas of many thinkers. The philosophy of "all-unity" was born on the basis of a critical rethinking and "universal synthesis" of various tendencies of thought, the historical incompleteness of which was fully realized by the Russian philosopher. But at the same time, he was convinced that every not uttered word in vain, every idea suffered through the spiritual and historical experience of mankind is not in vain, has its own meaning and significance.

The significance of Solovyov in the history of Russian thought lies in the fact that with his work he brought to life a host of imitators and commentators, and a galaxy of original, deep thinkers, gave rise to a new stage in the history of Russian philosophy.

It must be said that the world order, in which a person, in fact, is assigned only the role of a “playing animal”, was completely unacceptable for the most diverse and even opposite currents of Russian thought. Criticism of this kind of social "ideal" led to results far from equivalent. The history of Russian thought is full of dramatic contradictions and ideological conflicts. It is not only permissible, but absolutely necessary to strive to understand which of the Russian thinkers turned out to be closer to the truth in their spiritual quest. Such an indifferent and informal approach corresponds to the spirit of the national tradition itself.

The unity and integrity of Russian philosophical culture were affirmed in development, which is possible only as a living and contradictory process. But, without artificially smoothing out these contradictions in any way, it is necessary to see what determined the inseparable connection of the “Russian idea” at all stages of its development. historical destiny. We have the right to say that throughout its centuries-old history, Russian philosophy has always solved the problem that According to Solovyov, it is the "historical deed" of any true philosophy: it sought to "liberate the individual from external violence and give it inner content." And, perhaps, one of the most significant results of the philosophical creativity of many generations of Russian thinkers was the spiritual realism so characteristic of the national cultural tradition, which combined the ability to deeply comprehend all the tragedy of human existence in the world and in history with faith in the supreme significance of the individual, people, society.

5. Essence of the idea of ​​God-manhood

The mechanism of rapprochement between the God of the world and mankind is revealed in Solovyov's philosophical teaching through the concept of the God-man. The real and perfect incarnation of God-manhood, according to Solovyov, is Jesus Christ, who, according to Christian dogma, is both a complete God and a complete man. His image serves not only as an ideal to which every individual should strive, but also as the highest goal of the development of everything. historical process.

Solovyov's history is based on this goal. The purpose and meaning of the entire historical process is the spiritualization of mankind, the union of man with God, the embodiment of God-manhood. It is not enough, Solovyov believes, for the coincidence of the divine with the human to occur only in the face of Jesus Christ, i.e. through the medium of the divine word. It is necessary that the connection take place in a real-practical way, and not in individual people(in "saints"), but on the scale of all mankind. The primary condition on the path to God-manhood is Christian conversion, that is, the acceptance of the doctrine of Christianity. A natural man, that is, a man not enlightened by divine truth, opposes people as an alien and hostile force. Christ revealed universal moral values ​​to man, created the conditions for his moral perfection. By joining the teachings of Christ, a person follows the path of his spiritualization. This process takes the entire period of human life. Mankind will come to the triumph of peace and justice, truth and virtue, when God, embodied in man, who has moved from the center of eternity to the center of the historical process, will become its unifying principle. Modern society presupposes, from Solovyov's point of view, the unity of " universal church” and monarchical domination, the merger of which should lead to the formation of a “free theocracy”.

Role in various national literary traditions. Russian literature has always maintained an organic connection with the tradition of philosophical thought: Russian romanticism, the religious and philosophical searches of the late Gogol, the work of Dostoevsky and Tolstoy. It was the work of these two great Russian writers that received the deepest response in subsequent Russian philosophy, primarily in Russian religious metaphysics of the late 19th and 20th centuries.

philosophical meaning artistic creations F.M. Dostoevsky (1821–1881) was recognized by many Russian thinkers. Already a younger contemporary and friend of the writer, the philosopher V.S. Soloviev called to see in Dostoevsky a seer and a prophet, "the forerunner of the new religious art." In the 20th century, the problem of the metaphysical content of his writings is a special and very important topic of Russian philosophical thought. V. Ivanov, V.V. Rozanov, D.S. Merezhkovsky, N.A. Berdyaev, N.O. Lossky, L. Shestov and others. Such a tradition of reading Dostoevsky's work did not at all turn him into a "philosopher", the creator of philosophical doctrines, systems, etc. “Dostoevsky enters the history of Russian philosophy not because he built a philosophical system,” G.V. Florovsky wrote, “but because he widely expanded and deepened the most metaphysical experience ... And Dostoevsky shows more than proves. With exceptional force, the whole depth is shown religious theme and problems in the whole life of a person. ”Metaphysical ideas and problems (“damned questions”) fill the life of Dostoevsky’s heroes, become an integral element of the plot fabric of his works (“adventure of an idea”), collide in a “polyphonic” dialogue of positions and worldviews. This dialectic of ideas ("symphonic dialectics") was least of all abstract. She, in an artistic and symbolic form, reflected the deeply personal, spiritual, one might say, existential experience of the author, for whom the search for true answers to the “last”, metaphysical questions was the meaning of life and creativity. This is precisely what L. Shestov had in mind when he stated that "with no less force and passion than Luther and Kierkegaard, Dostoevsky expressed the basic ideas of existential philosophy."

Having experienced the influence of socialist ideas in his youth, having gone through penal servitude and experienced a deep worldview evolution, Dostoevsky, as an artist and thinker, in his novels and journalism will follow those ideas in which he saw the essence of the philosophy of Christianity, Christian metaphysics. His Christian worldview was perceived far from being unambiguous: there were both sharply critical (for example, by K.N. Leontiev) and exclusively positive characteristics (for example, by N.O. Lossky in the book Dostoevsky and his Christian worldview). But one thing is indisputable: depicting in his works the ups and downs of a person, the “underground” of his soul, the boundlessness of human freedom and its temptations, defending the absolute significance of moral ideals and the ontological reality of beauty in the world and man, denouncing vulgarity in its European and Russian versions, opposing the materialism of modern civilization and diverse utopian projections of his own faith in the path of the Church, the path of "universal unity in the name of Christ", Dostoevsky sought answers to "eternal" questions, expressing with great artistic and philosophical power the antinomism inherent in Christian thought, its irreducibility to any rational schemes.

The religious and philosophical searches of another major Russian writer, Leo Nikolayevich Tolstoy (1828–1910), were distinguished by a consistent desire for certainty and clarity (to a large extent at the level of common sense) in explaining fundamental philosophical and religious problems and, accordingly, a peculiar confessional-preaching style of expressing one’s own "creed". The fact of the enormous influence of Tolstoy's literary work on Russian and world culture is indisputable. The ideas of the writer caused and cause ambiguous assessments. They were perceived both in Russia (in the philosophical sense, for example, by N.N. Strakhov, in the religious sense - by "Tolstoyism" as a religious trend), and in the world (in particular, Tolstoy's preaching received a very serious response from the largest figures of the Indian national liberation movement ). At the same time, a critical attitude towards Tolstoy is quite widely represented in the Russian intellectual tradition. The fact that Tolstoy was a brilliant artist, but a "bad thinker", was written in different years Vl.S.Soloviev, N.K. Mikhailovsky, G.V. Florovsky, G.V. Plekhanov, I.A. Ilyin and others. However, no matter how serious the arguments of the critics of Tolstoy’s teaching sometimes may be, it certainly occupies a unique place in the history of Russian thought, reflecting the spiritual path of the great writer, his personal philosophical experience of answering the “last”, metaphysical questions.

Deep and retained its significance in subsequent years was the influence on the young Tolstoy of the ideas of J.Zh. Rousseau. The writer's critical attitude to civilization, the preaching of "naturalness", which in the late Tolstoy resulted in a direct denial of the significance of cultural creativity, including his own, in many respects go back precisely to the ideas of the French enlightener. Later influences include the philosophy of A. Schopenhauer (“the most brilliant of people,” according to the Russian writer) and Eastern (primarily Buddhist) motifs in Schopenhauer’s doctrine of “will” and “representation”. However, in the 1880s, Tolstoy's attitude to Schopenhauer's ideas became more critical, which was not least due to his high appreciation of Criticism. practical reason I. Kant (whom he described as a "great religious teacher"). However, it should be recognized that Kant's transcendentalism, the ethics of duty and, in particular, the understanding of history do not play any significant role in the religious and philosophical preaching of the late Tolstoy, with its specific anti-historicism, the rejection of state, social and cultural forms of life as exclusively "external", personifying a false historical choice of mankind and leading away from the solution of the main and only task - moral self-improvement. V.V. Zenkovsky quite rightly wrote about Tolstoy's "panmoralism". The ethical doctrine of the writer was largely syncretic in nature. He drew inspiration from various sources - the works of Rousseau, Schopenhauer, Kant, Buddhism, Confucianism, Taoism. But this far from orthodoxy thinker considered Christian morality to be the foundation of his own religious and moral teaching. The main meaning of Tolstoy's religious philosophizing consisted in a kind of ethization of Christianity, reducing this religion to the sum of certain ethical principles that allow rational and accessible not only to the philosophical mind, but also to ordinary common sense justification. Actually, all the religious and philosophical writings of the late Tolstoy are devoted to this task - Confession, the Kingdom of God is within you, About life, etc. Having chosen a similar path, the writer went through it to the end. His conflict with the Church was inevitable and, of course, was not only “external” in nature: his criticism of the foundations of Christian dogma, mystical theology, the denial of the “divinity” of Christ, etc. Vl.S. . Solovyov (Three conversations) and I.A. Ilyin (On resistance to evil).

Conclusion

From the topic we have considered, it can be seen that Russian philosophy is relatively young. It absorbed the best philosophical traditions of European and world philosophy. In its content, it addresses both the whole world and the individual and is aimed both at changing and improving the world (which is characteristic of the Western European tradition) and the person himself (which is characteristic of the Eastern tradition).

At the same time, this is a very original philosophy, which includes all the drama of the historical development of philosophical ideas, the opposition of opinions, schools and trends. Here Westernizers and Slavophiles, conservatism and revolutionary democratism, materialism and idealism, religious philosophy and atheism coexist and enter into a dialogue with each other. No fragments can be excluded from its history and its integral content - this only leads to the impoverishment of its content.

Russian philosophy is an integral part of world culture. This is its significance for philosophical knowledge and for general cultural development.

In this paper, the questions of the formation of Russian philosophy in the 19th century, the philosophical teachings of Westerners and Slavophiles, the philosophy of Chaadaev, as well as the original philosophical ideas of the remarkable thinker of Russian philosophy V.S. Solovyov.

Bibliography

1. Berdyaev N.A. Russian Idea / Oration of Russia and Russian Philosophical Culture / - M.: 1990. - 238 p.

2. Gorelov A.A. Philosophy: Textbook - Minsk: 2003. - 384 p.

3. Kulik S.P. History of Philosophy: textbook. allowance / S.P. Kulik, N.U. Tikhanovich; under total Ed. S.P. Kulik. - Minsk: Vysh. school, 2007. - 316 p.

4. Serbinenko Vyacheslav Vladimirovich. Russian philosophy: a course of lectures: textbook. manual on the discipline "Philosophy" for students of universities studying in non-philosophy. specialties and directions / VV Serbinenko. - 2nd ed., erased. - Moscow: Omega-L, 2006. - 464 p.

5. Spirkin A.G. Philosophy: Textbook. –2nd ed. - M., 2002. - 736 p.

It should be noted that important philosophical ideas in the XIX century. All these thinkers are characterized by the fact that they belonged to various ideological currents that were philosophical only in part, since they included a significant layer of non-philosophical theological historical aesthetic socio-political economics, etc. Suffice it to say that the first generalized exposition of the history of Russian philosophy was written by the archimandrite Gabriel in the World V. Karpov, Archimandrite Gavrila, these philosophers aspired to...

Share work on social networks

If this work does not suit you, there is a list of similar works at the bottom of the page. You can also use the search button

ESSAY

on the topic " Russian idea of ​​philosophical thought 19th century »

XIX century in the history of Russian philosophy is characterized by its complication,appearance of a number philosophical directions, associated with idealism,so it is with materialism. Wherein, the role of professional philosophical thought is growing, first of all, through the development of philosophical education within the walls of universities and theological academies.There is also a general growth of philosophical knowledge,especially in areas such aslike anthropology, ethics, philosophy of history,epistemology and ontology.

First decades of the 19th centuryin Russia are characterized by an intense interest in European philosophy.There is an expansion of philosophical contacts with the West,mastering the latest achievements of the European intellect.The focus is now on the largest representatives of German classical philosophy- Kant, Hegel and Schelling.

In this plan, the most interesting is the Moscow Circle of Philosophers,formed in 1823 It included V.F. Odoevsky, D.V. Venivitinov, I.V. Kireevsky, A.I. Koshelev, N.M. Rozhakhin. The members of the circle did not join the Decembrists,but stood in moderate opposition to absolutism and official ideology.They did not accept materialism either.The ideological source of their philosophy was Schellingism.

The first known Russian Schellingian was Danilo Mikhailovich Vellansky, which in Russia he actively promoted the natural-philosophical ideas of Schelling. In his writings (for example, "Experienced, observational and speculative physics» , "Philosophical definition of nature and man”) he developed, in particular, the idea of ​​a synthesis of experience and speculation,understanding of nature as a whole,living unity,the doctrine of the world soul and the Absolute as"essence of universal life» .

Professor of Moscow University Mikhail Grigoryevich Pavlov considered himself a follower of Schelling,- in his natural philosophy and romantic aesthetics,he followed the principles of Schellingism.

A great connoisseur of the philosophy of Schelling and Hegel was N.V. Stankevich, founder of the philosophical circle,which included M.A. Bakunin, V.G. Belinsky, V.P. Botkin and others.

It should be noted,that important philosophical ideas in the XIX century.belonged often not to systematizers-theorists,and members of philosophical circles(loving, Slavophiles and Westerners) , publicists and literary critics(V.G. Belinsky, A.I. Herzen, N.A. Dobrolyubov, D.I. Pisarev, A.A. Grigoriev, N.K. Mikhailovsky) , religious writers(K.N. Leontiev), outstanding word artists(F.M. Dostoevsky, L.N. Tolstoy), revolutionary theorists(P.L. Lavrov, M.A. Bakunin), etc. They are the carriers of " free philosophy» , were the initiators of new philosophical ideas,developed and enriched the terminology,although they did not create complete philosophical systems.This does not indicate of course about some inferiority of their intellect. Against, just ideas of this kind are much faster"grabbed" intelligentsia and widely disseminated through"thick magazines" not only in the capitals,but also in the provinces.What characterizes all these thinkers isthat they belonged to different « ideological currents» , which were only partly philosophical,since they included a significant layer of non-philosophical theological, historical, aesthetic, socio-political,economic and others. problems.

Significant role in the development of Russian thought played higher spiritual educational institutions.Suffice it to say,that the first generalized exposition of the history of Russian philosophy was written by Archimandrite Gabriel(in the world of V. N. Voskresensky) and was published in Kazan in 1840 S.S. Gogotsky, representative of the Kyiv school of spiritual and academic philosophy,published the first philosophical lexicons and dictionaries in Russia.The first Russian textbooks on philosophy were also written by professors of theological academies F.F. Sidonsky, V.N. Karpov, V.D. Kudryavtsev-Platonov.An outstanding translator of Plato's works was V.N. Karpov, who considered the translation of Plato's dialogues into Russian the main business of his life.The strength of spiritual and academic philosophy was the appeal to the heritage of world philosophical thought.A constant and indispensable source of academic courses in logic, psychology, history of philosophy, ethics (usually later published in monographic versions) was antique philosophical thought (mostly platonism) , as well as the philosophy of modern times,including the philosophy of Kant,Schelling and Hegel.

30-50s 19th century in Russia this is the time of formation of the most influential ideological currents, also called " philosophical awakening» . During this period, the social thought of Russia was divided into two directions. – Slavophilism and Westernism.

At 30 For years, a religious-idealistic philosophy existed in Russia.Its main representatives were F.A. Golubinsky, F.F. Sidonsky, V.N. Karpov, Archimandrite Gavrila- these philosophers sought to remove the contradictions between religion and philosophy, proved what philosophy canconnecting with sciencebe useful in the knowledge of nature and society.

In the 40s. 19th century a Slavophile trend arose in our country.Its representatives are A.S. Khomyakov, K.S. Aksakov, I.V. Kireevsky, Yu.F. Samarin. They opposed those philosopherswho consideredthat Russia should develop in the same direction,which the West believedthat our country has no other way, Besides, who went to the West.

One one of the largest representatives of Slavophilism was Alexei Stepanovich Khomyakov. A.I. Herzen called him"Ilya Muromets of Slavophilism» . In his main work "Notes on world history", or" Semiramis " Khomyakov presents history in the form of a tense struggle between two principles- the spirit of freedom and the spirit of necessity and materiality.The future of society is in its catholicity,when the freedom of each will be reconciled in Christian love and the unity of all will be achieved.According to Khomyakov,the achievement of catholicity presupposes the ecclesiasticalization of social life. Society, to become conciliar,according to the thinkershould restore the deanery of the early Christian apostolic church the beginning of a new era. Khomyakov thought that Russia can live free becausethat she has a community as a bearer of catholicity. Our country, in his opinion, should be a model of a new dispensation of life.

Another major representative of Slavophilism was Ivan Vasilyevich Kireevsky.Historians of philosophy highly appreciate his contribution to philosophy.His articles aroused wide interest among the reading public, so in the article "Nineteenth century» , he prefers Russian culture,comparing it with Western.Kireevsky notes,that in the West in the XVIII century.a destructive direction of minds arose. However, according to Kireevsky, in the 19th century the direction of European minds has changed for the better.He suggests borrowing from Western culture. In his opinion, Russia's backwardness from the West is due to a number of reasons.The main of these reasons- in the limitations of the elements of Russian education.Due to a number of circumstances, there was a preponderance of knowledge of material factors in the life of society over moral principles,the bearer of which is Orthodoxy.In other articles("Reply to Khomyakov» , "On the nature of the enlightenment of Europe and its relation to the enlightenment of Russia» ) Kireevsky partly renounces pro-Western sympathies.In them he criticizes Western civilization,the nature of thinking of people dominant in Western European countries,Western religiosity and statehood. And in the article On the Necessity and Possibility of New Beginnings for Philosophy» Kireevsky draws attention to the fact thatthat Orthodoxy has great potential,which should be used to develop philosophy.

Kireevsky believed,that logical and technical education,aimed at the formal development of the mind and external knowledge,should be combined with Slavic-Christian education,aimed at the inner dispensation of the spirit. He dreamed of the unity of the estates in Russia,and opposed those changeswhich gave impetus to the growth of individualism.His writings as a whole were imbued with a deep faith in the high destiny of the Russian people.However, his ideas were met with sharp criticism by opponents.

Slavophiles of the 19th centurycriticized the feudal-serf reality.They complained about the ruthless attitude of the masters towards the peasants.Representatives of this trend spoke out for freedom of speech and a public court,for the convening of the Zemsky Sobor,which would be advisory.They fought for the liberation of the peasants and the allocation of land to them.

The opponents of the Slavophiles are called Westernizers.The controversy between the Slavophiles and the Westerners then died out,then resumed again.

Contrary to the Westernizers, the Slavophils believed that Russia is following its own historical path,therefore, they protested against the mechanistic transfer to Russian soil of life and views alien to the people,social relations and theories. That is, if Westerners idealized the capitalist way of life,established in the advanced countries of Europe,and bourgeois democracyturning a blind eye to the negative phenomena of the life of the bourgeois West,then the Slavophiles went to the other extreme declaring that Western Europe from the very beginning followed the wrong path and that, torn by contradictions, it is incapable of further progressive development.Hence the idealization of Russian original principles and the preaching of the national exclusivity of Russia,its special historical mission. As in so in the other direction there was a healthy nucleus.Westerners were right, of course.that in terms of its level of development, Russia stood below the countries of the bourgeois West.Their criticism of serfdom and autocratic despotism from the positions of bourgeois liberalism was of great importance for Russian society,standing on the eve of anti-feudal transformations” .

Historians of philosophy believethat Slavophilism cannot be assessed unambiguously.They explain this bythat the Slavophiles did not deny large-scale landownership,did not advocate the immediate abolition of serfdom,idealized antiquity. However, according to historians of philosophy,the respect of the Slavophiles for the national dignity of our people deserves a positive assessment,desire for the liberation and unification of the Slavs.

Valuable in Slavophilism was thatthat its representatives raised the question of the originality of the historical paths of Russia,about the need to preserve and increase the national culture.However, they were not limited to general declarations,but they were working on collecting ancient monuments, folklore, drew attention to the need to respect customs,customs and culture of our people. Besides, Slavophiles opposed bureaucracy,the dominance of foreigners in public institutions,in the army and the economy, What - caused them to be persecuted.

The Slavophil doctrine had points of contact with the theory of official nationality.At the same time, she differed significantly from her. Firstly, Slavophiles condemned autocratic despotism,while supporters of the theory of official nationality saw in him the pinnacle of statehood. Secondly, the Slavophils thought about the need to abolish serfdom,while supporters of the theory of official nationality considered serfdom the most acceptable way to organize the life of peasants. Third, even in the understanding of Orthodoxy,where they stood closest to each other, both have differences,if in Uvarov's triune formula religion plays the role of a conductor of the will of the autocracy,then Slavophiles understand Orthodoxy as a way of thinking of the people,the basis of his spiritual life and the means of his voluntary catholicity.

As we see, the dispute between them was sharp,but did not assume the destruction of the enemy for the sake of proving the correctness of each of the disputing parties.And although the Slavophiles focused on the national identity of Russia,and Westerners gravitated more to the perception of the experience of Europe,both of them passionately desired the prosperity of their homeland and actively contributed to this.

For example, participant in the philosophical discussions of that time P.V.Annenkov in his « literary memoirs» called the dispute between Slavophiles and Westerners « a dispute between two different types of the same Russian patriotism» . However, it should be notedthat an attempt to divide all participants in the philosophical discussions of that time strictly into two camps(who is not a Westerner is a Slavophil, and vice versa) does not correspond to historical truth.The Slavophiles were united by a commitment Christian faith and orientation to patristic sources as the basis for the preservation of Orthodox Russian culture,Westernism was characterized by adherence to secular views and ideas of Western European philosophy.Unlike the revolutionary democrats, the Slavophiles managed to understand the essence of Russia more deeply.They did not push fellow citizens to destructive cataclysms,but tried to find a waywhich would help to avoid them.

Other related works that may interest you.vshm>
14403.		PHILOSOPHICAL AND THEOLOGICAL IDEA OF HESYCHASM AND RUSSIAN CULTURE	2.72MB
	That special thing that distinguishes us from others. Speaking about the relevance of the topic, we do not mean what is in the interests of the modern reader, but what can be meaningful to the reader. Consequently, the problem is formulated as follows: how much what is called the Russian national character and Russian culture in the mind of the researcher corresponds to what they are in themselves. Their works showed that hesychasm as a mystical current is not a separate phenomenon, but an expression of a general pattern inherent in...
5185.		The main directions of philosophical thought in Russian philosophy	21.13KB
	When characterizing the features of Russian philosophy, one must also take into account the cultural and historical background on which it was formed. In Russia, in the course of its history, there has been, as it were, an interweaving of two different types of cultures and, accordingly, types of philosophizing: rationalistic Western European and Eastern, Byzantine, included in Russian self-consciousness through Orthodoxy. This combination of two different types of thinking runs through the entire history of Russian philosophy.
19584.		Formation and development of Russian socio-philosophical thought	37.25KB
	Bulgakov to denote the Christian approach to the knowledge of social life and meaning that the philosopher and theologian does not consider this science to be exclusively positive. The fact is that the sociological views of these thinkers are in a certain sense independent of any value preferences, including Christian ones. Bulgakov, this designation implies the principles and orientations of the researcher, which are that the Kingdom of God is the only good that we need to seek. that Orthodoxy considers the Kingdom of God in a personal way...
20111.		The place and role of Russian philosophical thought in world history	44.05KB
	There are heated discussions around it. Their sharpness is not accidental: the problem of the specifics of Russian philosophy is rooted in understanding the peculiarities of Russian culture, Russian national identity and in the study of the interaction of philosophizing in Russia with philosophical ideas, concepts of the West and East.
3315.		Features of the development of socio-political thought in the XVII century	27.87KB
	First, it legally consolidated serfdom by turning the peasants into slaves. If natural laws determine what is right and what is not right, then politics judges what is useful and what is harmful. natural law talks about the individual and politics about society as a whole. The theoretical stumbling block for Tatishchev was serfdom.
1015.		Analysis and design of a product promotion system on the example of the activities of JSC "Idea-Fix"	35.46KB
	The concept and meaning of product promotion and marketing communications. The structure of the QMS: basic and synthetic means of marketing communications. The main means of marketing communications. Synthetic means of marketing communications.
2468.		Russian philosophy	2.47MB
	This means that Russian philosophical thought develops on the basis of insights and intuition. The difference between Russian thinking and European thinking is that it is very close to the Eastern one. From this we can conclude that a philosophical treatise, that is, a scientific form of presentation, is quite rare in science. This is connected in the previous feature with the fact that in Russian philosophy the intuitive form of cognition prevails over the rational one.
6315.		Russian philosophy and its representatives	15.91KB
	Freedom in his opinion was not created by God. Berdyaev distinguishes two types of freedom: primary irrational freedom - potential freedom which causes the pride of the spirit and, as a result, its falling away from God, which as a result leads to the slavery of the individual in the natural world; and âthe second freedom is the reasonable freedom in truth and goodness. freedom in God and received from God. History is determined by three forces: God's fate and human freedom.
21828.		Russian history in titles and names	18.47KB
	Konstantin Rokossovsky Born in 1896 in the city of Velikiye Luki in the family of a Pole inspector railway. By 1911, the boy remained an orphan, working as a laborer in a factory as an assistant to a stonemason's confectioner. In 1917, Rokossovsky, along with other supporters of the Bolsheviks, joined the Red Army. In 1942, he headed the Stalingrad Front and developed the Uranus plan to prevent an attack on Stalingrad.
105.		Native Russian and borrowed vocabulary	8.39KB
	Types of original Russian vocabulary: Indo-European words represent the most ancient layer of vocabulary. These include the words: mother daughter sister son wolf beaver birch oak wind water snow and many others. Common Slavic words Proto-Slavic vocabulary words formed during the period of the linguistic unity of the Slavs until the 6th century. Old Russian or common Eastern Slavic words of the 6th 1415th centuries.

1. The main directions of Russian philosophy19th century were:

Decembrist philosophy;

Philosophy of Westernizers and Slavophiles;

Philosophy of Chaadaev;

Conservative religious and monarchical philosophy;

Philosophy of the system of writers F.M. Dostoevsky and L.N. Tolstoy;

Revolutionary Democratic Philosophy;

liberal philosophy.

2. Decembrist philosophy was represented by the work of P. Pestel, N. Muravyov, I. Yakushkin, M. Lunin, I. Kireevsky, V. Kuchelbecker and others.

The main focus of the philosophy of the Decembrists is socio-political. Her core ideas were:

Priority of natural law;

The need for a legal system for Russia;

The abolition of serfdom and the provision of land to those who work on it;

Personal freedom of a person;

Restriction of autocracy by law and representative bodies or its replacement by a republic.

3. historical philosophy was represented by art P.Ya. Chaadaeva(1794 - 1856).

Main directions his philosophies were:

Philosophy of man;

Philosophy of history.

Man, according to Chaadaev, is a combination of material and spiritual substances. Human life is possible only in a collective. Being from birth to death in a collective (society), a person becomes a person, grows as a person. Collective (public) consciousness completely determines the individual, subjective. Life in a team is the main factor that distinguishes man from animals. Chaadaev opposed individualism, selfishness, opposition of private, narrowly selfish interests to the public.

According to Chaadaev in the basis historical process lies Divine Providence. The incarnation of the Divine Julia is Christianity.

Christianity is the core, the engine of history.

As for the history of Russia, according to Chaadaev, Russia "fell out" of the world historical process. The future of Russia, according to Chaadaev, is to return to the world historical field, to master the values ​​of the West, but thanks to its uniqueness that has developed over the centuries, to fulfill a historical mission within the framework of human civilization.

One of the main factors influencing the history, the fate of states and peoples, according to the philosopher, is geographical. The main reasons that caused the despotic autocracy, the dictate of the central government, serfdom, Chaadaev considered the vast expanses of Russia, incommensurable with other countries.

4. The problems of history, the choice of a historical path for Russia were dealt with representatives of the philosophical trends of "Westerners" and Slavophiles.

Prominent representatives of the Westerners were A.I. Herzen, N.P. Ogarev, K.D. Kavelin, V.G. Belinsky.

Westerners well assimilated the philosophical traditions of contemporary Western philosophy (materialism, empiricism) and tried to bring them into Russian philosophy.

According to Westerners, there is no "unique" historical path for Russia separate from the rest of civilization. Russia simply lagged behind world civilization and mothballed itself.

It is good for Russia to master Western values ​​and become a normal civilized country.

The opponents of the Westerners were Slavophiles. Their leaders were A.S. Khomyakov, I.V. Kireevsky, Yu.F. Samarin, A.N. Ostrovsky, brothers KS. and I.S. Aksakovs.

According to the Slavophiles, the basis of the historical existence of Russia is Orthodoxy and the communal way of life, and the Russian people are fundamentally different in their mentality from the peoples of the West (holiness, catholicity, piety, collectivism, mutual assistance against lack of spirituality, individualism, competition of the West).

In their opinion, any reforms, attempts to plant Western traditions on Russian soil sooner or later ended tragically for Russia.

5. In contrast to the philosophy of the Decembrists and other areas of philosophy that are not consistent with the official ideology, the so-called orthodox-monarchist philosophy. Its goals are to defend the existing socio-political and moral order, to neutralize oppositional philosophy. Its main slogan in the middle of the XIX century. was: "Orthodoxy, autocracy, nationality". An important role in orthodox-monarchical philosophy was played by religious direction. Its prominent representatives were N.V. Fedorov, K.N. Leontiev.

N.V. Fedorov(1828 - 1903) made the main themes of his philosophy:

Unity of the world;

The problem of life and death;

The problem of morality and the correct (moral) way of life. According to Fedorov, the world is one. Nature (environment),

God, man are one and interconnected, the link between them is the will and the mind. God, man and nature mutually influence each other, complement each other and constantly exchange energy, they are based on a single world mind.

The "moment of truth" of human life Fedorov considered its finiteness, and the greatest evil - death. Humanity must cast aside all strife and unite to solve the most important task - victory over death.

The philosopher believed in such a prospect. According to Fedorov, victory over death is possible in the future, with the development of science and technology, but it will not happen by eradicating death as a phenomenon (since this is impossible), but by finding ways to reproduce life, revitalize.

According to Fedorov, Jesus Christ gave hope for the possibility of revival.

The philosophy of Fedorov calls for the rejection of hostility, rudeness, confrontation between people and for the recognition by all of the highest images of morality. The moral life of all people without exception, according to Fedorov, is the path to solving all problems and world happiness. According to the philosopher, both extreme egoism and altruism are unacceptable in human behavior. It is necessary to live "with each and for each."

Another representative of the religious direction of Russian philosophy was K.N. Leontiev(1831 - 1891).

One of the main directions of Leontiev's philosophy is criticism of the negative phenomena of Russian life. At the center of this critique was developing capitalism. According to Leontiev, capitalism is the kingdom of "rudeness and meanness", the path to the degeneration of the people, the death of Russia. Salvation for Russia is the rejection of capitalism, isolation from Western Europe and its transformation into a closed Orthodox Christian center (in the image of Byzantium). In addition to Orthodoxy, autocracy, communality, and a strict class division should become the key factors in the life of a saved Russia.

Leontiev compared the historical process with human life. Like the life of a person, the history of every nation, state is born, reaches maturity and fades.

If the state does not seek to preserve itself, it perishes. The key to the preservation of the state is internal despotic unity. The goal of preserving the state justifies violence, injustice, slavery.

According to Leontiev, inequality between people is the desire of God and therefore it is natural and justified. 6. Representatives of the philosophical religious trend were also well-known Russian writers - F.M. Dostoevsky and L.N. Tolstoy, who left, in addition to the literary, a great philosophical heritage.

F.M. Dostoevsky(1821 - 1881) saw the future of Russia not in capitalism and not in socialism, but in relying on Russian "national soil" - customs, traditions.

Religion should play a key role both in the fate of the state and in the fate of the individual. It is on religion that human spirituality rests, it is a "shell" that protects a person from sins and evil.

A special role in the philosophical views of Dostoevsky (with which all his literary work is saturated) is occupied by the problem of man. Dostoevsky singled out two options life path, on which a person can walk:

The path of human deity;

The path of the divine.

The path of human deity is the path of absolute freedom of man. A person rejects all authorities, including God, considers his possibilities unlimited, and himself - the right to do everything, he himself tries to become God, instead of God. According to Dostoevsky, this path is destructive and dangerous both for others and for the person himself. Those who walk on it will fail.

The second path of the God-man is the path of following God, striving for Him in all one's habits and actions. Dostoevsky considered such a path to be the most faithful, righteous and salutary for man.

7. Another famous Russian writer, L.N. Tolstoy(1828 - 1910), created a special religious and philosophical doctrine - Tolstoyanism. Essence of Tolstoyanism in the following:

Many religious dogmas must be criticized and discarded, as well as magnificent ceremonial, cults, hierarchy;

Religion must be made simple and accessible to the people;

God, religion is goodness, love, reason and conscience;

The meaning of life is self-improvement;

The main evil on Earth is death and violence;

It is necessary to abandon violence as a way to solve any problems;

The basis of human behavior should be non-resistance to evil;

The state is a moribund institution and, since it is an apparatus of violence, has no right to exist;

Everyone needs to undermine the state in possible ways, to ignore it - not to go to work for officials, not to participate in political life etc.

For his religious and philosophical views in 1901 L.N. Tolstoy was anathematized (cursed) and excommunicated from the Church.

8. Representatives revolutionary-democratic direction of Russian philosophy19th century were:

N.G. Chernyshevsky;

Populists - N.K. Mikhailovsky, M.A. Bakunin, P.L. Lavrov, PN. Tkachev;

Anarchist P. Kropotkin;

Marxist G.V. Plekhanov.

A common feature of these directions - socio-political orientation. All representatives of these movements rejected the existing socio-political and economic system, they saw the future in different ways.

N.G. Chernyshevsky saw a way out of the emerging crisis of early capitalism in a "return to the land" (to the idea of ​​Russia's agrarianism), personal freedom and a communal way of life.

The populists advocated a direct transition to socialism, bypassing capitalism and relying on the originality of the Russian people. In their opinion, all means are possible for the overthrow of the existing system and the transition to socialism, the most effective of which is terror.

Unlike populists, anarchists did not see any point in preserving the state at all and considered the state (the mechanism of suppression) to be the source of all troubles.

Marxists saw the future of Russia in accordance with the teachings of K. Marx and F. Engels as socialist, with the prevailing state ownership.

9. Completes philosophical tradition 19th century liberal direction.

Its most prominent representative was the Russian philosopher B.C. Solovyov(1853 - 1900).

Core ideals his philosophies were:

The idea of ​​unity - the unification and harmony of all aspects of being (material, spiritual, etc.);

The idea of ​​morality as the main aspect of human life (the lowest level of morality is law, the highest is love);

The idea of ​​progress - as a universal connection of generations;

The idea of ​​the resurrection of all, both the living (spiritual resurrection) and the dead (bodily-spiritual), as the main goal towards which humanity should strive;

The idea of ​​God as an expression of goodness;

The idea of ​​a "god-man" - the life path of a person, which is based on following God, goodness, morality;

The idea of ​​Sophia - the universal Divine wisdom;

russian idea, consisting, according to Solovyov, of three ideas: "Holy Rus'" (Moscow - the Third Rome), "Great Rus'" (reforms of Peter I) and "Free Rus'" (the spirit of the Decembrists and Pushkin).

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Hosted at http://www.allbest.ru/

1. Philosophical ideasP.Ya.Chaadaeva

Pyotr Yakovlevich Chaadaev played an outstanding role in the development of Russian philosophy in the 19th century.

In the 1920s, traveling around Europe, P.Ya. Chaadaev met Schelling, whose philosophy, especially its religious motives, had a great influence on the formation of his worldview and philosophical convictions. In 1829-1831. he creates his main philosophical work, Letters on the Philosophy of History, better known as Philosophical Letters.

The Philosophical Letters are usually judged by the first of them, published in the Telescope, and therefore it is believed that Chaadaev discussed in them, first of all, the historical fate of Russia. However, only one of the eight letters is devoted directly to Russia. And in his "Philosophical Letters" Chaadaev is not concerned only with the fate of Russia, he builds a system of Christian philosophy of history, and, already proceeding from it, considers and interprets the history of Russia. Ideas connected with the mysterious meaning of the historical process, with the role of Russia in the destinies of all mankind, form the main core of the first letter. In the second letter, he develops philosophical and scientific evidence his main idea: "In the human spirit there is no other truth than that which God put into it with his own hand when he drew it out of being."

A significant part of the third philosophical letter is devoted to the consideration of the subordination of human understanding of life to a higher principle, an external force.

In the fourth philosophical letter, turning to the analysis of the movement physical bodies, Chaadaev concludes that inexorable logic forces us to speak of him as a consequence of an external source. And since movement is the universal form of existence of any phenomena in the world, mental and moral movement also has an external stimulus.

The sixth and seventh philosophical letters deal with the movement and direction of the historical process. In the eighth and last philosophical letter, the author concludes: “The truth is one: the kingdom of God, heaven on earth, all the gospel promises - all this is nothing more than insight and the realization of the combination of all the thoughts of mankind in a single thought; and this single thought is the thought of God himself, in other words, the realized moral law.

The initial postulate of his philosophy is that God is the Absolute Mind, which, thanks to its universal ideal, spiritual essence, has in itself the beginning for all real existence. He is a self-consistent Universe: "Everything has a beginning in the perfect thought of God." The existence of the world, the existence of history and the existence of man are the result of "God's continuous action on the world", his triumphant march. Man has never "walked otherwise than in the radiance of divine light." The absolute unity of God is manifested in the totality of human beings. Most clearly, the Absolute unity of the Divine mind is manifested through revelation and providential action, creation and creation of good. Chaadaev, as it were, tends to think that the basis of the Divine mind is good.

Chaadaev believes that the Divine mind can be represented in three ways. First, he appears to us and appears as God the Father, in whom all contradiction disappears. He revealed himself to us (mankind) to the extent "as necessary so that a person can seek Him in this life and find Him in another". God is absolute reality, absolute being. Secondly, God appears before us as the "Holy Spirit", the spirit, the mind, acting on the souls of people through their mind. In him (the Holy Spirit) are the origins and foundations of goodness, justice, truth. Thirdly, he appears to us and we represent him in the person of God the Son, Jesus Christ, in whom the human is inseparable from the Divine. Therefore, “if Jesus Christ had not come, the world would have become “nothing”.

In order for God to reveal himself to us, emphasizes Chaadaev, the creator, endowed a person with the necessary abilities: faith and reason. Faith reveals to us the sphere of God's Existence in all three hypostases of his unity. It is a necessary prerequisite and condition for man's relationship with God. Reason allows us to understand, comprehend the essence of God. Therefore Faith and reason are inseparable. To be a believer means to be reasonable. Moreover, “the tasks of the divine founder of Christianity never included imposing a mute and short-sighted faith on the world.” He agrees with the postulate of St. Augustine that faith without reason is blind. For blind faith is the faith of the crowd, not the individual.

The human mind is a mode of the Divine mind. The Creator gave it to man in order to be understood by him (man). Chaadaev identifies two properties, two bases human mind. The first property of the human mind is its religiosity and morality. Therefore, “in order to reflect, in order to judge things, it is necessary to have a concept of good and evil. Take it away from a man, and he will neither think nor judge, he will not be a rational being. By His will, God endowed man with moral reason. This is Chaadaev's central thought about the essence of the human mind, which manifests itself in the form of a "vague instinct for moral good", "an unformed concept without an obligatory thought", "an imperfect idea of ​​distinguishing between good and evil", incomprehensibly "embedded in our soul" .

Another property of the human mind is expressed in its creative nature. creative nature human consciousness, according to P.Ya. Chaadaev, allows people to "create life themselves, instead of leaving it to their own flow" . Reason is not a dispassionate system, indifferently contemplating everything. Therefore, the receptacle of human intelligence is the heart - reasonable by nature and acting by its own power. “Those who create their own heads with their hearts succeed and do more, because there is much more reason in feeling than in the reason of feelings.” Man is something more than a purely rational being, P.Ya. Chaadaev. The focus of a person's rational and spiritual life, his "cordiality" is Christian love, which is "reason without egoism, reason that refuses the ability to relate everything to itself." Therefore, faith is nothing but a moment of human knowledge. "A necessary condition for the development of man and his mind is religious and moral education, based on the obligatory dogma of the Trinity" .

Pays attention to P.Ya. Chaadaev and the contradictory nature of human existence, since two types of laws govern human existence. As a living bodily being, a person obeys the law of self-preservation, requiring only personal, egoistic good, in which he (man) sees his freedom. “The action of this law is visible and eerie, egoistic self-affirmation is revered as freedom, every time a person shakes the entire universe, and this is how history moves.” Earthly freedom is the freedom of a “wild colt,” emphasizes P.Ya. Chaadaev. This is negative freedom.

Another law of human existence, the side of necessity, according to Chaadaev, is the Law of Divine Reason, which contains truth and goodness. He (Divine Mind) both manifests itself and acts as truth and goodness, acquiring the property of Providence. Therefore, the freedom of human being acquires a true character when there is a “continuous external influence on the human mind” of God, which a person does not notice. God guides a person on the path of true freedom, which lies in the combination of freedom and goodness. Therefore, a person, both in his being and in history, according to Chaadaev, is faced not so much with the contradiction of freedom and necessity, but with the contradiction of freedom and goodness, and the desire for the latter should become a necessity.

P.Ya. Chaadaev adheres to the providentialist concept of the world history of mankind: the meaning of history is determined by the Divine mind (seeing everything) and the Divine will (all prescribing), ruling over the centuries and leading the human race to the final goals. Chaadaev believes that the subject of history is humanity or a separate people, and in this regard, he assigns a special place and a special role to Russia in world human history.

On the one hand, Russia “does not belong ... to either the West or the East, it has no traditions of either. We stand, as it were, outside of time; the universal upbringing of the human race has not spread to us. On the other hand, "Russia is called upon to undertake an immense mental task: her task is to resolve in due time all the questions and disputes that arouse in Europe." It must take the initiative to carry out all the generous thoughts of mankind, to become an example for the moral improvement of mankind. Her mission is to overcome the human egoism that has "conquered" Europe. The only drawback of Russia to fulfill such a messianic role is the lack of freedom, republic and serfdom, P.Ya. Chaadaev.

From the philosophy of P.Ya. Chaadaev in Russian philosophy "grew" two currents, two directions. "Slavophiles", who accepted Chaadaev's ideas about the "faith and catholicity of the Russian people." The Westerners stood up under the banner of "reason" preached by Chaadaev. Both currents in Russian philosophy arose almost simultaneously and competed until the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries.

2. Westernizers and Slavophiles on the ways of Russia's development

« Slavophiles» (Slavophilism) is a special trend in Russian philosophical thought. The central problem for the Slavophiles is the fate and role of Russia, its special place in world human history. The leaders of Slavophilism - A.S. Khomyakov (1804-1860), I.V. Kireevsky (1806-1856), K.S. Aksakov (1817-1860), Yu.F. Samarin (1819-1876) - made a justification for the original way of development of Russia. They proceeded from the fact that Russia has its own special path, determined by its history, position in the world, the vastness of its territory and population, geographical location, and especially the peculiar features of the Russian national character, the Russian "soul". The Slavophils considered Orthodoxy, autocracy and nationality to be the three foundations of Russia's special historical path.

One of the founders of Slavophilism is the Russian religious philosopher and publicist Kireevsky Ivan Vasilyevich (1806-1856). The main goal of his philosophical views is to substantiate the peculiarity of the path of the historical development of Russia, which is radically different from the development of Europe. He sees the foundations of Russia's development in Orthodoxy, the Orthodox Church, which preserved in purity the original truth of Christianity, distorted by Catholicism. In Orthodoxy and the Orthodox Church, he sees the foundations for preserving the spiritual integrity of both the individual and the people, the unity of cognitive and moral principles that are inseparable from faith and religion. Therefore, philosophy must comprehend the fundamental foundations of Russian identity, thanks to which, in contrast to Western philosophy, it acquires concreteness, eliminating the abstractness of Western philosophy. He sees another basis for the identity of Russia in the communal nature of public life, the communal spirit and self-consciousness of the Russian people, based on Orthodoxy. He puts forward the idea of ​​the "catholicity" of the Russian people, and the Orthodox Church as an institution that actually implements the idea of ​​catholicity, since it personifies the purity of Christianity. Therefore, already in Kireevsky, patriotism is put forward in the foreground of the moral and religious education of the people in its identity, requiring from the individual to serve the goal of the unity of the people, its catholicity. The value of the conciliar personality is higher and more preferable than the idea of ​​an individual personality. As an educated and enlightened person, he understood the meaning of "European education" as "the mature fruit of all-human development", but it needs to be rethought and transformed on the basis of Orthodoxy, the unity of faith and religion, the unity of the individual and the Orthodox Church. Only in this case Russia will not only preserve its originality, but also open the way for world history.

Another founder of "Slavophilism" was the Russian thinker, poet and publicist Khomiakov Alexei Stepanovich (1804-1860). The main idea of ​​his fundamental work "Notes on World History" is the search for and substantiation of the historical fate of Russia, its identity and its role in world history.

Considering being as the realization of the universe of God, which is an integral unity, Khomyakov believes that this universe of God is projected in a special way in human history. The basis of the unity of social life and history is "cathedralism" (gathering into a single whole not only the church, but also people). A necessary condition for such unity and catholicity, which includes the diversity of the mental and spiritual forces of a person, specific individuals, is faith. Moreover, the "true faith", which in its fullness is manifested in Orthodoxy. In addition to Orthodoxy, the basis of catholicity is the Russian peasant community, which acts as a collective personality, a “living face”, endowed with a unique character, soul, appearance and a special historical vocation.

Khomyakov is characterized by the idealization of the pre-Petrine era, which carried the true features of an original national culture and national identity.

Christian motifs in the work of the Slavophiles had a great influence on the development of Russian religious and philosophical thought. Many Russian historians of philosophy at the beginning of the 20th century consider Slavophilism as the beginning of the development of an original and original Russian philosophy, which put forward a number of new, original ideas. The Slavophiles did not deny the achievements of Western European culture. They highly valued the outward arrangement of Western life, and treated Western European science with deep respect. But their active rejection caused the dominance of individualism, disunity, fragmentation, isolation of the spiritual world of people, the subordination of spiritual life to external circumstances, the dominance of material interests over spiritual ones.

In the 40s of the 19th century, a special direction arose in Russian philosophical thought, which was called « Westerners» , « Westernism» . It arose in the course of a controversy with the "Slavophiles". In contrast to the Slavophiles, the "Westerners" did not defend the idea of ​​the originality and exclusivity of the historical role and fate of Russia in world history, but the idea of ​​Russia being woven into a single evolutionary world process. And the development of Western Europe and America is a progressive expression of world history. Therefore, Russia should objectively “follow” the Western path of development, and not isolate itself from it and not oppose it. The "Western" path of development was characterized by the development of capitalism, the establishment of the free development of the individual, the creation of civil society and opposition to all kinds of despotism, the progressive development of science. Freedom is understood as a necessary attribute of historical development. Representatives of "Westernism" believed that economic, political, social, industrial and technical transformations naturally await Russia, which should be promoted, not hindered. The spirit of the socio-economic transformation of Russia took possession of the minds of people, and the essence of this transformation had to be comprehended philosophically.

The “Westerners” considered the existence of serfdom and the absence of political and social freedoms of the individual to be the main obstacle to the progressive development of Russia. In this, representatives - "Westerners" did not differ. But they differed over the ways and means of transforming Russia and the future of Russia. As a single direction, "Westernism" survived until the end of the 60s of the XIX century. The largest representatives of the "Westerners" were A.I. Herzen, T.N. Granovsky, N.I. Ogarev, K.D. Kavelin and other philosophers and publicists. The ideas of "Westernism" were supported by V.G. Belinsky, I.S. Turgenev, P.V. Annenkov, I.I. Panaev. But the largest figure in the philosophical thought of Russia of this period was Alexander Ivanovich Herzen (1812-1870).

To form it philosophical views Hegel's philosophy, especially his doctrine of dialectics, had a great influence, materialistic philosophy L. Feuerbach.

A.I. Herzen develops his understanding of the development of history, the essence of the historical process. He notes that the development of history is based on the struggle of opposites. “At all times of the long life of mankind, two opposite movements are noticeable; the development of one causes the emergence of another, at the same time the struggle and destruction of the first. The source of this struggle is the contradiction between the individual, striving for monopoly, and the mass, which seeks "to take the fruit of their labor, to dissolve them in itself." They mutually exclude and complement each other at the same time. And "this polarity is one of the phenomena of the life development of mankind, a phenomenon like a pulse, with the difference that with each beat of the pulse, humanity takes a step forward." He emphasizes that this struggle proceeds in its own way in different epochs and in different countries, but it is a real source of universal development.

A person, an individual, according to Herzen, is a participant and creator of his own history and the history of mankind as a whole, after he left the animal world. He creates history as a social, public, and not a biological being. The attribute of a person's existence as a social, social being is the "freedom of the person", understood by him as a comprehensive manifestation of talents, his mind and his consciousness. Freedom itself is a manifestation of his consciousness and reason. By freedom, he understands "ownership of oneself." An indispensable condition for human freedom, according to Herzen, is the recognition of "personal autonomy", personal independence.

Philosophically comprehending the prospects for the development of human history, the internal motive of which, in his opinion, is the achievement of individual freedom, the liberation of man from social oppression and the establishment of social justice, he is convinced of the justice of the ideas of socialism, the implementation of which will lead to the creation of a just society without oppression of man. The era of bourgeois revolutions in the 19th century, which he witnessed, were, in his opinion, a natural stage in the movement towards socialism. He believes that Russia is also moving along this path. But disappointed in the results of the bourgeois revolutions in Western Europe, he comes to the conclusion that for Russia the most organic transition to socialism is through the Russian peasant community. And the social force capable of solving this historical task is the peasant. “The man of the future in Russia is a man,” emphasizes A.I. Herzen. Why, then, does he see in the Russian community the basis for establishing socialism in Russia? Firstly, because the Russian peasant is instinctively inclined towards communist morality, which denies not only the injustice of the landlords and the landowners' power, but injustice, inequality as such. Secondly, the Russian community has historically justified the strength of its internal device. “The community saved the Russian people from the Mongol barbarism… She…” withstood the intervention of the authorities; she successfully lived to see the development of socialism in Europe. Thirdly, since the creator of history is the people, and the majority of the people in Russia are the peasantry, the communal consciousness and psychology of the people most fully correspond to the assertion of the principles of socialism in the organization of public life. In his opinion, the historical mission of Russia is expressed in the fact that it is able to establish socialism, which is an expression of the demand of world history itself. Ideas and philosophy of A.I. Herzen influenced the formation in Russia of such a political movement in the 19th century as Narodnaya Volya.

The representative of the liberal trend in "Westernism" was the Russian historian and philosopher, a prominent jurist Konstantin Dmitrievich Kavelin (1818-1885). For western liberals general principle is the recognition of human freedom and its realization as a universal driving force of historical development. From these positions, he demanded the abolition of serfdom as the main obstacle to the socio-economic progress of Russian society, preventing Russia from naturally joining in a single universal process of civilized development. He considered the release of peasants with land for ransom a necessary condition for the formation of a conservative "muzhik estate", endowed with the right of private property, as the social force that would ensure the socio-economic progress of Russia. He believed that the patriarchal foundations of economic relations and the exclusivity of the national characteristics of Russia (for example, the religiosity of the Russian people) had exhausted themselves. Therefore, the historical prospects for the development of Russia are connected with the convergence of the development of Western Europe on the basis of the recognition of liberal freedoms of the individual and new social groups and classes emerging in Russia of that period. At the same time, he was a supporter of a compromise between the need for liberal socio-economic reforms and the preservation of autocracy based on liberal laws.

For all the differences between Westerners and Slavophiles, they had much in common. And this they had in common was love for freedom, love for Russia, humanism. In the first place on the scale of values, they put spiritual values, were deeply concerned about the problem of the moral growth of the individual, and hated philistinism.

Differences of views related primarily to such questions: what should be the form of government, laws; whether legal guarantees of individual freedom are needed; what are the optimal limits of individual autonomy; what place should religion take; what is the significance of national elements of culture, traditions, customs, rituals.

3. PhilosophyV.S.SolovyovAndON THE.Berdyaev

Vladimir Sergeevich Solovyov(1853-1900) played an outstanding role in the development of Russian philosophical thought in the 19th century. He created his own original philosophical system, called the "Philosophy of Unity" and "The Teaching of God-manhood." It had a pronounced religious, mystical character.

The initial idea of ​​the doctrine of All-Unity is the position that "God is everything, that is, that everything in a positive sense or the unity of all constitutes the subject of its own content, subject or objective essence." In other words, God is the Universe. In addition, God is the Absolute Subject, creating everything out of himself and giving content to everything that exists, including the natural world. This is the Unity of God.

The second postulate of his philosophy of "All-unity" is that God is the beginning. As the primal essence, God acts as the Father, which emphasizes his absolute expression as a subject. The Absolute of God as a subject (Father) is expressed in three ways:

1) he posits everything (creates) because he already possesses the content of this act of creation;

2) positing itself is the realization of the absolute content of God as a subject;

3) God as the Absolute preserves and affirms himself in this content, which is the result of the activity of God as a subject.

The unity of God in reality manifests itself in the form of a trinity:

1) as the beginning of everything, he is God the father;

2) God is the word by which Divine Wisdom, Sophia, is uttered;

3) holy spirit (non-material essence of God.

All these three hypostases of the God of the Absolute (the Unity of God in himself), and as his other, manifests itself through the will as driving force God.

God as the Absolute All-Unity acquires a special form of being in the form of the World Soul, which is both active and independent, but does not have its own beginning. But as soon as the World Soul tries to fall away from the Divine unity of being, it loses its freedom and its power over itself. “Separating itself, it takes itself away from everything, it ceases to unite everyone.” The world soul has an important role to play - to unite everyone around the value of the Absolute All-Unity of God.

As a true philosopher V.S. Solovyov raises the question of the essence of the world process. In his opinion, "the gradual realization of the ideal unity is the meaning of the world process", and nature is a necessary stage in this process. After the World Soul and the natural world united by it fell away from the Divine idea and its beginning, nature disintegrated "into a multitude of warring elements." That is, it has lost unity within itself and unity with the Divine principle (All-Unity). In order for the lost unity to be reborn in the form of an absolute organism, three stages must pass and pass in the world natural process:

1) cosmic matter, under the influence of gravitational forces, is drawn into great cosmic bodies - the stellar or astral epoch;

2) when these bodies become the basis for the development of more complex forces (forms of the world process) - heat, light, magnetism, electricity, chemistry. An integral harmonic system is created;

3) finally, the third stage, thanks to the all-penetrating ether, as a pure medium of unity, acquires the form of being in the form of the life of an organism (living nature).

Such is the peculiar natural philosophy of V.S. Solovyov, not devoid of features of evolution. He was a supporter of the creation of the unity of the natural sciences (which he knew well), religion and philosophy, which in their own way reveal the Unity of the Divine principle in everything. But nature, including living nature, is only the beginning, the outer shell for the Divine idea of ​​unity. Only in man, as a bodily, rational and spiritual being, does the World Soul for the first time unite the inner with the Divine Logos. And human consciousness is a sphere where nature outgrows itself and passes into the area of ​​the Absolute, the possible achievement of the All-Unity. Why, then, it is in man and through man that the restoration of the lost All-Unity is possible? First of all, because "man is the image and likeness of God." Secondly, “human consciousness carries the eternal divine idea”, “in the ideal consciousness, a person has the spirit of God. Man has the unconditional, but formal freedom of the infinite human "I", since he represents the likeness of God. Thirdly, because "man has the same inner essence of life - total unity, which God also has." But the most important thing is that a person, as an active, acting being, is free to desire to have her as God. "He wants to master it himself, or he will master it." That is, a person as a consciously spiritual being can potentially revive the unity in himself.

Man as a creation of God, the "first man" Adam, appears at first as an integral bodily and spiritual-conscious being. But then he fell away from the Idea of ​​God, from God Himself, lost his original essence, moreover, by his own will. Falling away from God and his essence is sin. What are the temptations that the "first man" could not resist? The first temptation is the material good, which he considers the goal and prefers spiritual good. The second reason for the fall and evil was "the temptation to make one's own power, given to him by God, an instrument of self-affirmation of oneself as God." The third, last and most powerful temptation for the first man was the temptation to assert "his dominion over the world" at all costs. Achieving this goal is possible by the only means - violence against the world and against other people. After this act of the fall, realized through many separate, individual, personal acts, she human life and human history itself acquired a tragic character. And people themselves without new strength and a new “ideal of man” are not able to interrupt it, they cannot restore the All-Unity with God.

And yet V.S. Solovyov believes in historical progress, the purpose of which is the restoration and revival of the lost All-Unity with God, which is the true meaning and motive of all world history. But this task can be solved if a new type of man appears - the “God-man”, and humanity becomes “God-manhood”, examples of which we find in the form and person of Jesus Christ. This is how V.S. Solovyov's concept of "God-man" and "God-manhood".

According to the philosophical version of V.S. Solovyov Jesus Christ is a special person. He embodies both divine traits and human traits. He is the son of God, in whom the Divine spirit, Divine will, Divine Wisdom, Divine truth and the Word are embodied in a concrete, individual form. But, in addition, I. Christ and the son of man. He is also subject to temptation. But thanks to the Divine spirit and Divine will, he overcomes them. Each person can approach the ideal of the God-man, embodied in the face of I. Christ. V.S. Solovyov astutely notes that this is achievable if a person transforms himself, not only freely accepts the ideas and teachings of I. Christ, but finds a place for the Divine principle in himself, in his soul.

V.S. Solovyov gives love, moreover, sexual love, a completely earthly human feeling. In his special work "The Meaning of Love", he reveals the connection of sexual love with the All-Unity and God-manhood. Expanding the horizon of action of love, V.S. Solovyov emphasizes that its extension to the sphere of interpersonal relations makes it possible to overcome atomism and individualism, and thus, the real realization of the All-Unity is achieved. It universalizes love, giving it a cosmic character.

A special place in the embodiment of the idea of ​​All-Unity as the meaning of the historical process of V.S. Solovyov assigned churches. In it, he saw a special institution designed to help people gain practical All-Unity. In the 80s, he even advocated the union of the Catholic and Orthodox churches. Later, he departs from this idea, believing that only Orthodoxy, Orthodox Church and the Russian people are capable of carrying out the cause of All-Unity.

At the end of his life, he was increasingly doubted about the practical feasibility of the ideas of the All-Unity and the “ideal of goodness in real life". “The point is not only that evil is a fact of human history, but also that good good man does not make evil good. Actual beneficence increases good in good and evil in evil. He even spoke of the Apocalypse as the end of world history.

Philosophy at its core Nikolai AlexandrovichBerdyaev (1874-1948) is religious-existentialist in nature, with clear signs of anthropologism. In his work “My Philosophical Worldview” (1937), he characterizes the subject of his philosophy as follows: “At the center of my philosophical work is the problem of man. Therefore, my whole philosophy is highly anthropological. To pose the problem of man means at the same time to pose the problem of freedom, creativity, personality, spirit and history. My philosophy is of an existential type". It can be said that the subject of Berdyaev's philosophy is freedom, creativity as a condition and ways of life manifestation of a person as a person, the core of which is spiritual and religious life in its formation and manifestation. “Philosophy is the science of the spirit. However, the science of the spirit is first of all the science of human existence. And if so, then philosophy has not only theoretical, but also practical significance. It is in the practical application of philosophy that N.A. Berdyaev her vocation: “A real, called philosopher wants not only knowledge of the world, but also changes, improvements in the world. It cannot be otherwise, if philosophy is first of all the doctrine of the meaning of human existence, of human destiny. Therefore philosophy is not only the love of wisdom, but wisdom itself. Philosophy is involved in the mystery of being and the being of man. Unlike science, it cannot be purely rational, and unlike theology, it (philosophy) is alien to dogmatism. According to N.A. Berdyaev, it has a cleansing significance for both science and religion. By virtue of this vocation and destiny, the philosopher by nature often turns out to be lonely and unrecognized, and only later does he receive public recognition.

Proceeding from such a definition of the subject and task of philosophy, he raises the eternally fundamental question for philosophy: what precedes what - being to freedom or freedom to being? The initial postulate of the entire philosophy of N.A. Berdyaev lies in the primacy of freedom in relation to being, to everything that exists: “The originality of my philosophical type is primarily in the fact that I put not being, but freedom, at the foundation of philosophy.” “Freedom, according to N.A. Berdyaev, is not special along with divine being, freedom is something without which the existence of the world does not make sense for God, through which only God's plan for the world is justified. God created the world out of nothing, and therefore out of freedom.” Freedom is not only the fundamental principle of being, but the fundamental principle of life, and life is nothing but a manifestation of the Spirit. “Freedom, according to Berdyaev, is self-determination from within, from the depths, and is opposed to any determination from outside, which is a necessity.” Therefore, freedom is originally ideal-spiritual in nature, it is out of nature. Freedom precedes the world, it is rooted in the original nothingness. That is why even God (an all-powerful spiritual entity) is “all-powerful over being, but not over freedom. Without freedom there is no Being of God. Freedom generates everything in the world, including good and evil (which we will discuss in more detail below). Freedom is an initially necessary condition for the existence of a person, his formation as a person and for creativity. By means of it, he (man) affirms himself positively. We can say that, according to Berdyaev, freedom is total. Therefore, he connects the tragedy of man and history with the unfulfillment of freedom.

Freedom, according to N.A. Berdyaev, is most fully embodied in the spirit, in the spiritual life. “Spirit, according to Berdyaev, is a quality that stands outside of any utility that infects the life of the world… Spirit is a force that frees from the power of the elements, from the power of earth and blood… rising above them, but not destroying them. The spirit acts everywhere and in everything, but as a force that enlightens, transforms, liberates, and does not force. Spirit is creative activity, creating everything from itself.

Spirit is the true and true reality because it is truth, goodness, meaning, freedom. And God, as the highest incarnation of the Spirit, is a creative subject, creating the world out of himself according to the laws of freedom of the Spirit. Berdyaev calls nature the soulless world, and because of its lack of spirituality, it is a fallen world and only an object. There is no freedom in this objectified world. The property of “fallenness” (a low, base world, since there is no spirit and meaning in it) Berdyaev also extends to the public, social world, if there is no freedom in it and the meaning of being is not affirmed. Therefore, the objectified world (natural and social) lies in sin, in evil. He is not a supporter of its destruction and cutting off, realizing that this is impossible, but a supporter of the enlightenment of the lower and its transformation into the higher. And this mission falls to the lot of a person when he becomes a God-human personality! The world is created by God, not by the subject, not by man. But man is “called for creativity in the world,” through man God continues his creation in the form of a transformative, creative activity of man. Therefore, not only does a person need God in order to be a creative person, but God needs a person.

ON THE. Berdyaev adheres to the established tradition in Christian theology and Christian-religious philosophy to consider man as the result of a creative act of God. He is the image and likeness of God - as a subject. Man by nature is both a spiritual, and bodily, and rational being. It is precisely “in man that the mystery of being is hidden”, since in him there is a unity of the divine and simply human. That is why he calls his philosophy and anthropological.

The idea of ​​the "God-man" is one of the central problems of the entire philosophy of N.A. Berdyaev. By the God-man, he means not the new Jesus Christ, but an ordinary man, but transformed, freed from sins and vices, who has become a person who is driven by love, goodness and truth, and who in his spirit and soul consolidates the ideal of J. Christ.

The first act that every person must perform in order to become a God-human person, that is, a true person, is liberation from sin and sinfulness, into which the first person (Adam) fell, by his own will and from freedom. The source of the fall, according to Berdyaev, is egocentrism: “Egocentrism is isolation and hopelessness, suffocation, insanity on oneself,” N.A. Berdyaev. The deepest source of the fall is the fallen, objectified nature, the bodily substance of man. Redemption and overcoming sin and the fall into sin is possible only through love, since God is love, spiritual love. For, Berdyaev notes, in Christianity the redemption of sinfulness is a matter of love, primarily spiritual love, and not judicial justice.

ON THE. Berdyaev strongly emphasizes the difference between love and passions. The first springs from the Spirit, the second from the requirements of the body. It is the latter that give rise to the power of enslavement, for behind them lies objectified nature. They are one of the sources of sin. They can be transformed only under the influence of spiritual love, so to speak, humanized. "Competition" between them is an integral part of human life existence. Spiritual love leads to freedom, the latter does not. This is also the tragedy of human destiny.

In order to become a God-human being, that is, a true person, a person, it is necessary to go through the crucible of the struggle between good and evil. Good opens the way to the God-man for us, evil closes it. “Evil must first of all be seen in oneself, and not in another,” emphasizes N.A. Berdyaev. The true spiritual direction of the fight against evil is "in faith in the power of good more than in the power of evil."

A special place in his philosophy N.A. Berdyaev averts the problem of loneliness in being, in the existence of a person. “The disease of loneliness is one of the main problems of the philosophy of human existence as a philosophy of human destiny,” he emphasizes.

List of used literature

Philosophy Chaadaev Solovyov Slavophile

1. The world of philosophy: A book for reading: At 2 o'clock - M .: IPL, 1991.

2. Novikova L., Sizemskaya I. The paradigm of Russian philosophy of history // Svobodnaya thought - 1995. - No. 5.

3. Chaadaev P.Ya. Complete works and selected letters: In 2 volumes - M .: Nauka, 1991.

4. Sukhanov K.N., Chuprov A.S. famous philosophers XIX-XX centuries: Essays on ideas and biographies. - Chelyabinsk: Outskirts, 2001.

5. Solovyov Vl. Reading about God-manhood (bow and arrow). - St. Petersburg: Artist creative literature, 1994.

6. Berdyaev N.A. My philosophical outlook / N.A. Berdyaev on Russian philosophy. - Sverdlovsk: Ural State University, 1991. - Part 1.

7. Berdyaev N.A. I and the world of objects / N.A. Berdyaev. Philosophy of the free spirit. - M.: Respublika, 1994.

8. Berdyaev N.A. Philosophy of the free spirit. - M.: Respublika, 1994.

9. Berdyaev N.A. Spirit and reality / N.A. Berdyaev. Philosophy of the free spirit. - M.: Respublika, 1994.

10. Chistov G.A. Philosophy. Historical and problematic aspect: Course of lectures. - Chelyabinsk: Publishing House of SUSU, 2003. - Part II. - 106 p.

Hosted on Allbest.ru

Similar Documents

The main stages in the development of Russian philosophy. Slavophiles and Westernizers, Materialism in Russian Philosophy in the Middle of the 19th Century. Ideology and main provisions of the philosophy of Russian pochvennichestvo, conservatism and cosmism. Philosophy of unity Vladimir Solovyov.

test, added 02/01/2011


Philosophical thought of Russia in the 19th century, its trends and representatives: Slavophiles (I. Kireevsky), Westerners (A. Herzen), populism (M. Bakunin), nihilism (D. Pisarev). The development of Russian religious thought, the work of F. Dostoevsky and V. Solovyov.

test, added 03/28/2009


Stages of development of Russian philosophy and their general characteristics. Historical orthodox-monarchical philosophy of F.M. Dostoevsky, P.Ya. Chaadaeva, L.N. Tolstoy. Revolutionary democratic, religious and liberal philosophy. Westernizers and Slavophiles.

test, added 05/21/2015


Russian Philosophy as an Integral Part of the World Historical and Philosophical Process. Philosophical ideas of Chaadaev. Slavophilism and Westernism about the ways of Russia's development. The difference between the philosophy of man and philosophical anthropology according to Solovyov and Berdyaev.

abstract, added 09/22/2012


Religious and philosophical searches of Russian writers (F. Dostoevsky, L. Tolstoy). Westernizers and Slavophiles. Metaphysics of unity Vl. Solovyov. Materialistic and idealistic trends in Russian philosophy of the second half of the 19th - early 20th centuries.

training manual, added 06/16/2013


Formation and development of Russian philosophy. Russian philosophy of the 17th - 19th centuries. Russian philosophy of the late XIX - early XX centuries. Philosophical system Vladimir Solovyov. The idea of ​​unity in the teachings of P. Florensky, S. Bulgakov, L. Karsavin. Russian cosmism.

abstract, added 05/02/2007


The role of Russian religious philosophy of the XX century. Formation of Russian religious philosophy of the XX century. New religious consciousness. Religious and philosophical meetings. former. Spiritual renaissance at the beginning of the 20th century. Its essence and social meaning.

abstract, added 05/23/2003


Sociocultural development of Russia in the period of the 19th century. Philosophical teachings of Westerners and Slavophiles. Historiosophy of Petr Yakovlevich Chaadaev, its connection with anthropology. Philosophy of Vladimir Sergeevich Solovyov, its place in the Russian religious and philosophical tradition.

abstract, added 11/09/2010


The initial period of the formation of Russian philosophy: XI-XVII centuries. Features of Russian philosophy of the XVIII century, the contribution of Lomonosov and Radishchev to its development. Philosophy of Russian revolutionary democrats. Russian religious philosophy as a specific worldview.

abstract, added 06/26/2009


Formation, features and stages of development of Russian philosophy and the philosophy of the Russian Enlightenment of the XVIII century. and the second half of the 19th - early 20th centuries. Slavophiles and Westerners, the philosophy of Russian cosmism. Discussions of materialism and idealism, philosophy of law.