N. Y. Danilevsky and O. Spengler on “Slavic” and “Romano-Germanic” Cultural-Historical Types and Prospects of Their Interaction (Comparison of the Concept and Method)

Madzharov Alexander S.
{"title":"N. Y. Danilevsky and O. Spengler on “Slavic” and “Romano-Germanic” Cultural-Historical Types and Prospects of Their Interaction (Comparison of the Concept and Method)","authors":"Madzharov Alexander S.","doi":"10.21209/1996-7853-2022-17-3-59-68","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Thinkers N. Y. Danilevsky and O. Spengler brought together a civilization approach to world history. The relevance of the works of these authors is evidenced by their consonance with the modern historical process. The interrelation of ideas and the relative reliability of the predictions made by the theorists predetermined the purpose of the work: comparison of the concepts of “Slavic” and “Romano-Germanic” cultural and historical types, the study of the applied methodology of research by Danilevsky and Spengler, and the application of the comparative historical method in this work. Danilevsky created a typological direction in historical research, moved away from the interpretation of international relations as a situational phenomenon, realized the importance of historical forecasting. He came to the conclusion that Russia and Europe belong to different cultural and historical types, there are, in modern terms, mental contradictions between them, which in the future could give rise to clashes between civilizations. The studies of the geopolitician convinced him that Europe considered, and will continue to consider our fatherland, a “foreign” and even a “hostile” world. Fifty years after Danilevsky, Spengler spoke about the future of Western civilization. The philosopher’s doctrine developed in the direction laid down by the Russian geopolitician. The philosopher revealed the palette of the Faustian soul “from the inside”, and confirmed the assumptions and fears of Danilevsky. “Faustian culture” as Spengler concluded, “has always been aimed at “spreading”. All thinkers and leaders from Eckhart to Napoleon wanted to “conquer the world”. The coming twentieth century was seen by the philosopher as the era of the “war of inheritance”, in which India, China, South Africa, and Russia would enter. In the list of “mobilized states”, the thinker saw his fatherland in the first place. “Unbearable tension”, he testified, pushes Europe to the true Faustian path ‒ the “primal politics of all living things” ‒ war. The conducted historiographical analysis showed that the morphological attitude of the classics of civilization analysis changed the research paradigm, increased the possibilities of theoretical understanding of the problem, opened up prospects for comparative study of cultures, obtaining the necessary geopolitical forecast today.","PeriodicalId":33580,"journal":{"name":"Gumanitarnyi vektor","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gumanitarnyi vektor","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21209/1996-7853-2022-17-3-59-68","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Thinkers N. Y. Danilevsky and O. Spengler brought together a civilization approach to world history. The relevance of the works of these authors is evidenced by their consonance with the modern historical process. The interrelation of ideas and the relative reliability of the predictions made by the theorists predetermined the purpose of the work: comparison of the concepts of “Slavic” and “Romano-Germanic” cultural and historical types, the study of the applied methodology of research by Danilevsky and Spengler, and the application of the comparative historical method in this work. Danilevsky created a typological direction in historical research, moved away from the interpretation of international relations as a situational phenomenon, realized the importance of historical forecasting. He came to the conclusion that Russia and Europe belong to different cultural and historical types, there are, in modern terms, mental contradictions between them, which in the future could give rise to clashes between civilizations. The studies of the geopolitician convinced him that Europe considered, and will continue to consider our fatherland, a “foreign” and even a “hostile” world. Fifty years after Danilevsky, Spengler spoke about the future of Western civilization. The philosopher’s doctrine developed in the direction laid down by the Russian geopolitician. The philosopher revealed the palette of the Faustian soul “from the inside”, and confirmed the assumptions and fears of Danilevsky. “Faustian culture” as Spengler concluded, “has always been aimed at “spreading”. All thinkers and leaders from Eckhart to Napoleon wanted to “conquer the world”. The coming twentieth century was seen by the philosopher as the era of the “war of inheritance”, in which India, China, South Africa, and Russia would enter. In the list of “mobilized states”, the thinker saw his fatherland in the first place. “Unbearable tension”, he testified, pushes Europe to the true Faustian path ‒ the “primal politics of all living things” ‒ war. The conducted historiographical analysis showed that the morphological attitude of the classics of civilization analysis changed the research paradigm, increased the possibilities of theoretical understanding of the problem, opened up prospects for comparative study of cultures, obtaining the necessary geopolitical forecast today.
丹尼列夫斯基和斯宾格勒论“斯拉夫”与“罗马-日耳曼”文化历史类型及其相互作用的展望(概念与方法比较)
思想家丹尼列夫斯基(N.Y.Danilevsky)和斯宾格勒(O.Spengler)共同提出了一种对世界历史的文明方法。这些作者的作品与现代历史进程的一致性证明了它们的相关性。理论家们的思想的相互关系和预测的相对可靠性决定了这项工作的目的:比较“斯拉夫”和“罗马-日耳曼”文化和历史类型的概念,研究达尼列夫斯基和斯宾格勒的应用研究方法,以及比较历史方法在这项工作中的应用。达尼列夫斯基开创了历史研究的类型学方向,摆脱了对国际关系作为一种情境现象的解释,认识到了历史预测的重要性。他得出的结论是,俄罗斯和欧洲属于不同的文化和历史类型,用现代的话说,它们之间存在着精神矛盾,这在未来可能会引发文明之间的冲突。这位地缘政治学家的研究使他相信,欧洲考虑并将继续考虑我们的祖国,一个“外国”甚至“敌对”的世界。丹尼列夫斯基50年后,斯宾格勒谈到了西方文明的未来。这位哲学家的学说是朝着俄罗斯地缘政治学家制定的方向发展的。这位哲学家“从内部”揭示了浮士德灵魂的调色板,并证实了达尼列夫斯基的假设和恐惧。正如斯宾格勒总结的那样,“浮士德文化”一直以“传播”为目的。从埃克哈特到拿破仑,所有的思想家和领袖都想“征服世界”。这位哲学家将即将到来的二十世纪视为“继承战争”的时代,印度、中国、南非和俄罗斯将进入这场战争。在“动员国家”的名单中,这位思想家首先看到了他的祖国。他作证说,“无法忍受的紧张局势”将欧洲推向了真正的浮士德之路——“万物的原始政治”——战争。所进行的历史分析表明,文明分析经典的形态态度改变了研究范式,增加了对问题进行理论理解的可能性,开辟了文化比较研究的前景,获得了今天必要的地缘政治预测。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
54
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信