{"title":"“哲学轮船”:论霍鲁日的范式","authors":"A. Ermichev","doi":"10.17588/2076-9210.2023.2.140-150","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article analyzes the speech of S.S. Khoruzhy, published in 1990 in the “Literaturnaya Gazeta” under the title “Philosophical Steamer. How it was”. The metaphor he found has become popular and is actively used by modern critics of Soviet history. in 1922, S.S. Khoruzhy presented the expulsion of a group of Moscow and St. Petersburg intellectuals, among whom there were 13 philosophers, sociologists and jurists, as a spiritual catastrophe of Russia and even as the “end of Russian philosophy”. On the contrary, in the proposed article, this event is assessed as only a political action aimed at excluding from the public life of Soviet Russia all those who remained in the same unscientific ideological positions, defended the bourgeois values of university autonomy and freedom of speech, stating this in public speeches not understanding the new socio-political reality. The article emphasizes that the value confrontation in the public consciousness of Soviet Russia could turn into a political confrontation, which could threaten the country and the authorities with a new round of civil war. A parallel is drawn between the state of public consciousness of Soviet Russia in the 20s and the USSR in the 80s – early 90s of the twentieth century, when “glasnost” and “perestroika” became the beginning of the death of the USSR. The article challenges the thesis of S.S. Khoruzhy about the “end of philosophy” in Russia. It is argued that the establishment of the monopoly position of Marxist materialism and the exclusion of any non-Marxist philosophy from cultural life was simply the beginning of a new stage of Russian philosophy, forced to develop in its prescribed theoretical form. Meanwhile, thinkers of the Russian diaspora noted the presence of positive heuristic possibilities in Soviet philosophy, but in the absence of a philosophical dialogue they could not fully develop. The transformation of philosophy in Soviet history reminds the author of the time of Peter the Great, when one of the directions of European philosophy was given state patronage and Russian philosophical thinking left behind “love of wisdom” as a passed stage.","PeriodicalId":445879,"journal":{"name":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“Philosophical steamer”: on the Paradigm of S.S. Khoruzhy\",\"authors\":\"A. Ermichev\",\"doi\":\"10.17588/2076-9210.2023.2.140-150\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article analyzes the speech of S.S. Khoruzhy, published in 1990 in the “Literaturnaya Gazeta” under the title “Philosophical Steamer. How it was”. The metaphor he found has become popular and is actively used by modern critics of Soviet history. in 1922, S.S. Khoruzhy presented the expulsion of a group of Moscow and St. Petersburg intellectuals, among whom there were 13 philosophers, sociologists and jurists, as a spiritual catastrophe of Russia and even as the “end of Russian philosophy”. On the contrary, in the proposed article, this event is assessed as only a political action aimed at excluding from the public life of Soviet Russia all those who remained in the same unscientific ideological positions, defended the bourgeois values of university autonomy and freedom of speech, stating this in public speeches not understanding the new socio-political reality. The article emphasizes that the value confrontation in the public consciousness of Soviet Russia could turn into a political confrontation, which could threaten the country and the authorities with a new round of civil war. A parallel is drawn between the state of public consciousness of Soviet Russia in the 20s and the USSR in the 80s – early 90s of the twentieth century, when “glasnost” and “perestroika” became the beginning of the death of the USSR. The article challenges the thesis of S.S. Khoruzhy about the “end of philosophy” in Russia. It is argued that the establishment of the monopoly position of Marxist materialism and the exclusion of any non-Marxist philosophy from cultural life was simply the beginning of a new stage of Russian philosophy, forced to develop in its prescribed theoretical form. Meanwhile, thinkers of the Russian diaspora noted the presence of positive heuristic possibilities in Soviet philosophy, but in the absence of a philosophical dialogue they could not fully develop. The transformation of philosophy in Soviet history reminds the author of the time of Peter the Great, when one of the directions of European philosophy was given state patronage and Russian philosophical thinking left behind “love of wisdom” as a passed stage.\",\"PeriodicalId\":445879,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Solov’evskie issledovaniya\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Solov’evskie issledovaniya\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2023.2.140-150\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2023.2.140-150","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
“Philosophical steamer”: on the Paradigm of S.S. Khoruzhy
The article analyzes the speech of S.S. Khoruzhy, published in 1990 in the “Literaturnaya Gazeta” under the title “Philosophical Steamer. How it was”. The metaphor he found has become popular and is actively used by modern critics of Soviet history. in 1922, S.S. Khoruzhy presented the expulsion of a group of Moscow and St. Petersburg intellectuals, among whom there were 13 philosophers, sociologists and jurists, as a spiritual catastrophe of Russia and even as the “end of Russian philosophy”. On the contrary, in the proposed article, this event is assessed as only a political action aimed at excluding from the public life of Soviet Russia all those who remained in the same unscientific ideological positions, defended the bourgeois values of university autonomy and freedom of speech, stating this in public speeches not understanding the new socio-political reality. The article emphasizes that the value confrontation in the public consciousness of Soviet Russia could turn into a political confrontation, which could threaten the country and the authorities with a new round of civil war. A parallel is drawn between the state of public consciousness of Soviet Russia in the 20s and the USSR in the 80s – early 90s of the twentieth century, when “glasnost” and “perestroika” became the beginning of the death of the USSR. The article challenges the thesis of S.S. Khoruzhy about the “end of philosophy” in Russia. It is argued that the establishment of the monopoly position of Marxist materialism and the exclusion of any non-Marxist philosophy from cultural life was simply the beginning of a new stage of Russian philosophy, forced to develop in its prescribed theoretical form. Meanwhile, thinkers of the Russian diaspora noted the presence of positive heuristic possibilities in Soviet philosophy, but in the absence of a philosophical dialogue they could not fully develop. The transformation of philosophy in Soviet history reminds the author of the time of Peter the Great, when one of the directions of European philosophy was given state patronage and Russian philosophical thinking left behind “love of wisdom” as a passed stage.