{"title":"美国М。索洛维约夫的“森林与草原之争”观:“赞成”与“反对”","authors":"Y. Volkov","doi":"10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.123-134","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Based on works by representatives of the Marxist and the Eurasian direction, the article considers arguments “for” and “against” S. M. Solovyov’s conception of the “struggle between the forest and the steppe” as an important part of his historiological and philosophical-historical doctrine. This essay shows that the main arguments against Solovyov’s conception are connected to the interpretations of historical facts corresponding to the theoretical positions of the Marxist and Eurasian paradigms of history. They include: the thesis about the class character of the Russian state and of the state enslavement of the population; that of the subordination of the course of a nation’s history to the action of universal historical laws; that of the decisive role of geographical and ethnic factors; that of the mutual influence of the “forest” and the “steppe” on the formation of the Eurasian state. To determine the balance of arguments “for” and “against” the conception of the “struggle between the forest and the steppe,” the author proposes to use the model of a structural and hierarchical history, where there are stable and dynamic levels in space and time. The essay concludes that the geohistorical fact of the division of the East European plain into forest and steppe belts, which makes it possible to theoretically explain the premises behind the conception of the “struggle between the forest and the steppe, raises no objections from any of the critics of such a struggle. At the same time, historical facts concerning the understanding of the nature of social integrity, on the level at which the struggle took place, lead to fundamentally different theoretical interpretations. Even more discrepancies are found concerning the causes of the changes that determine the historical dynamics. As the real course of history shows, in a changing and interconnected world, such causes can actually become a global conflict of cultures.","PeriodicalId":445879,"journal":{"name":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","volume":"20 3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"S.М. Solovyov’s Conception of the “Struggle between the Forest and the Steppe”: “For” and “Against”\",\"authors\":\"Y. Volkov\",\"doi\":\"10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.123-134\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Based on works by representatives of the Marxist and the Eurasian direction, the article considers arguments “for” and “against” S. M. Solovyov’s conception of the “struggle between the forest and the steppe” as an important part of his historiological and philosophical-historical doctrine. This essay shows that the main arguments against Solovyov’s conception are connected to the interpretations of historical facts corresponding to the theoretical positions of the Marxist and Eurasian paradigms of history. They include: the thesis about the class character of the Russian state and of the state enslavement of the population; that of the subordination of the course of a nation’s history to the action of universal historical laws; that of the decisive role of geographical and ethnic factors; that of the mutual influence of the “forest” and the “steppe” on the formation of the Eurasian state. To determine the balance of arguments “for” and “against” the conception of the “struggle between the forest and the steppe,” the author proposes to use the model of a structural and hierarchical history, where there are stable and dynamic levels in space and time. The essay concludes that the geohistorical fact of the division of the East European plain into forest and steppe belts, which makes it possible to theoretically explain the premises behind the conception of the “struggle between the forest and the steppe, raises no objections from any of the critics of such a struggle. At the same time, historical facts concerning the understanding of the nature of social integrity, on the level at which the struggle took place, lead to fundamentally different theoretical interpretations. Even more discrepancies are found concerning the causes of the changes that determine the historical dynamics. As the real course of history shows, in a changing and interconnected world, such causes can actually become a global conflict of cultures.\",\"PeriodicalId\":445879,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Solov’evskie issledovaniya\",\"volume\":\"20 3 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-30\",\"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/10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.123-134\",\"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/10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.123-134","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
S.М. Solovyov’s Conception of the “Struggle between the Forest and the Steppe”: “For” and “Against”
Based on works by representatives of the Marxist and the Eurasian direction, the article considers arguments “for” and “against” S. M. Solovyov’s conception of the “struggle between the forest and the steppe” as an important part of his historiological and philosophical-historical doctrine. This essay shows that the main arguments against Solovyov’s conception are connected to the interpretations of historical facts corresponding to the theoretical positions of the Marxist and Eurasian paradigms of history. They include: the thesis about the class character of the Russian state and of the state enslavement of the population; that of the subordination of the course of a nation’s history to the action of universal historical laws; that of the decisive role of geographical and ethnic factors; that of the mutual influence of the “forest” and the “steppe” on the formation of the Eurasian state. To determine the balance of arguments “for” and “against” the conception of the “struggle between the forest and the steppe,” the author proposes to use the model of a structural and hierarchical history, where there are stable and dynamic levels in space and time. The essay concludes that the geohistorical fact of the division of the East European plain into forest and steppe belts, which makes it possible to theoretically explain the premises behind the conception of the “struggle between the forest and the steppe, raises no objections from any of the critics of such a struggle. At the same time, historical facts concerning the understanding of the nature of social integrity, on the level at which the struggle took place, lead to fundamentally different theoretical interpretations. Even more discrepancies are found concerning the causes of the changes that determine the historical dynamics. As the real course of history shows, in a changing and interconnected world, such causes can actually become a global conflict of cultures.