Subjective method and evaluation in science (based on the materials of Nikolay I. Kareev’s manuscript “General methodology of the Humanities”)

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to introduce “General methodology of the Humanities” (1922), one of the latest monographs by the historian, sociologist and methodologist of science Nikolay Kareev (1850–1931). The book, which the scholar did not publish during his lifetime, was introduced into scientific circulation only partially and needs further up­dating in terms of its significance for the history of Russian sociology. It systematizes the methodological ideas of N.I. Kareev, establishes a connection between his works with such European trends as positivism and neo-Kantianism as well as with “Russian subjective sociological school”. The proposed fragment of the seventh chapter (“Normative and applied knowledge in the humanities”) focuses on the problem of the subjective method and assessment in science. It is concluded that the subjectivism of the Russian sociologi­cal school was of a special nature: it was associated not only with the ethical attitude to­wards the individual and society, but also with the recognition of the internal, mental, subjective side of social life itself. The combination of practical and psychological, im­perative convictions and inner experiences resulted in a theoretical synthesis of which the embodiment was the “Russian sociological school”. The “Russian subjective school” re­mained a positivist project for which it was possible to study society scientifically, a project that studied phenomena and not essences, a project that built on facts and not on metaphysical fabrications. In the study of social phenomena, the School introduced the principle of personality, thereby rejecting Compte’s reductionism, which drew analogies between social and physical processes. It is hypothesized that the criticism of Marxism from the standpoint of the subjectivism of the Russian sociological school could serve as an additional argument for the prohibition of the book in the 1920s. The manuscript was found in the Research Department of Manuscripts of the Russian State Library in the per­sonal collection of N.I. Kareev and is being restored based on drafts. The publication is accompanied by an introductory article revealing the main provisions in Kareev’s work.