Pub Date : 2021-12-15DOI: 10.17588/2076-9210.2021.4.106-118
I. A. Edoshina
The article reconstructs the relations between two contemporaries, two classics of Russian culture – Alexander Ostrovsky and Fyodor Dostoevsky. The relations are considered in the dynamics of their development. Despite the fact that contemporaries of Ostrovsky and Dostoevsky noted the playwright’s critical perception of Dostoevsky’s work, the emphasis is placed on the friendly nature of their relationship, the proximity of their aesthetic views, and the commonality of their creative framework. The article stresses that the proximity of their aesthetic views on artistic creativity will become the basis for Ostrovsky’s cooperation with the Dostoevsky brothers’ journal “Vremya” (Time). The research undertaken here analyzes the reasons for the termination of this cooperation and the nature of further relations between Ostrovsky and Dostoevsky, their mutual assessment of each other’s creativity. As a result, it is noted that although Dostoevsky did not enter Ostrovsky’s inner circle, in his plays the playwright addressed the issues that worried both of them.
{"title":"A.N. Ostrovsky and F.M. Dostoevsky: to the History of the Relationship","authors":"I. A. Edoshina","doi":"10.17588/2076-9210.2021.4.106-118","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2021.4.106-118","url":null,"abstract":"The article reconstructs the relations between two contemporaries, two classics of Russian culture – Alexander Ostrovsky and Fyodor Dostoevsky. The relations are considered in the dynamics of their development. Despite the fact that contemporaries of Ostrovsky and Dostoevsky noted the playwright’s critical perception of Dostoevsky’s work, the emphasis is placed on the friendly nature of their relationship, the proximity of their aesthetic views, and the commonality of their creative framework. The article stresses that the proximity of their aesthetic views on artistic creativity will become the basis for Ostrovsky’s cooperation with the Dostoevsky brothers’ journal “Vremya” (Time). The research undertaken here analyzes the reasons for the termination of this cooperation and the nature of further relations between Ostrovsky and Dostoevsky, their mutual assessment of each other’s creativity. As a result, it is noted that although Dostoevsky did not enter Ostrovsky’s inner circle, in his plays the playwright addressed the issues that worried both of them.","PeriodicalId":445879,"journal":{"name":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","volume":"171 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133679089","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-15DOI: 10.17588/2076-9210.2021.4.006-024
M. V. Maksimov
This essay presents a description of the scholarly events commemorating the 20th anniversary of the journal “Solovyov Studies”. It gives an overview of the exhibition "20 years of the journal “Solovyov Studies”: 2001–2021," prepared by the editorial board of the journal together with the Library of the ISPU. It highlights a variety of the sections of the exposition and the materials presented, reflecting the development of the journal over two decades, the composition of its editorial board, including authoritative experts from Russia, Bulgaria, Great Britain, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, the United States of America, Ukraine, and France. The reader’s attention is drawn to the information about the journal's position in various ratings schemes, both domestic and foreign, and citation indices, the share of publications by foreign authors and their geographical location, as well as the number of journal-views over the past five years. The article shows the role of scientific communications in the development of the journal, Information is given on the participation of the editorial board in international scientific events, on publications devoted to the journal and its presentations in Russian and foreign publications, universities and research centers. The article describes the Solovyov seminar’s cultural and student projects, which received substantial content and information support from “Solovyov Studies”. The level of interest of the scientific community in the journal is also noted.
{"title":"«Love Rejoices in Truth …»: to the 20th anniversary of the journal «Solovyov Studies»","authors":"M. V. Maksimov","doi":"10.17588/2076-9210.2021.4.006-024","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2021.4.006-024","url":null,"abstract":"This essay presents a description of the scholarly events commemorating the 20th anniversary of the journal “Solovyov Studies”. It gives an overview of the exhibition \"20 years of the journal “Solovyov Studies”: 2001–2021,\" prepared by the editorial board of the journal together with the Library of the ISPU. It highlights a variety of the sections of the exposition and the materials presented, reflecting the development of the journal over two decades, the composition of its editorial board, including authoritative experts from Russia, Bulgaria, Great Britain, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, the United States of America, Ukraine, and France. The reader’s attention is drawn to the information about the journal's position in various ratings schemes, both domestic and foreign, and citation indices, the share of publications by foreign authors and their geographical location, as well as the number of journal-views over the past five years. The article shows the role of scientific communications in the development of the journal, Information is given on the participation of the editorial board in international scientific events, on publications devoted to the journal and its presentations in Russian and foreign publications, universities and research centers. The article describes the Solovyov seminar’s cultural and student projects, which received substantial content and information support from “Solovyov Studies”. The level of interest of the scientific community in the journal is also noted.","PeriodicalId":445879,"journal":{"name":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","volume":"129 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133956592","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-30DOI: 10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.022-064
M. Medovarov
The article is devoted to documents concerning the polemical exchange between Vladimir Solovyov and Alexander Kireev on the unification of the Orthodox and Catholic Churches in 1897 as well as the final stage of their relationship on the whole. For the first time, the author reconstructs the exact chronology and sequence of the first set of polemics between the two thinkers after a ten-year break that took place on the pages of several newspapers and journals from May to September 1897 of that year. Some portions of this polemic have never been republished, and some other articles were republished with significant alterations. This introductory article examines the arguments of Solovyov and Kireev, as well as the positions of the respective presses themselves. Novoye Vremya [New Time], Moskovskiye Vedomosti [Moscow Gazette] and Russkoe Obozrenie [Russian Review]. This article provides an assessment of the context in which this dispute broke out, and the appendix provides a list of fifteen historical sources arranged in chronological order. In addition to the open letters between Solovyov and Kireev directed against each other, notes by Nikolay Engelhardt and Boris Shchetinin concerning this dispute are also included. In addition, for the first time, Solovyov’s archival letters to Anatoly Alexandrov as well as Kireev's previously unpublished memoirs about Solovyov (from the 1900s) are also presented. With the publication of the articles by the two thinkers, the present author has taken into account all discrepancies and alterations when comparing the original journal and newspaper texts with their subsequent re-printings in the collected works of Solovyov and Kireev.
{"title":"The Dispute between Vladimir Solovyov and Alexander Kireev about the Union of Churches in 1897: Chronology, Context, Sources","authors":"M. Medovarov","doi":"10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.022-064","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.022-064","url":null,"abstract":"The article is devoted to documents concerning the polemical exchange between Vladimir Solovyov and Alexander Kireev on the unification of the Orthodox and Catholic Churches in 1897 as well as the final stage of their relationship on the whole. For the first time, the author reconstructs the exact chronology and sequence of the first set of polemics between the two thinkers after a ten-year break that took place on the pages of several newspapers and journals from May to September 1897 of that year. Some portions of this polemic have never been republished, and some other articles were republished with significant alterations. This introductory article examines the arguments of Solovyov and Kireev, as well as the positions of the respective presses themselves. Novoye Vremya [New Time], Moskovskiye Vedomosti [Moscow Gazette] and Russkoe Obozrenie [Russian Review]. This article provides an assessment of the context in which this dispute broke out, and the appendix provides a list of fifteen historical sources arranged in chronological order. In addition to the open letters between Solovyov and Kireev directed against each other, notes by Nikolay Engelhardt and Boris Shchetinin concerning this dispute are also included. In addition, for the first time, Solovyov’s archival letters to Anatoly Alexandrov as well as Kireev's previously unpublished memoirs about Solovyov (from the 1900s) are also presented. With the publication of the articles by the two thinkers, the present author has taken into account all discrepancies and alterations when comparing the original journal and newspaper texts with their subsequent re-printings in the collected works of Solovyov and Kireev.","PeriodicalId":445879,"journal":{"name":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","volume":"53 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132267010","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-30DOI: 10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.065-087
G. Aliaiev, V. Chernyshov
Originally published in English in 1950, A Solovyov Anthology, prepared by S.L. Frank, has already been reprinted three times, a fact that demonstrates a continuing interest in its content. This paper undertakes a textual analysis of the pieces contained in the Anthology in comparison with the original (second) edition of Solovyov’s works. This paper also makes use of archival material and Frank’s correspondence in connection with the preparation of the Anthology, and an overview of comments in the press upon its publication is also given. This paper also presents biographical information, which reveals the editorial process behind the Anthology, and an analysis of Frank’s choice of texts. The authors argue that Frank presented Solovyov, above all, as a religious thinker, and not as a theoretical philosopher. This viewpoint, on the one hand, is connected with Frank’s previous editorial work on An Anthology of Russian Religious Thinkers, and, on the other hand, can be explained by Frank’s own attitude toward Solovyov in the final period of his creativity. The authors also provide a critical survey of the main reactions and reviews that appeared in the English press upon the book’s appearance within the context of the influence of the book’s direction on the evaluation of Solovyov’s personality and creativity, particularly his Christian universalism.
{"title":"Vladimir Solovyov’s Texts in the Anthology by S.L. Frank","authors":"G. Aliaiev, V. Chernyshov","doi":"10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.065-087","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.065-087","url":null,"abstract":"Originally published in English in 1950, A Solovyov Anthology, prepared by S.L. Frank, has already been reprinted three times, a fact that demonstrates a continuing interest in its content. This paper undertakes a textual analysis of the pieces contained in the Anthology in comparison with the original (second) edition of Solovyov’s works. This paper also makes use of archival material and Frank’s correspondence in connection with the preparation of the Anthology, and an overview of comments in the press upon its publication is also given. This paper also presents biographical information, which reveals the editorial process behind the Anthology, and an analysis of Frank’s choice of texts. The authors argue that Frank presented Solovyov, above all, as a religious thinker, and not as a theoretical philosopher. This viewpoint, on the one hand, is connected with Frank’s previous editorial work on An Anthology of Russian Religious Thinkers, and, on the other hand, can be explained by Frank’s own attitude toward Solovyov in the final period of his creativity. The authors also provide a critical survey of the main reactions and reviews that appeared in the English press upon the book’s appearance within the context of the influence of the book’s direction on the evaluation of Solovyov’s personality and creativity, particularly his Christian universalism.","PeriodicalId":445879,"journal":{"name":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116956581","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-30DOI: 10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.168-181
N. V. Dzutseva
In this article, a number of selected episodes of the “Gospel text” taken from Vyacheslav Ivanov’s “Roman Diary of 1944” – a kind of “sunset” cycle of the poet – are investigated. Particular attention is paid to the place of this cycle within the poet’s creative output. It is observed that the diary-style of the poetry emphasizes the lyrical and confessional tonality of the texts included in the “Roman Diary of 1944.” A detailed analysis of the poems, whose plot is defined by the apostolic theme, is carried out. In particular, the difference between Vyacheslav Ivanov’s creative interpretation of the Gospel episodes concerning the apostles and the corresponding New Testament passages – a difference that emphasizes the strong personal nature of Ivanov’s interpretation of these texts – is highlighted. Special attention is also paid to the historical and cultural context of the works considered. As a result, the concept of “aiontopos” will be introduced into the creative context of Vyacheslav Ivanov’s poetry. Within this concept, the inseparable (essential) link between the later years of his biography and the common Christian “path” to God is revealed. Special attention is paid to the important and still debated issue concerning Vyacheslav Ivanov’s acceptance of Catholicism according to Vladimir Solovyov’s formula. This entire issue introduces the analyzed verses into the context of the general European cultural and philosophical thought of the twentieth century. In this regard, the analyzed poetic texts indicate the names of the saints equally worshiped in both the Catholic and Orthodox traditions. In this way, the cultural-historical and cultural-philosophical relevance of Vyacheslav Ivanov’s poetic intuitions, the ones that express the idea of a common Christian unity in the bosom of the Universal Church, is remarked.
本文将从Vyacheslav Ivanov的《1944年罗马日记》(Roman Diary of 1944)中选取一些“福音文本”片段，作为诗人的“日落”循环。特别注意的是这个循环在诗人的创作输出中的位置。可以观察到，日记式的诗歌强调了“1944年罗马日记”中包含的文本的抒情和忏悔的调性。详细分析的诗歌，其情节是由使徒的主题定义，进行。特别是，Vyacheslav Ivanov对有关使徒的福音书章节的创造性解释与相应的新约段落之间的差异-这种差异强调了Ivanov对这些文本的解释的强烈的个人性质-被强调。特别注意的是还考虑到作品的历史和文化背景。因此，“iontopos”的概念将被引入到维亚切斯拉夫·伊万诺夫诗歌的创作语境中。在这个概念中，揭示了他晚年的传记与基督教通往上帝的共同“道路”之间不可分割的(本质的)联系。特别注意的是关于维亚切斯拉夫·伊万诺夫根据弗拉基米尔·索洛维约夫的公式接受天主教的重要而仍有争议的问题。整个问题将分析的诗句引入到二十世纪欧洲文化和哲学思想的大背景中。在这方面，分析的诗歌文本表明了天主教和东正教传统中同样崇拜的圣徒的名字。通过这种方式，我们可以看出维亚切斯拉夫·伊万诺夫的诗歌直觉在文化-历史和文化-哲学上的相关性，这些直觉表达了在普世教会的怀抱中共同的基督教团结的想法。
{"title":"“A Straight Path, a Narrow Path ...” (New Testament Plots in the “Roman Diary of 1944” by Vyacheslav Ivanov: The Apostles)","authors":"N. V. Dzutseva","doi":"10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.168-181","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.168-181","url":null,"abstract":"In this article, a number of selected episodes of the “Gospel text” taken from Vyacheslav Ivanov’s “Roman Diary of 1944” – a kind of “sunset” cycle of the poet – are investigated. Particular attention is paid to the place of this cycle within the poet’s creative output. It is observed that the diary-style of the poetry emphasizes the lyrical and confessional tonality of the texts included in the “Roman Diary of 1944.” A detailed analysis of the poems, whose plot is defined by the apostolic theme, is carried out. In particular, the difference between Vyacheslav Ivanov’s creative interpretation of the Gospel episodes concerning the apostles and the corresponding New Testament passages – a difference that emphasizes the strong personal nature of Ivanov’s interpretation of these texts – is highlighted. Special attention is also paid to the historical and cultural context of the works considered. As a result, the concept of “aiontopos” will be introduced into the creative context of Vyacheslav Ivanov’s poetry. Within this concept, the inseparable (essential) link between the later years of his biography and the common Christian “path” to God is revealed. Special attention is paid to the important and still debated issue concerning Vyacheslav Ivanov’s acceptance of Catholicism according to Vladimir Solovyov’s formula. This entire issue introduces the analyzed verses into the context of the general European cultural and philosophical thought of the twentieth century. In this regard, the analyzed poetic texts indicate the names of the saints equally worshiped in both the Catholic and Orthodox traditions. In this way, the cultural-historical and cultural-philosophical relevance of Vyacheslav Ivanov’s poetic intuitions, the ones that express the idea of a common Christian unity in the bosom of the Universal Church, is remarked.","PeriodicalId":445879,"journal":{"name":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123954744","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-30DOI: 10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.006-018
K. Burmistrov
An analysis of the manuscript legacy of V.S. Solovyov is of the greatest importance for the study of his views, creativity, and biography, especially in connection with the ongoing pro-ject of publishing a complete collection of his works and letters. Even well-known and al-ready published texts, including those that appeared in newspapers and journals, need careful comparison with the manuscripts that have come down to us. This is particularly true of Solovyov's correspondence that at the time were carefully selected and, in some cases, edited before publication. This is demonstrated by the example of one of the philosopher’s letters that was intentionally published in a noticeably shortened form. The letter to his friend F.B. Getz was written in the summer of 1891 and reflects a dramatic episode in the lives of both and led to a break between Solovyov and the editorial board of the Petersburg newspaper Novosti. The article also presents a short story about Faivel Getz (1853–1932), a journalist, social activist, and the addressee of the letter with whom Solovyov engaged on the Jewish issue. This article also analyzes at length the events of 1891, which led to a small scandal that served as the reason for writing this letter. V.S. Solovyov could be suspected of cheating and self-promotion as a result of a misunderstanding that arose from the fact that two different authors published in the same newspaper at that time under the same pseudonym. The appendix contains the full text of Solovyov's letter to Getz with the necessary commentary.
{"title":"The Story of how Vladimir Sergeevich Took Offense at Faivel Bentsilovich. An Unpublished V.S. Solovyov’s Letter to F.B. Getz","authors":"K. Burmistrov","doi":"10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.006-018","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.006-018","url":null,"abstract":"An analysis of the manuscript legacy of V.S. Solovyov is of the greatest importance for the study of his views, creativity, and biography, especially in connection with the ongoing pro-ject of publishing a complete collection of his works and letters. Even well-known and al-ready published texts, including those that appeared in newspapers and journals, need careful comparison with the manuscripts that have come down to us. This is particularly true of Solovyov's correspondence that at the time were carefully selected and, in some cases, edited before publication. This is demonstrated by the example of one of the philosopher’s letters that was intentionally published in a noticeably shortened form. The letter to his friend F.B. Getz was written in the summer of 1891 and reflects a dramatic episode in the lives of both and led to a break between Solovyov and the editorial board of the Petersburg newspaper Novosti. The article also presents a short story about Faivel Getz (1853–1932), a journalist, social activist, and the addressee of the letter with whom Solovyov engaged on the Jewish issue. This article also analyzes at length the events of 1891, which led to a small scandal that served as the reason for writing this letter. V.S. Solovyov could be suspected of cheating and self-promotion as a result of a misunderstanding that arose from the fact that two different authors published in the same newspaper at that time under the same pseudonym. The appendix contains the full text of Solovyov's letter to Getz with the necessary commentary.","PeriodicalId":445879,"journal":{"name":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130170738","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-30DOI: 10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.019-021
K. Burmistrov
{"title":"V.S. Solovyov’s letter to F.B. Getz, July 18, 1891","authors":"K. Burmistrov","doi":"10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.019-021","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.019-021","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":445879,"journal":{"name":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","volume":"286 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115330482","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-30DOI: 10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.154-167
S. Ilizarov, V. Kupriyanov
{"title":"Timofey Ivanovich Rainoff. The outlines of the history of Russian philosophy of the 1850-60s years","authors":"S. Ilizarov, V. Kupriyanov","doi":"10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.154-167","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.154-167","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":445879,"journal":{"name":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114350522","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-30DOI: 10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.088-104
L. A. Gaman
This article presents F.A. Stepun’s interpretation of the views of the outstanding Russian philosopher Vladimir Solovyov (1853–1900) concerning the issue of the direction of historical development, as an integral part of Solovyov’s philosophy of unitotality. It must be observed that this part of Stepun’s creative output has not yet been sufficiently studied. In fact, Stepun’s interpretation of Solovyov’s views in the context of religious symbolism facilitates a deeper understanding of Solovyov’s conception as well as the comprehension of the theoretical sources of the historical and religious constructions of Stepun himself. This study emphasizes the importance of Solovyov’s work and personality for Russia’s Silver Age culture, including his religious and philosophical trajectory, to which Stepun himself belonged. The interest of scholars in Solovyov’s work is also documented, with a particular focus on the contribution the Russian émigré community gave to its study: these authors, in fact, managed to preserve during emigration the best traditions of Russian culture, in general, and of Russian religious and philosophical thought, in particular. The core of a number of theoretical statements of Solovyov’s historiosophy will be also provided, along with Stepun’s interpretation of them. Moreover, the special nature of the “methodological pluralism”, which is peculiar to Stepun’s approach to research, will be analyzed as well as the importance for him of religious symbolism’s method in the study of Solovyov’s views on the historical process. Finally, the great meaning of Solovyov’s doctrine of God-manhood for Stepun’s work will be explored. The main theoretical statements of this doctrine turned out to be compatible with his ideas on the ontology of history, on its structure, and on its anthropological nature. It will be also emphasized the perception of the historicity and “singularity” of Christ, which is peculiar for Solovyov, and subsequently for Stepun, being it the key for Christianity, in general, and for Christian historicism, in particular. The conclusion deals with the significant influence of Solovyov’s ideas on Stepun’s historical and philosophical studies, as well as with the importance of the problems that concern the study of the intellectual history of Russia.
{"title":"The “Symbolic Worldview” of V. Solovyov and the Issue of the Development of the Historical Process: An Interpretation by F.A. Stepun (1884–1965)","authors":"L. A. Gaman","doi":"10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.088-104","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.088-104","url":null,"abstract":"This article presents F.A. Stepun’s interpretation of the views of the outstanding Russian philosopher Vladimir Solovyov (1853–1900) concerning the issue of the direction of historical development, as an integral part of Solovyov’s philosophy of unitotality. It must be observed that this part of Stepun’s creative output has not yet been sufficiently studied. In fact, Stepun’s interpretation of Solovyov’s views in the context of religious symbolism facilitates a deeper understanding of Solovyov’s conception as well as the comprehension of the theoretical sources of the historical and religious constructions of Stepun himself. This study emphasizes the importance of Solovyov’s work and personality for Russia’s Silver Age culture, including his religious and philosophical trajectory, to which Stepun himself belonged. The interest of scholars in Solovyov’s work is also documented, with a particular focus on the contribution the Russian émigré community gave to its study: these authors, in fact, managed to preserve during emigration the best traditions of Russian culture, in general, and of Russian religious and philosophical thought, in particular. The core of a number of theoretical statements of Solovyov’s historiosophy will be also provided, along with Stepun’s interpretation of them. Moreover, the special nature of the “methodological pluralism”, which is peculiar to Stepun’s approach to research, will be analyzed as well as the importance for him of religious symbolism’s method in the study of Solovyov’s views on the historical process. Finally, the great meaning of Solovyov’s doctrine of God-manhood for Stepun’s work will be explored. The main theoretical statements of this doctrine turned out to be compatible with his ideas on the ontology of history, on its structure, and on its anthropological nature. It will be also emphasized the perception of the historicity and “singularity” of Christ, which is peculiar for Solovyov, and subsequently for Stepun, being it the key for Christianity, in general, and for Christian historicism, in particular. The conclusion deals with the significant influence of Solovyov’s ideas on Stepun’s historical and philosophical studies, as well as with the importance of the problems that concern the study of the intellectual history of Russia.","PeriodicalId":445879,"journal":{"name":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","volume":"94 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122079282","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-30DOI: 10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.105-122
A. Kiryakin
The article examines the views of V.S. Solovyov on the existence of man in the world and on the future of humanity. Its main task is to prove that it is necessary to shift the focus of consideration of V.S. Solovyov’s philosophy from the study of Sofia to the study of God-manhood and to the ways of achieving this result. This problem is worked out by means of a comparative analysis on the views on Man-god and God-man by V.S. Solovyov, F.M. Dostoevsky, and L.N. Andreev. It turns out that the doctrine of God-manhood is considered as the cornerstone of V.S. Solovyov’s by a number of scholars, such as Janusz Dobieszewski and Jan Krasicki. V.S. Solovyov investigates the material nature of humankind and states that the latter is subjected to the temptations of the flesh and can subordinate its life to the basic needs. In this regard, V.S. Solovyov presumably sees a way for humankind to overcome its material nature and such a way would be the overcoming of the three temptations of a higher order; whereas he certainly identifies the path to God-manhood in overcoming the three temptations, in the way Jesus Christ indicated. The same subject of “overcoming the temptations” is also analyzed through the scenes of temptations of F.M. Dostoevsky’s and L.N. Andreev’s heroes, each of which contains the plot of Jesus Christ’s temptation in the wilderness. The scene of the superhuman’s temptation taken from V.S. Solovyov’s “A Short Story of Antichrist” is also considered. In conclusion, for V.S. Solovyov it was important to show what the overcoming the temptations in the human soul leads to and the impact of this victory on humanity. In this respect, it can be affirmed that the God-Man and God-manhood are the result of the joint efforts of man and God. The conclusion of the article deals with the relevance of searching for an answer to the question stated by V.S. Solovyov and F.M. Dostoevsky, which concerns what awaits humanity in the future.
{"title":"Human and God-manhood Existence in V.S. Solovyov's Philosophy","authors":"A. Kiryakin","doi":"10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.105-122","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2021.3.105-122","url":null,"abstract":"The article examines the views of V.S. Solovyov on the existence of man in the world and on the future of humanity. Its main task is to prove that it is necessary to shift the focus of consideration of V.S. Solovyov’s philosophy from the study of Sofia to the study of God-manhood and to the ways of achieving this result. This problem is worked out by means of a comparative analysis on the views on Man-god and God-man by V.S. Solovyov, F.M. Dostoevsky, and L.N. Andreev. It turns out that the doctrine of God-manhood is considered as the cornerstone of V.S. Solovyov’s by a number of scholars, such as Janusz Dobieszewski and Jan Krasicki. V.S. Solovyov investigates the material nature of humankind and states that the latter is subjected to the temptations of the flesh and can subordinate its life to the basic needs. In this regard, V.S. Solovyov presumably sees a way for humankind to overcome its material nature and such a way would be the overcoming of the three temptations of a higher order; whereas he certainly identifies the path to God-manhood in overcoming the three temptations, in the way Jesus Christ indicated. The same subject of “overcoming the temptations” is also analyzed through the scenes of temptations of F.M. Dostoevsky’s and L.N. Andreev’s heroes, each of which contains the plot of Jesus Christ’s temptation in the wilderness. The scene of the superhuman’s temptation taken from V.S. Solovyov’s “A Short Story of Antichrist” is also considered. In conclusion, for V.S. Solovyov it was important to show what the overcoming the temptations in the human soul leads to and the impact of this victory on humanity. In this respect, it can be affirmed that the God-Man and God-manhood are the result of the joint efforts of man and God. The conclusion of the article deals with the relevance of searching for an answer to the question stated by V.S. Solovyov and F.M. Dostoevsky, which concerns what awaits humanity in the future.","PeriodicalId":445879,"journal":{"name":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126439908","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：