伊兹戈耶夫对知识分子的看法

IF 0.1 0 PHILOSOPHY Filosofskii Zhurnal Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.21146/2072-0726-2022-15-2-17-30
Maria A. Chernovskaya
{"title":"伊兹戈耶夫对知识分子的看法","authors":"Maria A. Chernovskaya","doi":"10.21146/2072-0726-2022-15-2-17-30","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A special footnote was added to the article “Educated Youth (Notes on its Life and Senti­ments)”, included in the famous collection of essays Vekhi (1909), in which author A. Iz­goev expressed his disagreement with a “common platform” of the collection, outlined by M. Gershenzon in the introduction. What was the reason for Izgoev’s rejection of the as­sertion that an individial’s inner life is the only foundation on which a society can be built? If Izgoev had criticized the ideas on intelligentsia proposed by some of Vekhi’s con­tributors back in 1903, why did he agree to become one of Vekhi’s contributors himself and, moreover, why did he defend Vekhi from accusations of conservatism after the publication of the volume? In our opinion, answers to these questions can be found in Izgoev’s theory of intelligentsia. The present paper is an attempt to reconstruct that theory. Izgoev believed that the conception of intelligentsia proposed by narodniks (in particular, N. Mikhaylovsky) and by neoidealists (N. Berdyaev and S. Bulgakov) was incorrect be­cause it did not take into account the material interests of this social group. Intelligentsia earns an income by teaching and doing research, and with a lack of freedom of speech and thought in the state cannot execute its functions because the latter require a spiritual freedom. Representatives of intelligentsia can unite to fight for freedom. This is benefi­cial for the intelligentsia itself and contributes to the progress of the whole nation. De­spite Izgoev’s disagreement with treating intelligentsia as a higher-class group that does not pursue its material interests, he, as other authors of Vekhi considered it to be the only group that was capable of transforming Russia into a democratic and law-governed state.","PeriodicalId":41795,"journal":{"name":"Filosofskii Zhurnal","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A.S. Izgoev’s vision of intelligentsia\",\"authors\":\"Maria A. Chernovskaya\",\"doi\":\"10.21146/2072-0726-2022-15-2-17-30\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A special footnote was added to the article “Educated Youth (Notes on its Life and Senti­ments)”, included in the famous collection of essays Vekhi (1909), in which author A. Iz­goev expressed his disagreement with a “common platform” of the collection, outlined by M. Gershenzon in the introduction. What was the reason for Izgoev’s rejection of the as­sertion that an individial’s inner life is the only foundation on which a society can be built? If Izgoev had criticized the ideas on intelligentsia proposed by some of Vekhi’s con­tributors back in 1903, why did he agree to become one of Vekhi’s contributors himself and, moreover, why did he defend Vekhi from accusations of conservatism after the publication of the volume? In our opinion, answers to these questions can be found in Izgoev’s theory of intelligentsia. The present paper is an attempt to reconstruct that theory. Izgoev believed that the conception of intelligentsia proposed by narodniks (in particular, N. Mikhaylovsky) and by neoidealists (N. Berdyaev and S. Bulgakov) was incorrect be­cause it did not take into account the material interests of this social group. Intelligentsia earns an income by teaching and doing research, and with a lack of freedom of speech and thought in the state cannot execute its functions because the latter require a spiritual freedom. Representatives of intelligentsia can unite to fight for freedom. This is benefi­cial for the intelligentsia itself and contributes to the progress of the whole nation. De­spite Izgoev’s disagreement with treating intelligentsia as a higher-class group that does not pursue its material interests, he, as other authors of Vekhi considered it to be the only group that was capable of transforming Russia into a democratic and law-governed state.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41795,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Filosofskii Zhurnal\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Filosofskii Zhurnal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21146/2072-0726-2022-15-2-17-30\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Filosofskii Zhurnal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21146/2072-0726-2022-15-2-17-30","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在著名散文集《维希》(1909)中收录的文章《知青(其生活和情感笔记)》中添加了一个特别的脚注,其中作者A. izz - goev表达了他对该文集的“共同平台”的不同意见,该平台由格申松先生在引言中概述。伊兹戈耶夫拒绝“个人的内心生活是建立社会的唯一基础”这一观点的原因是什么?如果伊兹戈耶夫早在1903年就批评过维克的一些投稿人提出的关于知识分子的观点,为什么他自己同意成为维克的投稿人之一,而且,为什么他在该书出版后还为维克辩护,不让他受到保守主义的指责?我们认为,这些问题的答案可以在伊兹戈耶夫的知识分子理论中找到。本文试图重构这一理论。伊兹戈耶夫认为,民粹派(特别是N. Mikhaylovsky)和新理想主义者(N. Berdyaev和S. Bulgakov)提出的知识分子概念是不正确的,因为它没有考虑到这个社会群体的物质利益。知识分子以教学和研究为收入来源,在国家缺乏言论和思想自由的情况下无法履行其职能,因为后者需要精神上的自由。知识分子的代表可以团结起来为自由而战。这对知识分子本身是有利的,对整个民族的进步也是有利的。尽管伊兹戈耶夫不同意将知识分子视为一个不追求物质利益的高级群体,但他和《Vekhi》的其他作者一样,认为知识分子是唯一有能力将俄罗斯转变为民主和法治国家的群体。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A.S. Izgoev’s vision of intelligentsia
A special footnote was added to the article “Educated Youth (Notes on its Life and Senti­ments)”, included in the famous collection of essays Vekhi (1909), in which author A. Iz­goev expressed his disagreement with a “common platform” of the collection, outlined by M. Gershenzon in the introduction. What was the reason for Izgoev’s rejection of the as­sertion that an individial’s inner life is the only foundation on which a society can be built? If Izgoev had criticized the ideas on intelligentsia proposed by some of Vekhi’s con­tributors back in 1903, why did he agree to become one of Vekhi’s contributors himself and, moreover, why did he defend Vekhi from accusations of conservatism after the publication of the volume? In our opinion, answers to these questions can be found in Izgoev’s theory of intelligentsia. The present paper is an attempt to reconstruct that theory. Izgoev believed that the conception of intelligentsia proposed by narodniks (in particular, N. Mikhaylovsky) and by neoidealists (N. Berdyaev and S. Bulgakov) was incorrect be­cause it did not take into account the material interests of this social group. Intelligentsia earns an income by teaching and doing research, and with a lack of freedom of speech and thought in the state cannot execute its functions because the latter require a spiritual freedom. Representatives of intelligentsia can unite to fight for freedom. This is benefi­cial for the intelligentsia itself and contributes to the progress of the whole nation. De­spite Izgoev’s disagreement with treating intelligentsia as a higher-class group that does not pursue its material interests, he, as other authors of Vekhi considered it to be the only group that was capable of transforming Russia into a democratic and law-governed state.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Filosofskii Zhurnal
Filosofskii Zhurnal PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
50.00%
发文量
25
期刊最新文献
The problem of autocracy in the late Renaissance (La Boétie and Charron) The justification of morality and the justification of utilitarianism in Jeremy Bentham’s ethics Stratified reality in Francis Bradley’s idealism, its critics and a personalistic alternative Attention as a condition for moral responsibility A time to be silent and a time to speak: S. Kierkegaard’s “The Point of View for My Work as an Author”
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1