Slavophiles are ... Philosophical directions. Slavophilism and Westernism

Approximately in the 40-50 years of the XIX century in Russian society, two areas were distinguished - Slavophilism and Westernism. Slavophiles promoted the idea of a "special path of Russia," and their opponents, Westerners, tended to the need to follow the traces of Western civilization, especially in the areas of social order, culture and civil life.

Where did these terms come from?

"Slavophiles" is a term introduced by the famous poet Konstantin Batyushkov. In turn, the word "Westernism" first appeared in Russian culture in the 40s of the nineteenth century. In particular, you can meet him in the "Memoirs" of Ivan Panayev. Especially often this term began to be used after 1840, when there was a rupture between Aksakov and Belinsky.

History of the emergence of Slavophilism

The views of the Slavophils, of course, did not appear spontaneously, "out of nowhere". This was preceded by an entire era of research, the writing of numerous scientific works and works, a painstaking study of the history and culture of Russia.

It is believed that the very origins of this philosophical trend stood Archimandrite Gabriel, also known as Vasily Voskresensky. In 1840 he published in Kazan "Russian philosophy", which became in its way a barometer of the nascent Slavophilism.

Nevertheless, the philosophy of the Slavophiles began to take shape somewhat later, during the ideological disputes that arose on the basis of the discussion of Chaadayev's Philosophical Letter. Adherents of this direction came forward with a substantiation of the individual, original way of historical development of Russia and the Russian people, radically different from the West European way. In the opinion of the Slavophiles, Russia's identity in the first place lies in the absence of class struggle in its history, in the Russian land community and artels, and in Orthodoxy as the only true Christianity.

Development of the Slavophile Current. Basic Ideas

In the 1840's. The views of the Slavophils especially spread in Moscow. The best minds of the state gathered in the literary salons of Elagins, Pavlovs, Sverbeevs - it was here that they communicated among themselves and conducted lively discussions with Westerners.

It should be noted that the works and works of the Slavophils were subjected to harassment by censorship, some activists were in the field of view of the police, and some were even arrested. It is because of this, for a fairly long time, they did not have a permanent printed publication and placed their notes and articles mainly in the pages of the magazine Moskvityanin. After partial censorship softening, in the 1950s the Slavophiles began publishing their own journals ("Rural landscaping", "Russian conversation") and newspapers ("Sail, Molva").

Russia should not absorb and adopt the forms of Western European political life - in this were firmly convinced by all, without exception, the Slavophiles. This, however, did not stop them from considering it necessary to actively develop industry and trade, banking and joint-stock business, the introduction of modern machinery into agriculture and the construction of railways. In addition, the Slavophiles welcomed the idea of abolishing serfdom "from above" with the mandatory provision of land allotments to peasant communities.

Much attention was paid to religion, with which the ideas of the Slavophils were closely related. In their opinion, the true faith that came to Russia from the Eastern Church, causes a special, unique historical mission of the Russian people. It was the Orthodoxy and traditions of the social order that formed the deepest foundations of the Russian soul.

In general, the Slavophiles perceived the people within the framework of conservative romanticism. Typical for them was the idealization of the principles of traditionalism and patriarchy. In parallel, the Slavophils sought to bring the intelligentsia closer to the common people, to study its daily life and way of life, language and culture.

Representatives of Slavophilism

In the 19th century, many writers, scholars and Slavophile poets worked in Russia. Representatives of this area, deserving special attention - Khomyakov, Aksakov, Samarin. Prominent Slavophils were Chizhov, Koshelev, Belyaev, Valuev, Lamansky, Hilferding and Cherkassky.

Suffice close to this direction in the worldview were the writers Ostrovsky, Tyutchev, Dal, Yazykov and Grigoriev.

With respect and interest in the ideas of Slavophilism were respected linguists and historians - Bodiansky, Grigorovich, Buslaev.

History of origin of Westernism

Slavophilism and Westernism arose approximately in the same period, and therefore, and consider these philosophical currents need to be integrated. Westernism as an antipode of Slavophilism is the direction of Russian anti-feudal social thought, which also arose in the 40s of the XIX century.

The initial organizational base for representatives of this direction were Moscow literary salons. The ideological arguments that took place in them are vividly and realistically portrayed in Herzen's "The Past and Thoughts."

The development of the Western current. Basic Ideas

The philosophy of the Slavophiles and Westerners differed drastically. In particular, the general features of the ideology of Westerners include a categorical rejection of the feudal-serf system in politics, economics and culture. They advocated the implementation of socio-economic reforms on the Western model.

Representatives of Westernism believed that there was always an opportunity to establish a bourgeois-democratic system by peaceful means, methods of propaganda and enlightenment. They highly valued the reforms carried out by Peter I, and considered it their duty to transform and shape public opinion in such a way that the monarchy was forced to carry out bourgeois reforms.

Westerners believed that Russia should overcome economic and social backwardness not at the expense of developing an original culture, but at the expense of the experience of Europe, long gone ahead. However, they did not focus on the differences between the West and Russia, but on the general that was present in their cultural and historical destiny.

In the early stages of the philosophical studies of the Westerners, the works of Schiller, Schilling and Hegel were particularly influential.

Split Westerners in the mid 40-ies. XIX century

In the middle of the forties of the XIX century, a fundamental split occurred among the Westerners. This happened after the disputation of Granovsky and Herzen. As a result, two trends of the Western current emerged: liberal and revolutionary-democratic.

The reason for the disagreement was in relation to religion. If the liberals defended the dogma of the immortality of the soul, the Democrats, in turn, relied on the positions of materialism and atheism.

Their ideas on the methods of carrying out reforms in Russia and post-reform development of the state differed. Thus, the democrats propagandized the ideas of the revolutionary struggle with the goal of further building socialism.

The greatest influence on the views of Westerners during this period was the works of Comte, Feuerbach and Saint-Simon.

In the post-reform period under the conditions of universal capitalist development, Westernism ceased to exist as a special line of social thought.

Representatives of Westernism

The original Moscow circle of Westerners included Granovsky, Herzen, Korsh, Ketcher, Botkin, Ogaryov, Kavelin, etc. Belinsky, who lived in Petersburg, was in close contact with the circle. Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev, a talented writer, also regarded himself as a Westernizer.

After what happened in the mid-40's. The split Annenkov, Korsh, Kavelin, Granovsky and some other figures remained on the side of the liberals, and Herzen, Belinsky and Ogaryov took the side of the Democrats.

Communication between Slavophiles and Westerners

It is worth remembering that these philosophical trends were born at the same time, their founders were representatives of the same generation. Moreover, both the Westernizers and the Slavophiles emerged from a single social environment, rotating in the same circles.

Fans of both theories constantly communicated with each other. And this communication was not always limited to criticism: when they found themselves in one meeting, in one circle, they often found something close to their own point of view during the thinking of their ideological opponents.

In general, most of the disputes were of the highest cultural level - the opponents treated each other with respect, listened attentively to the opposite side and tried to give convincing arguments in favor of their position.

Similarities between Slavophiles and Westerners

Apart from the Western democrats who separated later, both the former and the latter recognized the need for carrying out reforms in Russia and solving existing problems peacefully, without revolutions and bloodshed. Slavophiles interpreted this in their own way, adhering to more conservative views, but also recognized the need for change.

It is believed that attitudes toward religion were one of the most contentious moments in ideological disputes between supporters of different theories. However, for the sake of justice, it is worth noting that the human factor played a significant role in this. Thus, the views of the Slavophiles were largely based on the idea of the spirituality of the Russian people, its proximity to Orthodoxy, and the propensity to strictly observe all religious customs. At the same time, the Slavophiles themselves, mostly from the secular families, did not always follow the church rites. The Westerners did not at all encourage excessive piety in man, although some representatives of the current (a vivid example - P. Ya. Chaadaev) sincerely believed that spirituality and, in particular, Orthodoxy is an integral part of Russia. Both believers and atheists were present in both directions.

There were also those who did not belong to any of these currents, occupying the third side. For example, VS Solovyov noted in his works that no satisfactory solution of the main universal human problems has been found so far neither in the East nor in the West. And this means that all the active forces of mankind must work together, without exception, listening to each other and by joint efforts approaching prosperity and greatness. Solovyov believed that both "pure" Westerners and "pure" Slavophils are people who are limited and incapable of objective judgments.

Let's sum up

The Westernizers and Slavophiles, whose main ideas we considered in this article, in fact, were utopians. Westernizers idealized the overseas development path, European technologies, often forgetting about the peculiarities of the Russian mentality and the age-old differences in the psychology of the Western and Russian people. Slavophils, in turn, extolled the image of the Russian people, were inclined to idealize the state, the image of the monarch and Orthodoxy. Both of them did not notice the threat of the revolution and until the very last day they hoped to solve problems by the method of reforms, in a peaceful way. It is impossible to single out a winner in this endless ideological war, because disputes about the correctness of the chosen path of development of Russia do not stop to this day.