The Problem of Historical Responsibility in the Russian Religious and Philosophical Thought of the Late 19th - Early 20th Centuries (Based on the Collection Vekhi)

The important role of hermeneutical methodology for the analysis of the topic of historical responsibility in the collection is substantiated. The hermeneutical analysis of Vekhi suggests and shows its special role in shaping the philosophical and historical views of representatives of Russian religious and philosophical thought in the early 20th century. The conclusion is drawn, that within the framework of the collection, a unified historiosophical model of historical responsibility is developed based on the values of Christian consciousness and the values of the Slavophile tradition. Without using the concept of historical responsibility directly, the authors of the collection essentially work in this particular discourse, which the analysis of the concepts and categories that they use to criticize the revolutionary intelligentsia shows. The authors of the collection comprehend the problems of the intelligentsia and revolution in the context of the widespread criticism of the moral and historical consciousness of the Russian revolutionary intelligentsia. The authors analyze the problems of historical responsibility in three contexts: (1) the discussion of revolution as a violation of the natural course of the historical process, (2) the topic of responsibility of the intelligentsia as the most important subject of historical consciousness, and (3) the theme of the individual as the most important condition for the development of historical responsibility. This allows considering the collection Vekhi as a special stage in the transformation of Russian religious and philosophical thought of the early 20th century and European ethical thought from the classical ethics of persuasion to the ethics of responsibility. The topic of personal historical responsibility of a Russian intellectual is consonant with modern research in the field of ethics of responsibility presented in the works of Paul Ricoeur and Hans Jonas: the rejection of responsibility by transferring it to a higher level of the authoritarian hierarchy. This approach also actualizes the idea of personal involvement in specific actions and personal responsibility for one's own moral choice, including in relation to one's past.

Keywords

Authors

References