Sergey Averintsev in Russian historiography

The article concerns historiographic situation with works by Sergey Averintsev. Unlike many other scholars, Averintsev is endowed with the significance far beyond academical matters, so the literature on him largely deals with estimation of him as a social phenomenon rather than with scientific criticism of his ideas. Methodological criticism on him is found in lesser part of papers on Averintsev. From the literature provided we can distinguish two groups of works, written from the apologetic and critical points correspondingly. The first approach is represented by Christian authors and the most notable of them is Olga Sedakova. There are two main issues of Averintsev's works which are studied by these authors most intently - his ''recipient-oriented'' knowledge model and its connection with the Christian tradition. Recipient orientation means that Averintsev's writings unlike many other works in humanities are not only an increase of knowledge, but also a transmission of certain existential, universal meanings. As these meanings become topical in dialogue, Averintsev's knowledge always implies a final recipient, it is ''targeted'' and communicatively-oriented. Unlike posi-tivist ''non-targeted'' knowledge it is truly ''humane knowledge of the humane''. For Christian authors meanings deriving from Aver-intsev's works are inevitably connected with the Tradition. Thus, his works are valuable for enlightening the Soviet reader with religious truths unknown to them from the authoritative positions of rigid science; and his works are significant not as a new knowledge but as a form of latent sermon. This apologetic approach is opposed by the critical one, presented by Mikhail Gasparov and others. Ideological interpretation of Averintsev's writings is unacceptable for Gasparov - his point is that Averintsev's works present scientific content in the first place which cannot be reduced to some sort of ''camouflaged'' missionary activity. Gasparov's follower Natalia Avtonomova in turn supposes Averintsev and Gasparov are agents of two opposite approaches to research of culture and knowledge in the whole. Targeted, full of meanings, rooted in Tradition knowledge of Averintsev is opposed by technocratic, based on strict methods and search of objective regularities, non-subject knowledge of Gasparov. It is the latter approach, which, by Avtonomova, can provide true methodological criticism of Averintsev's ideas.

Keywords

Authors

References