Religious searches of Russian philosophers of the Silver Age. silver Age

Russian philosophy has a thousand-year history since the time of Kievan Rus. Its roots go back to the national soil, however, it has been influenced by various currents of world philosophy, especially German classical philosophy 18th - 19th centuries By the beginning of the twentieth century. we can talk about the existing original Russian philosophical school. In the works of Russian philosophers, problems were posed, the solution of which is important for Russia and the fate of world civilization. This philosophy is presented in different forms: non-Marxist and Marxist materialism, secular and religious idealism. Philosophical problems considered in the works of prominent figures of science and artistic culture. Russian philosophy is characterized by the following features: 1) special attention was paid to the problem of man - philosophical anthropology; 2) it had a humanistic character; 3) problems occupied an important place in it creative activity; 4) issues of axiology (the science of values) were especially considered; 5) it is inherent in cosmism. These features distinguished the works of philosophers of all schools, which speaks of integrity, unity in the diversity of Russian philosophy. The flowering of Russian philosophy is the turn of the 19th - 20th centuries. Russian philosophy, along with Russian literature, is Russia's main contribution to world spiritual culture. Russian philosophy has given many ideas in various fields: ontology, theory of knowledge, logic, ethics, aesthetics, social philosophy. At the turn of the XIX - XX centuries. - one of the most significant stages in the history of Russian spiritual culture - there was a great turning point. The common spiritual basis for the innovations of the "Silver Age" in various spheres of culture was a new philosophy - the Russian religious and philosophical renaissance. For Russian thinkers, philosophy was not an abstract theory, but the core of spiritual culture.
« silver Age" - unique cultural phenomenon, one of the features of which is the complexity, interweaving of various elements of spiritual culture, which makes this period related to the ancient mythological stage in the development of human consciousness, when there was no division of spiritual life into artistic, moral and religious principles. Centuries of isolated development of philosophy, religion, art led to their flourishing. However, by the beginning of the twentieth century. a deep gap began to painfully manifest itself between various spheres of spiritual culture, between what is and what should be, thought and action, beauty and everyday life, politics and morality. This gap was realized only by brilliant loners - F.M. Dostoevsky or Vl. Solovyov, who discovered on the basis of the philosophy of unity the triune formula: Truth - Goodness - Beauty. established by the beginning of the twentieth century. philosophy had significant shortcomings: 1) traditional materialism led to the belittling of the spirit, consciousness, considering them only as a simple function, a reflection of being; 2) positivism declared empty the problems of the spiritual world, the meaning of life - everything that cannot be measured and calculated by the methods of the exact sciences; 3) traditional idealism tore logical forms or sensations from real being. Art, isolated from philosophy and morality, turned either into a dull copy of everyday life, or into a verbal game. Religious consciousness was increasingly clothed in frozen church ritual forms and, naturally, whole generations of the intelligentsia moved away from it. The new stage of Russian culture at the turn of the century was a grandiose attempt to overcome the disastrous gap for culture.
The interweaving of philosophy with other forms of spiritual life, mainly with art and literature, found its expression not only in theory, but also in everyday practice. Thus, the emergence of philosophical and artistic salons is characteristic: the salon of D. Merezhkovsky and Z. Gippius, where supporters of the “new religious consciousness” N. Berdyaev, V. Rozanov, A. Blok, A. Bely, N. Minsky gathered; salon of the poet and philosopher V. Ivanov - "environments"; St. Petersburg religious and philosophical meetings with the participation of the journals "New Way" (since 1903), "Questions of Life" (since 1905); Liberals grouped around the journal Russkaya Mysl under the leadership of P. Struve. However, there were tragic contradictions in the Russian Renaissance: the cultural elite was isolated in a small circle and cut off from the broad social currents of that time. This had fatal consequences in the character which the Russian revolution assumed. At the same time, the consequences of the spiritual feat of Russian thinkers cannot be underestimated. Today, the restoration and development of the spiritual wealth of the "Silver Age" has begun. It is necessary to comprehend social cataclysms, the sources of utopianism, the restoration of moral criteria, ideals, the revival of national pride, far from narcissism. Of particular importance is the revival of morality, "truth" - the moral foundations of life, the spiritual essence of being. Truth is sought not for the sake of abstract knowledge, but in order to "transform the world, purify and be saved." A.F. Losev wrote that XIX century Russia has produced a number of profound thinkers who, by their genius, can be placed next to the luminaries of European philosophy. Of the philosophers of the "Silver Age" we can name Vl. Solovyov, K. Leontiev, P. Florensky, N. Berdyaev, I. Ilyin, L. Shestov, V. Rozanov, N. Lossky, L. Karsavin and others. Special place among them belongs Vl. Solovyov - the creator of the concept of unity. Vladimir Sergeevich Solovyov (1853 - 1900) - the son of the historian S.I. Solovyov graduated from Moscow University, taught, then acted as a publicist. His main works are: “Justification of the good. Moral Philosophy”, “Criticism of Abstract Principles”, “Theoretical Philosophy”, etc. In 1900, Vl. Solovyov was elected an honorary academician of the Academy of Sciences.
Vl. Solovyov appears as an idealist. He attempted to combine in a "great synthesis" Christian Platonism, German classical idealism (Schelling) and scientific empiricism. The core of the philosophical teachings of Vl. Solovyov - the idea of ​​unity. This is such a system in which all elements of the spiritual and material world are directed towards the Absolute and revived. This unity was conceived by the philosopher in the form of Sophia - the wisdom of God. The path to the comprehension of the existent Vl. Solovyov saw in organic synthesis different ways knowledge - empirical, philosophical-rational and mystical. One of these forms of comprehension of the existent cannot lead to the Truth, which is accessible only to the synthesis of science, philosophy and revelation. The philosopher believed that all available philosophical teachings suffer from one-sidedness. The idea of ​​unity is complex. This is the inclusiveness of being, and “whole knowledge” (as a synthesis of science, philosophy, religion), and the “cathedralism” of a person, that is, his generic, socio-historical and universal essence. The highest goal of historical development is the spiritual communication of people, which Vl. Solovyov called the Church. His terminology is unusual, he put original content into it. The spiritual development of mankind must come to three major categories of human thought: Truth, Goodness and Beauty. Real life imperfect, its evolution is going on, the ultimate goal of which is the Kingdom of God - as the highest Good. Later Vl. Solovyov became close to Russian cosmism and preached "theurgic work", designed to rid the world of the destructive effects of time and space, to overcome death. At the same time, especially towards the end of life, along with the call to a higher being, absolute Good, Vl. Solovyov feared the threat of the end of history, big catastrophes. Nationalism, general satiety, external contentment, but complete spiritual decay lead to disaster. As a result, there will be a decline in moral and religious values, the dominance of spiritualism, superstition, and belief in any deception. The philosopher feared capitalism and revolution. Although in the realm of the spirit he is a revolutionary. Above all Vl. Solovyov put the unity of knowledge, faith, beauty with the Good, with the principles of morality, which knows no exceptions. Not a single person, not a single people, not a single group of people, if they do no harm to anyone, should suffer. Vl. Solovyov rejects the idea of ​​violence even in the name of liberating people, changing the nature of the system. In this, he differs significantly from the Russian revolutionaries, preaching humility, asceticism, and not violence in the name of socialism, which for Vl. Solovyov is no different from the bourgeois system he hates, with its dominance of material interests and injustice. But we must keep in mind that he wrote about utopian socialists like Saint-Simon, and he did not know enough about Marxism. The two forces that the philosopher feared - capitalism and revolution - appeared in the twentieth century. upsurges in science and technology, social transformations and the horrors of wars, the destruction of millions of people. Vl. Solovyov wrote a lot about Russia ("Russian Idea" and others). He advocated the unity of Europe and Russia, for the unification of all three varieties of Christianity: Catholicism, Orthodoxy, Protestantism. He was against reducing the "Russian idea" to the Christian monarchical idea. Neither the state, nor society, nor the church, taken separately, express the essence of the "Russian idea". This idea coincides with the Christian transformation of life, with its construction on the principles of Truth, Goodness and Beauty. The "Russian idea" is carried out not against other nations, but with them and for them. Creativity Vl. Solovyov had a noticeable influence on the subsequent development of Russian philosophy. It stands at the origins of the "new religious consciousness" of the early twentieth century: "God-seeking" and religious philosophy N. A. Berdyaev, S. N. Bulgakov, P. A. Florensky and others. The Russian Revolution of 1905 - 1907. was one of the major events of the early twentieth century. Everything was mixed here: the collapse of tsarist illusions, spontaneous riots, the Black Hundreds, terror, the formation of parliamentarism, etc. The authors of the collection “Milestones. Collection of Articles on the Russian Intelligentsia”, published in 1909. In this book, leading philosophers, lawyers, publicists tried to comprehend the experience of the first Russian revolution and, in its light, evaluate the leading trends in Russian social thought, traditional views and ideals of the Russian intelligentsia. After its release, "Milestones" generated a huge number of responses, controversy, and active rejection of both left and right public figures. In the first six months of 1909 alone, 154 articles were published about the collection.
Thus, the leader of the Cadets, P. Milyukov, sharply negatively assessed Vekhi, seeing in the book a distortion of the image of the Russian intelligentsia. The opponent of the liberals, V. I. Lenin, called the collection an encyclopedia of liberal renegade, seeing in it a break with revolutionary democratic traditions. One of the key ideas of "Milestones" was expressed by the initiator of the collection M.O. Gershenzon: “A person cannot live forever outside.” (Milestones. From the depths. - M .: Pravda, 1991. - P. 74). It was a call for the formation of personality, for the need for continuous inner work of a person, for his self-deepening. No external changes in the fatherland will lead to the achievement of justice, flourishing, harmony of human relations, if there are no steady changes in the inner world of a person. A call to creative consciousness, to self-education, to overcoming the "evil in oneself", i.e. to the cleansing of consciousness from prejudices, from narrow group intolerance, when for the sake of temporary political slogans the values ​​of morality, spiritual life are sacrificed, sounded with exceptional force in Vekhi. The authors of Vekhi were honest, sincere champions of the country's true progress. They did not idealize contemporary Russia. They did not defend the autocracy, but spoke of the enormity of a blind, spontaneous and merciless popular revolt, the antidote to which can only be a strong state power based on law. By the way, M. Gorky, V. Korolenko, I. Bunin, V. Shulgin wrote about this after October 1917. It is interesting that the articles in the collection were not previously discussed, the authors did not get acquainted with each other's articles. The coincidence of many ideas and the unconditional integrity of the collection are all the more indicative. The authors proceeded from the recognition of the primacy of spiritual life over external forms human communication(economy, state power). The main goal of the book is to comprehend the results of the first decade of the twentieth century. in Russia, the revolution, the rampant terror, the fermentation of minds, and, above all, to reveal the spiritual justification for these events, to discuss how true the ideological predilections of the Russian intelligentsia were, whether many of its ideals turned into idols, dogmas that were not subject to discussion. Although the inevitable accusations of apostasy, oblivion of ideals and traditions stemmed from this. Many of the ideas voiced in "Milestones" were a continuation of the traditions of Russian socio-philosophical thought in the new conditions. Contrary to popular notions, the "vekhites" also accepted certain ideas of the revolutionary democrats, in particular, A. Herzen. These are the ideas of personal freedom, the need for a solid moral foundation for any radical change. It is necessary to get rid of dogmatic thinking, no matter how humane and democratic these or those ideas may be. The ideas of pluralism developed. Need to transfer from external to inside life, which ensures the spiritual freedom of the intellectual. It is required to know the domestic philosophical thought better: in particular, A. Khomyakov, B. Chicherin, A. Kozlov, S. Trubetskoy, L. Lopatin, V. Neslilov, P. Chaadaev, Vl. Solovyov, L. Tolstoy, F. Dostoevsky. Passion for European fashion must be countered by a universal national tradition. Interestingly, the "Vekhi" in the past were Marxists. By the beginning of the twentieth century. Russian philosophers are moving away from Marxism, striving to better understand not only the economic laws of society, but also spiritual world personality, its freedom. They saw the basis of progress not in destruction, but in creation, hence the need for purposeful, creative, organized, competent work. The ideas of Vekhi become relevant again at the beginning of the 21st century, when Russia is going through another inversion. A notable phenomenon in philosophy was cosmism. In world culture, both Western and Eastern, there is a deep tradition associated with the feeling of deep involvement of man in cosmic existence, the idea of ​​man as a microcosm containing all natural, cosmic elements and energies, as evidenced by religions, myths, magical rituals. In fact, from antiquity to late XIX in. this cosmic theme, in a broad sense, developed only in myth, folklore, poetry, as well as in some philosophical and utopian fantastic works (Cyrano de Bergerac, Jules Verne). But it is significant that it is in Russia, which became the birthplace of the scientific doctrine of the biosphere and its transition to the noosphere and opened the way to outer space, that already, starting from the middle of the 19th century, a unique cosmic direction of scientific and philosophical thought has matured, which was widely developed in the 20th century. These are such philosophers and scientists as N.F. Fedorov, A.V. Sukhovo-Kobylin, N.A. Umov, K.E. Tsiolkovsky, V.I. Vernadsky, A.L. Chizhevsky, V.N. Muravyov, A.K. Gorsky, N.A. Setnitsky, N.G. Kholodny, A.K. Maneev and others. In the philosophical heritage of the thinkers of the Russian religious revival - Vl. Solovyov, P. Florensky, S. Bulgakov, N. Berdyaev - there is also a line that is close to the pathos of the ideas of Russian cosmism. The genetic feature of the new worldview is the idea of ​​active evolution, i.e. the need for a new creative stage in the development of the world, when humanity directs it in the direction in which reason and moral sense dictate to it. This direction will be more accurately defined not as cosmic, but as active-evolutionary. Man for active-evolutionary thinkers is still an intermediate being, still in the process of growth, far from being perfect, but at the same time consciously creative, called to transform not only the external world, but also his own nature. It is essentially about expanding the rights of conscious-spiritual forces, about controlling the spirit of matter, about the spiritualization of the world and man. One of the main questions that cosmist philosophers pondered was the question of the future prospects of our civilization, the direction of human development. They believed that further development is possible only if harmony is found between man and nature, moreover, nature is understood as the cosmos, and not just the earth. Confrontation between them can only lead to death. Mankind will be able to find harmony between itself and the cosmos only if it finds harmony within itself, between all the people of the planet. Russian cosmism for the first time began to substantiate the idea of ​​uniting people, proceeding not so much from ideological and political, but from environmental and moral reasons. Thus, the most important feature of this philosophical direction was the combination of such problems as spacewalks, the preservation of the natural environment, and the establishment of universal human brotherhood. For religious cosmists, the highest goal of development - the transfigured zones of being - is called the Kingdom of God. In the idea of ​​God-manhood, the idea of ​​the creative vocation of mankind triumphs. Arises A New Look on a person, not only as a historical, social figure, biological or existential subject, but also as an evolving, creatively self-transcendent, cosmic being. Moreover, we are not talking about an individual person, but a conciliar humanity. The ideal prototype of such humanity among religious cosmists is the Soul of the world, the Divine Sophia. It is necessary to overcome the currently dominant idea of ​​the existing boundaries of man. The expansion of knowledge in itself cannot be the highest good: it is unknown for what or only to create temporary material comfort for the living. The highest good can only be life, and life in its spiritual color, personal life and its preservation, extension and development. The pinnacle of active-evolutionary thought is resurrection personalism directed against death. The cosmists themselves were diversified people, encyclopedic thinkers who worked fruitfully in various fields of science and technology. Unfortunately, the works of many of them are included in scientific circulation only in last years(A. Chizhevsky, a number of works by K. Tsiolkovsky). The current of Russian cosmism has not only national, but also universal significance. In our time, when there is a search for a fundamentally new type of thinking that would give planetary hope, the legacy of Russian cosmists acquires a special attraction. Cosmology is an essential feature of the Silver Age culture, which is reflected in philosophy (Vl. Solovyov, V. Rozanov, N. Lossky), literature, especially poetry (V. Bryusov, A. Bely, A. Blok), new trends in Russian painting (M. Vrubel) and Russian music (A. Skryabin).

35 question:

Russian Marxism(G. Plekhanov, V. Ulyanov).

Georgy Valentinovich Plekhanov (1856-1918) - encyclopedically educated scientist, major philosopher, researcher in the field of economics, sociology, aesthetics, ethics. Plekhanov substantiated and popularized the doctrine of Marxism, developed and concretized its individual issues, especially in the field of social philosophy: the role of the masses and the individual in history, the interaction of the base and the superstructure, the role of ideology, etc. He believed that the key to revealing the essence of social phenomena must be sought not in the nature of individual individuals, but in the relationships they enter into in the production process. In his opinion, there are two types of production relations: technical (“direct relations of producers in the production process”), which are not of a class nature, and “property”, which in a class society have a class character. This gave him reason to define the state not as a special apparatus of violence, but as an entire formation above classes, the emergence of which can be explained to a very large extent by the direct influence of the needs of the socially productive process. In the field of ontology and epistemology, he expressed a number of original ideas. So, he believed that matter as a source of sensations is a collection of "things in themselves." The sense organs do not mechanically copy reality, but transform information. which is then laid out in the form of "hieroglyphs" bringing to our attention what actually happens with "things in themselves". Some of the Marxists, in particular V.I. Lenin, were inclined to see this as a concession to Kantianism and classed Plekhanov's "hieroglyphism" with agnosticism. In fact, there is no going into agnosticism here, just as there is no assertion about the unknowability of "things in themselves." Plekhanov only sought to lead the Marxist theory of knowledge out of the dead ends of naive realism. His “hieroglyphism” was an attempt to recognize the sign as one of the most important means of cognition, as one of the manifestations of the creativity of the mind, which overcame not only the deceptiveness of the senses (color as such, for example, objectively does not exist outside of a person), but also the delusions born of complexity. reflections of essence in consciousness. He argued that “hieroglyphs”, although they do not fully reflect reality, still carry adequate information about the shape, structure and relationships of real objects, and this is enough for us to be able to study the effects of “things in themselves” on us and, in turn, influence them. Plekhanov also defended the objectivity of space and time. Space, he believed, is not only a subjective form of contemplation (as I. Kant believed); it also corresponds to some objective "in itself". He revealed the continuity of Marxism with the best traditions of the past and at the same time emphasized the need for its creative development. Vladimir Ilyich Lenin (1870-1924), as the organizer and leader of the Bolshevik Social Democratic Party of Russia and a professional revolutionary, developed primarily the idea of ​​class struggle and the mechanisms for implementing the dictatorship of the proletariat. He was above all a politician, and at the center of his political interests was the idea of ​​the class struggle, brought to the idea of ​​the dictatorship of the proletariat. Many of his works were subordinated to this idea. Lenin's research on economics is also subordinated to the idea of ​​social transformation, the elimination of private ownership.

As a theoretician of Marxism, Lenin further developed Marxism in a positive way, and in a number of cases put forward fundamentally new propositions (in the book Materialism and Empirio-Criticism, in Philosophical Notebooks, etc.). In his works, many problems of social philosophy were covered from a new angle - about the essence, forms and types of the state, about the criterial signs of social classes, etc. Matter problem. Previously, the idea of ​​matter was identified with substance, with material-substrate formations. It turned out that the physical field is not matter, but something spiritual or, at best (as, for example, in V.S. Solovyov), material-spiritual. Some of the naturalists believed that the discovery of fields expanded the concept of matter, which turned out to be matter plus field. Lenin analyzed this concept and gave it an epistemological definition. “Matter,” he noted, “is an objective reality that exists outside and independently of consciousness and is reflected by it.” The problem of truth. Truth, according to the classical (correspondent) concept, meant the coincidence of a person's ideas and reality. Lenin not only deciphered the concept of "reality", by which one must mean both the phenomenon, and the essence, and the object, and spiritual education(after all, the ideas of the cognizing subject may or may not correspond to the latter), he put forward a position on the subjective side of truth and its objective content. The problem of practice. Practice is not only absolute, but also relative. It cannot be absolute. She herself is in development, i.e. may be less developed or more developed. Not every practice can serve as a criterion of truth, but only that which is correlated with the level of development of the theory.

The problem of the general method of cognition. Lenin revealed the structure (elements) of dialectics as a theory and as a general method. Dialectics included not only the basic laws of development, but also many correlative categories that act in the process of cognition as principles regulating cognitive activity (the principle of the unity of form and content, the principle of causality, etc.). The problem of the union of philosophy and natural science. Lenin put forward the proposition that it was necessary to establish an alliance between Marxist philosophers and non-Communist naturalists (with natural-science materialists and even naturalists who adhere to positions of idealism). Lenin, as head of state, did a lot to start the formation of this union immediately after the October Revolution.

Legal Marxism- the ideological and political trend of the Russian intelligentsia in the 1890s. (P. B. Struve, S. N. Bulgakov, M. I. Tugan-Baranovsky and others). They appeared in the legal journals Novoye Slovo (1894-97), Life (1897-1901), Nachalo (1899) and others, used the provisions of Marxist economic theory to justify the development of capitalism in Russia, advocated democratic freedoms, developed liberal theories of reforming society. From con. 1900s moved from Marxism to liberalism, their leaders became the core of the Kadet Party.

Religious and philosophical meetings (RFS) of representatives of the Russian intelligentsia and the Orthodox clergy opened in St. Petersburg on November 29, 1901 at the initiative of a group of writers.
For the first time the idea of ​​their organization was expressed by Z.N. Gippius and picked up by her husband D.S. Merezhkovsky and V.V. Rozanov. On October 8, 1901, authorized founding members of the RFU - D.S. Merezhkovsky, D.V. Philosophers, V.V. Rozanov, V.S. Mirolyubov and V.A. Ternavtsev - were received by the chief prosecutor of the Holy Synod K.P. Pobedonostsev. In the evening of the same day, the founding members of the RFU - D.S. Merezhkovsky, Z.N. Gippius, V.A. Ternavtseva, N.M. Minsky, V.V. Rozanova, D.V. Filosofova, L.S. Bakst and A.N. Benois received Metr. Anthony (Vadkovsky).
The RFU took place in the building of the Geographical Society.
The permanent chairman of the RFU was Bp. Yamburgsky Sergiy (Stragorodsky), Rector of St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences. The Council of Assemblies also included: a future participant in the Renovationist schism, Archim. Antonin (Granovsky), Protopresbyter I.L. Yanyshev, Archpriest S.A. Sollertinsky, D.S. Merezhkovsky, V.S. Mirolyubov (publisher of the journal Life for All), V.V. Rozanov, treasurer - V.A. Ternavtsev. Later, the original composition of the founding members was expanded to include Archim. Sergiy (Tikhomirov), V.M. Skvortsov (editor of the Missionary Review), M.A. Novoselov (publisher-editor of the "Religious and Philosophical Library"), Z.N. Gippius, D.V. Philosophers, A.V. Kartashev, V.V. Uspensky, N.M. Minsky, P.P. Pertsov, E.A. Egorov.
Many representatives of the literary and artistic elites of Russia of those times were visitors to the RFU, among them - I.E. Repin, A.N. Benois, V.Ya. Bryusov, L.S. Bakst, S.P. Diaghilev, A.A. Block.
A total of 22 RFU meetings took place. The following topics were discussed: “On the relationship of the Church to the intelligentsia”, “Leo Tolstoy and the Russian Church”, “On the relationship between the Church and the state”, “On freedom of conscience”, “On the spirit and flesh”, “On marriage”, “On dogmatic development Churches". The minutes of the meetings were published in the journal "New Way", then "Notes of the St. Petersburg Religious and Philosophical Meetings" (St. Petersburg, 1906) were published.
A common valuation of the RFS as manifestations of the religious and philosophical revival, the revival of Russian theological apologetic thought etc., does not coincide with the diatribe of St. rights. John of Kronstadt "On the Old and New Ways of Salvation" (March 1903). On April 5, 1903, by a decree of K.P. Pobedonostsev RFU were closed.
According to the plan of the organizers, during the RFU under the guise of discussing burning issues of religious and civil life of the Church it was proposed to reconsider the attitude to Orthodox dogmas, to heretical teachings, to state power and marriage, and thereby overcome a certain “internal crisis” that supposedly hinders the Russian Orthodox Church fulfill the "great task of public salvation." In the first report of V.A. Ternavtsev called the Church give an answer not in word, but in deed to universal human requests. In subsequent speeches, the ideas of a religious renewal of society, "neo-Christianity", were put forward for the sake of saving Russia in its "hopeless" situation.
The results of the RFU, this meeting of the "two worlds", the participants, as a rule, evaluate negatively, noting the lack of dialogue, mutual understanding of the parties, the imminent closure of the meetings. Despite this imaginary disappointment with the results of the RFU, with t. Sp. modernists, the action was a success in its own way. Representatives of the Orthodox clergy, with the exception of St. John of Kronstadt, did not give a church-canonical assessment of the new false teachings that were voiced during the RFU.
The consequences of the RFU, as a manifestation of modernism in the Russian Church, can be traced far ahead, right up to the beginning of the 21st century. Literally each of the ideas voiced at the RFU: Gnostic mixing of the Church and the world, dogmatic development, immorality, "collective salvation", speaking out against the foundations of Christian statehood and the public, etc. - received further development, both in the immediate period of the Renovationist split, and in subsequent years. This can be seen on the examples of the teachings of Mariology, the materials of the conference "The Sacrament of Marriage - the Sacrament of Unity" (St. Petersburg, 2008), the teachings of prof. A.I. Osipov, sectarian activity about. G. Kochetkova and others.

Quotes from speeches at the RFU:
D.S. Merezhkovsky: For us, theological science is not the last authority, not a peremptory instance. If it prevents us from going to Christ, then we recognize that it must be destroyed, not to leave stone unturned.
V.A. Ternavtsev: There is absolutely nothing to do with the dogmas preserved by the Church, either in the state, or in artistic creativity, or in the struggle for the organization of a good social life. Yes, with them one can renounce all this, but not build up... While Christianity is tragically divided into warring confessions and stands in conflict with the state and culture, we are told that everything is complete in the teachings of the Church. This is the most unfortunate mistake of our scholastic school theology.
D.V. Philosophers: In our doctors, female students, students, who went to the service of their neighbor in a famine year, there was an unconscious “religiosity”, since they were true to true love for the “earth”. But "religiosity" is not a religion. Faith in God was replaced by their faith in progress, civilization, in the categorical imperative. And now, before our eyes, the consciousness of society has grown, and the old ideals have ceased to satisfy it. Dostoevsky and Nietzsche clearly showed their futility, so as not to talk about spiritual writers. In the name of love for one's neighbor, without love for God, there can be no true work on earth. Without God, there can be no real culture that embraces the fullness of human existence… The Church, in contrast to an intelligent society, understood and consciously accepted only the first half of the commandment: “Love the Lord Your God with all your heart and with all your soul.” And unable to accommodate the second, she began to deny it, brought her love for God, her service to Him - to hatred of the world, to contempt for culture. Historical Christianity, right up to the 20th century, focused all its attention only on the ascetic side of the teaching of Christ, on serving God, neglecting in its one-sidedness that God's world, part of which are neighbors who work in the sweat of their faces.

Sources

1. St. John of Kronstadt. On the Old and New Ways of Salvation // Missionary Review. 1903. No. 5. SS. 690-692
2. Prot. G. Florovsky. Ways of Russian theology. Paris, 1937
3. S.M. Polovinkin. At the turn of the century (Religious and philosophical meetings in St. Petersburg in 1901-1903) // "Russia XXI". 2001. №6

It is generally accepted that the concept of the “silver age of Russian culture” was introduced into scientific and general cultural use by the famous philosopher N. Berdyaev in his essay “The Russian Idea”. The period of existence of the "Silver Age" covers the turn of the XIX-XX centuries with the addition of twenty years of the XX century. The “golden age of Russian culture” is called the years 20-40 of the nineteenth century. Its representatives are Pushkin and Lermontov, the Slavophile and Westernizer philosophers, the painters Bryullov and Kiprensky, the composer Glinka and others.

The culture of the “Silver Age” manifested itself initially in painting, when artists, united by work in the journal “World of Art”, such as Somov, Lansere, Benois, abandoned one of the basic principles of the aesthetics of the Wanderers - “literaryism”, putting artistic creativity at the forefront The principle is not social, but aesthetic. Then the field of culture of the "Silver Age" expanded to include poetry, music, ballet and, finally, philosophy. In philosophy, the culture of the “Silver Age” began to manifest itself at the beginning of the 20th century, existed in Russia until the twenties, and then, together with philosophers, “moved” mainly outside of Russia - to Europe. Its main representatives include N. Berdyaev, S. Bulgakov, I. Ilyin, N. Lossky, L. Karsavin, V. Rozanov, P. Florensky, S. Frank and others.

The metaphorical concepts of the “golden” and “silver” ages in Russian culture surprisingly accurately characterize the essence of these periods. spiritual development in Russia. The golden color is associated with the sun, which illuminates the objects of the external world for it. Like the sun, A.S. lit up the world. Pushkin, for he wrote about the Caucasian prisoner, about the stone guest, about the Bronze Horseman, about Mozart and Salieri. A.S. Khomyakov also wrote about world and Russian history, about England, about Russia, and so on. The moon shines with silver light. Moonlight is reflected light. The moon rather reveals itself in silver light than illuminates others. Unlike the representatives of the culture of the "golden age", the artists and philosophers of the "silver age" wrote mainly about themselves; the so-called "subjective content" in their work has greater value than before, but does not become the only one. The culture of the "Silver Age" sought to organically express the synthesis of the world external to man and his inner being. It seems that philosophy succeeded best of all. The outer world for philosophers and artists remains, as in the period of the “golden age”, primarily Russia. Her fate is experienced and comprehended in the personal and universal terms. The poetic lines of one of the poets, heirs of the culture of the “Silver Age” can serve as an illustration of what has been said:

Anything about Russia?

Construction sites and threshing?...

All I have about Russia,

Even when about myself.

Most Silver Age philosophers started out as Marxists. They came to Marxism consciously, having thoroughly studied philosophy in general. In Marxism, they were attracted by a scientific, objective analysis of reality. Before the conscious acceptance of Marxism, the ideology of the populists dominated the minds of the Russian intelligentsia. The Narodniks insisted on a special path for Russia, different from the West. But by the nineties of the nineteenth century, capitalism began to take hold in the country, reminiscent of Western capitalism, with all its “ birthmarks”- horrors. In this regard, Russian philosophers saw in Karl Marx's "Capital" a critical and at the same time scientific analysis of the reality that began to emerge in Russia. Marxism was opposed by a certain part of the intelligentsia to populism.

However, the philosophers of the "Silver Age", like the Westerners of the "Golden Age", thought quite independently and soon turned to the criticism of Marxism. So, S. Bulgakov drew attention to the fact that in agriculture capitalism cannot win in Russia. He saw the stability and self-sufficiency of the peasant economy, showed that it has cultural and economic incentives that are different from the incentives for industrial production. The famous Eurasianist P. Savitsky and the outstanding agrarian economist A. Chayanov supported this idea, substantiating it scientifically. By the beginning of the 20th century, the philosophers listed above were beginning to move away from Marxism. This is due to the following circumstances:

one). They did not find an answer to the problem of man in Marxism, although they recognized that Marxism is strong where the mass, the class, acts.

2). They listened, though generally disagreed, to Western critics of Marxism such as Bernstein and Kautsky. The latter believed that Marx's theory should not be a dogma. Of Marxism must be preserved economic theory, sociology, the theory of the role of material production. Marx's political theory does not stand up to criticism, since a society that wants to improve does not need the dictatorship of the proletariat, but needs a parliamentary republic, does not need a revolution, but needs reforms that harmonize social relations. Moreover, Western critics of Marxism argued that the philosophy of K. Marx was also outdated, so it must be replaced by a modern version of Kantianism, which harmoniously combines a critical analysis of the possibilities of cognition with the assertion of the universality of the moral law.

3). In the departure of philosophers from Marxism, the domestic philosophical tradition played a huge role. They showed interest in the philosophical heritage of the Slavophiles, continuing to develop their ideas of the integrity of knowledge and catholicity. Particular attention was paid to understanding the conservative philosophy of the late Slavophile K.N. Leontiev: his ideas about the flowering complexity of culture as the root cause of individual creative achievements, his criticism of Western culture as leading to the equation and, accordingly, to the death of culture as such. In general, these philosophers accepted the idea of ​​philosophical synthesis by V. Solovyov, who realized the principle of the unity of philosophy, science and theology in cognition.

Already in 1901-1902, the philosophers of the “Silver Age” came to a religious worldview and published the first joint work entitled “Problems of Idealism”. In his articles, idealism is considered both in the ordinary sense of this term - as a desire for an ideal, and in a philosophical sense - as a counterbalance to materialism and positivism. The collection substantiates the logical and vital connection between idealism and the liberation movement. Idealism, according to S. Bulgakov, “strives to perform the same service with respect to the social ideal that economic materialism serves it in Marxism; is, as it were, a foundation laid under an old building. From here, the authors focus on the idea of ​​the absolute value of the individual as the ultimate goal. social development. The collection constantly emphasizes and puts forward the principle of personality, its unconditional dignity, its natural and inalienable rights.

Their other joint work - "Milestones" - was devoted to assessing the originality of the Russian intelligentsia, its attitude to religion, philosophy, politics and culture. The authors of the collection argued that the nihilism prevailing in the minds of the intelligentsia led to grave consequences for Russia and its culture. They evaluate the intellectual party-political disunity, which suppresses morality, spiritual freedom and sovereignty of the individual, in the same negative way. The collection "From the Depths", which on the whole belonged to the same circle of authors as "Milestones", is devoted to a religious assessment of the 1917 revolution. Here the continuity with the ideas expressed in the "Milestones" is emphasized. The authors believe that the prophecies and warnings of Vekhi, which were not heard at the time, have come true. The reason for the catastrophe that befell Russia lies in the all-round crisis, which was clearly felt in the previous 10-20 years, and was prepared by the entire previous history of the country, and especially intensively - in the last 100 years. First of all, this is a religious, spiritual, moral, cultural crisis, and then a socio-economic one. Ultimately, the Russian revolution, from their point of view, is the victory of the anti-Christian forces, who are now trying to completely de-Christianize Russia; this is the victory of that pagan principle, which at one time was forcibly overthrown, but not defeated and not overcome spiritually ideologically, that is, actually driven inside, and is now trying to take revenge. But the crisis in Russia is also linked to the global crisis. As one of the causes of the revolution, they name the First World War.

One of the main ideas of the Silver Age philosophers is the need for an organic connection between philosophy and religion. In connection with it, we note such forms of association of philosophers and representatives of art as religious-philosophical societies. In them, the Russian intelligentsia was engaged in God-seeking. The most famous philosophical and religious associations include D. Merezhkovsky's circle. Merezhkovsky, like many other spiritual leaders of that time, was overcome by the idea of ​​​​reuniting the intelligentsia with religion. To do this, religion must be cleansed of coarse priesthood, taken out of control of the state apparatus and, according to the well-known thought of L.N. Tolstoy, restore pure Christianity.

to the main problems philosophical reflection the period under study should include creativity and freedom. An original approach to their solution was proposed by N. Berdyaev. He proceeds from the fact that the world is one and created by God. The creations of God include nature and man himself. But after the creation of nature and man, the creative process does not stop. The culture that man creates is developing on the earth. Consequently, a person in his creativity continues the work of God, and his inherent ability for creativity is divine, and this is what makes him, a man, like God. This point of view is significantly different from the idea of ​​V. Solovyov, who argued that the divine nature of a person is most clearly expressed in the concepts of goodness and conscience, therefore, paraphrasing the well-known aphorism of Rene Descartes, he wrote: “I am ashamed, therefore I exist.” But let us return to the exposition of Berdyaev's point of view. He rightly pointed out that one cannot create by order, therefore a person must be free, indeterminate. In his work “Christianity and the class struggle (in memory of K. Marx)”, he noted that one of the merits of Marx is the creative development of the idea of ​​class struggle. But the class struggle, according to Berdyaev, is only one of the forms of struggle that exists in society. There are also others - the struggle of religions, the struggle of states, and so on. Marx, on the other hand, absolutizes the class struggle, and, naturally, he sees a person as belonging to some class. This leads to Marx's misunderstanding of the problem of creativity. From the point of view of Berdyaev, a person should not be a particle of a class, nation, society; he, as a creative subject, should not be constrained by anything.

One of the fruitful ideas of the philosophy of the "Silver Age" is a clear distinction and understanding of the concepts of "culture" and "civilization". According to the same Berdyaev, culture is a product of spiritual activity. Its main feature is the presence of a religious principle, the illumination of the ideal. It is organic, that is, it grows out of the creative principle, but is not artificially created. Civilization is expressed in technology and is associated with the beginning of the material. The concept of "civilization" has a broad meaning and a wide field of manifestation - from industry to artistic technologies. It is impossible to reject civilization, but without culture it can turn into the death of mankind. Berdyaev shows that starting from the 18th century, a new reality comes to the forefront of history - a technique that radically changes the conditions of human existence. The dominance of the technological principle in human life leads it to dehumanization, and even more so, to the destruction of life as such.

The philosophy of the "Silver Age" continues to develop historiosophical problems. The original concept of history was put forward by P. Florensky. The guiding theme of his cultural and historical views is the denial of culture as a single process in time and space, with the ensuing denial of the evolution and progress of culture. As for the life of individual cultures, Florensky develops the idea of ​​their subordination to rhythmically changing types of cultures - medieval and renaissance. The medieval type is supposed to be the highest; God is placed at the center of culture here. As signs of medieval culture as an objective type, he calls integrity and organicity, catholicity, dialectic, dynamics, activity, strong-willed beginning, self-assembly, and so on. The main thing for Florensky is the integrity and organic nature of the universe, and this ideal was achieved in Europe in the late Middle Ages. Florensky himself felt like a Russian Orthodox thinker of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. The decline in Europe begins in the Renaissance, when man is placed at the center of culture. The signs of the culture of the Renaissance (as a subjective type) are: fragmentation, individualism, logic, static, passivity, intellectualism, analyticity, abstraction and superficiality. Behind these characteristics is the disunity of social reality, the disunity of ideas, narrow specialization, the division of society into groups hostile to each other, and so on. The Renaissance culture of Europe, according to Florensky, ended its existence at the beginning of the 20th century, and now one can observe the first sprouts of a new type of culture.

Concluding a general, although, of course, incomplete review of the ideas of the philosophy of the “Silver Age”, we note that the further presentation of the material will be connected with this philosophical tradition.

Russian philosophy has a thousand-year history since the time of Kievan Rus. Its roots go back to the national soil, however, it was influenced by various currents of world philosophy, especially German classical philosophy of the 18th - 19th centuries. By the beginning of the 20th century, one can speak of an original Russian philosophical school that had developed. In the works of Russian philosophers, problems were posed, the solution of which is important for Russia and the fate of world civilization. This philosophy is presented in different forms: non-Marxist and Marxist materialism, secular and religious idealism. Philosophical problems were considered in the works of prominent figures of science and artistic culture.

Russian philosophy is characterized by the following features: 1) special attention was paid to the problem of man - philosophical anthropology; 2) it had a humanistic character; 3) an important place in it was occupied by the problems of creative activity; 4) issues of axiology (the science of values) were especially considered; 5) it is inherent in cosmism. These features distinguished the works of philosophers of all schools, which speaks of integrity, unity in the diversity of Russian philosophy. The flowering of Russian philosophy is the turn of the 19th - 20th centuries. Russian philosophy, along with Russian literature, is Russia's main contribution to world spiritual culture. Russian philosophy has given many ideas in various fields: ontology, theory of knowledge, logic, ethics, aesthetics, social philosophy.

At the turn of the 19th - 20th centuries - one of the most significant stages in the history of Russian spiritual culture - a great turning point took place. The common spiritual basis for the innovations of the "Silver Age" in various spheres of culture was a new philosophy - the Russian religious and philosophical renaissance. For Russian thinkers, philosophy was not an abstract theory, but the core of spiritual culture.

The "Silver Age" is a unique cultural phenomenon, one of the features of which is the complexity, interweaving of various elements of spiritual culture, which makes this period related to the ancient mythological stage in the development of human consciousness, when there was no division of spiritual life into artistic, moral and religious principles. Centuries of isolated development of philosophy, religion, art led to their flourishing. However, by the beginning of the 20th century, a deep gap between various spheres of spiritual culture, between the existent and the proper, thought and action, beauty and everyday life, politics and morality began to painfully manifest itself. This gap was realized only by brilliant loners - F. M. Dostoevsky or Vl. Solovyov, who discovered on the basis of the philosophy of unity the triune formula: Truth - Goodness - Beauty.

The philosophy that had developed by the beginning of the 20th century had significant shortcomings: 1) traditional materialism led to the belittling of the spirit, consciousness, considering them only as a simple function, a reflection of being; 2) positivism declared empty the problems of the spiritual world, the meaning of life - everything that cannot be measured and calculated by the methods of the exact sciences; 3) traditional idealism tore logical forms or sensations from real being.

Art, isolated from philosophy and morality, turned either into a dull copy of everyday life, or into a verbal game. Religious consciousness was increasingly clothed in frozen church ritual forms and, naturally, whole generations of the intelligentsia moved away from it. The new stage of Russian culture at the turn of the century was a grandiose attempt to overcome the disastrous gap for culture.

The interweaving of philosophy with other forms of spiritual life, mainly with art and literature, found its expression not only in theory, but also in everyday practice. Thus, the emergence of philosophical and artistic salons is characteristic: the salon of D. Merezhkovsky and Z. Gippius, where supporters of the “new religious consciousness” N. Berdyaev, V. Rozanov, A. Blok, A. Bely, N. Minsky gathered; salon of the poet and philosopher V. Ivanov - "environments"; St. Petersburg religious and philosophical meetings with the participation of the magazines "New Way" (since 1903), "Questions of Life" (since 1905); Liberals grouped around the journal Russkaya Mysl under the leadership of P. Struve.

However, there were tragic contradictions in the Russian Renaissance: the cultural elite was isolated in a small circle and cut off from the broad social currents of that time. This had fatal consequences in the character which the Russian revolution assumed. At the same time, the consequences of the spiritual feat of Russian thinkers cannot be underestimated. Today, the restoration and development of the spiritual wealth of the "Silver Age" has begun. It is necessary to comprehend social cataclysms, the sources of utopianism, the restoration of moral criteria, ideals, the revival of national pride, far from narcissism. Of particular importance is the revival of morality, "truth" - the moral foundations of life, the spiritual essence of being. Truth is sought not for the sake of abstract knowledge, but in order to "transform the world, purify and be saved."

A.F. Losev wrote that “in the 19th century, Russia produced a number of profound thinkers who, by their genius, can be placed next to the luminaries of European philosophy.”

Of the philosophers of the "Silver Age" we can name Vl. Solovyova, K. Leontiev,

P. Florensky, N. Berdyaev, I. Ilyin, L. Shestov, V. Rozanov, N. Lossky, L. Karsavin and others.

The Russian Revolution of 1905-1907 was one of the biggest events of the early 20th century. Everything was mixed here: the collapse of tsarist illusions, spontaneous riots, the Black Hundreds, terror, the formation of parliamentarism, and so on. The authors of the collection “Milestones. Collection of articles on the Russian intelligentsia, published in 1909.

In this book, leading philosophers, jurists, publicists tried to comprehend the experience of the first Russian revolution and, in its light, evaluate the leading trends in Russian social thought, the traditional views and ideals of the Russian intelligentsia. After its release, "Milestones" generated a huge number of responses, controversy, and active rejection of both left and right public figures. In the first six months of 1909 alone, 154 articles were published about the collection.

Thus, the leader of the Cadets, P. Milyukov, sharply negatively assessed Vekhi, seeing in the book a distortion of the image of the Russian intelligentsia. The opponent of the liberals, V. I. Lenin, called the collection an encyclopedia of liberal renegade, seeing in it a break with revolutionary democratic traditions.

One of the key ideas of "Milestones" was expressed by the initiator of the collection M. O. Gershenzon: "A person cannot live forever outside." (Milestones. From the depths. - M .: Pravda, 1991. - P. 74). It was a call for the formation of personality, for the need for continuous inner work of a person, for his self-deepening. No external changes in the fatherland will lead to the achievement of justice, flourishing, harmony of human relations, if there are no steady changes in the inner world of a person. The call for creative consciousness, for self-education, for overcoming the “evil in oneself”, that is, for clearing the mind of prejudices, of narrowly group intolerance, when the values ​​of morality and spiritual life are sacrificed for the sake of temporary political slogans, were voiced with exceptional force in “Milestones ".

The authors of Vekhi were honest, sincere champions of the country's true progress. They did not idealize contemporary Russia. They did not defend the autocracy, but spoke of the enormity of a blind, spontaneous and merciless popular revolt, the antidote to which can only be a strong state power based on law. By the way, M. Gorky, V. Korolenko, I. Bunin, V. Shulgin wrote about this after October 1917. It is interesting that the articles in the collection were not previously discussed, the authors did not get acquainted with each other's articles. The coincidence of many ideas and the unconditional integrity of the collection are all the more indicative.

The authors proceeded from the recognition of the primacy of spiritual life over external forms of human communication (economy, state power). The main goal of the book is to comprehend the results of the first decade of the twentieth century in Russia, the revolution, the rampant terror, the fermentation of minds, and, above all, to identify the spiritual justification for these events, to discuss how true the ideological preferences of the Russian intelligentsia were, whether many of its ideals, turned into idols, dogmas that are not subject to discussion. Although the inevitable accusations of apostasy, oblivion of ideals and traditions stemmed from this.

Many of the ideas voiced in Vekhi were a continuation of the traditions of Russian socio-philosophical thought under new conditions. Contrary to popular beliefs, the Vekhites also adopted certain ideas of the revolutionary democrats, in particular,

A. Herzen. These are the ideas of personal freedom, the need for a solid moral foundation for any radical change. It is necessary to get rid of dogmatic thinking, no matter how humane and democratic these or those ideas may be. The ideas of pluralism developed. A transfer from the outer to the inner side of life is necessary, which ensures the spiritual freedom of the intellectual. It is required to know the domestic philosophical thought better: in particular, A.

Khomyakov, B. Chicherin, A. Kozlov, S. Trubetskoy, L. Lopatin, V.

Neslilov, P. Chaadaeva, Vl. Solovyov, L. Tolstoy, F. Dostoevsky. Passion for European fashion must be countered by a universal national tradition.

Interestingly, the "Vekhi" in the past were Marxists. By the beginning of the 20th century, Russian philosophers were moving away from Marxism, striving to better understand not only the economic laws of society, but also the spiritual world of the individual, his freedom. They saw the basis of progress not in destruction, but in creation, hence the need for purposeful, creative, organized, competent work. The ideas of Vekhi become relevant again at the beginning of the 21st century, when Russia is going through another inversion. 10.1.4.

). This also includes the authors of the Russian abroad, whose work is also considered in line with modernism ( cm. LITERATURE OF THE RUSSIAN ABROAD). There is another approach that seeks to consider the entire frontier era as a whole, in a complex relationship not only with different literary movements, but also with all the phenomena of the cultural life of this period (art, philosophy, religious and political movements). Such an idea of ​​the "Silver Age" has been widespread in recent decades both in Western and domestic science.

The boundaries of the designated period are defined by different researchers in different ways. The beginning of the Silver Age is dated by most scientists to the 1890s, some to the 1880s. Differences regarding its final border are great (from 1913–1915 to the middle of the 20th century). However, the point of view is gradually being asserted that the "Silver Age" came to an end in the early 1920s.

In modern use, the expression "silver age" either does not have an evaluative character, or carries a touch of poeticization (silver as a noble metal, lunar silver, special spirituality). The original use of the term was rather negative, since the silver age coming after the golden one implies recession, degradation, decadence. This idea goes back to antiquity, to Hesiod and Ovid, who built the cycles of human history in accordance with the change of generations of the gods (under the titan Kronos-Saturn there was a golden age, under his son Zeus-Jupiter a silver one came). The metaphor of the “golden age” as a happy time for mankind, when eternal spring reigned and the earth itself bore fruit, received a new development in European culture, starting with the Renaissance (primarily in pastoral literature). Therefore, the expression "silver age" should have indicated a decrease in the quality of the phenomenon, its regression. With this understanding, Russian literature of the Silver Age (modernism) was opposed to the "golden age" of Pushkin and his contemporaries as "classical" literature.

R. Ivanov-Razumnik and V. Piast, who were the first to use the expression "silver age", did not oppose it to Pushkin's "golden age", but distinguished it in the literature of the early 20th century. two poetic periods ("golden age", strong and talented poets; and "silver age", poets of lesser power and lesser importance). For Piast, the "silver age" is primarily a chronological concept, although the succession of periods correlates with a certain lowering of the poetic level. On the contrary, Ivanov-Razumnik uses it as an estimate. For him, the "Silver Age" is the decline of the "creative wave", the main features of which are "self-sufficient technique, a decrease in spiritual take-off with an apparent increase in the technical level, the brilliance of form."

N. Otsup, popularizer of the term, also used it in different senses. In a 1933 article, he defined the Silver Age not so much chronologically as qualitatively, as a special type of creativity.

In the future, the concept of "Silver Age" was poeticized and lost its negative connotation. It was rethought as a figurative, poetic designation of an era marked by a special type of creativity, a special tone of poetry, with a touch of high tragedy and exquisite refinement. The expression "silver age" replaced analytical terms and provoked disputes about the unity or contradictory nature of the processes of the early 20th century.

The phenomenon that the term “Silver Age” denotes was an unprecedented cultural upsurge, a tension of creative forces that came in Russia after the populist period, marked by positivism and a utilitarian approach to life and art. The "decomposition of populism" in the 1880s was accompanied by a general mood of decline, "the end of the century." In the 1890s, overcoming the crisis began. Organically perceiving the influence of European modernism (primarily symbolism), Russian culture created its own versions of the “new art”, which marked the birth of a different cultural consciousness.

Despite the difference in poetics and creative attitudes, the modernist currents that arose in the late 19th and early 20th centuries proceeded from the same ideological root and had many common features. “What united the young symbolists was not general program... but the same determination of denial and rejection of the past, "no", thrown in the face of the fathers, ”wrote in his Memoirs A. Bely. This definition can be extended to the entire set of directions that arose at that time. Contrary to the idea of ​​the “usefulness of art”, they asserted the inner freedom of the artist, his selectivity, even messianism, and the transformative role of art in relation to life. N. Berdyaev, who called this phenomenon “Russian cultural renaissance” (or “Russian spiritual renaissance”), described it this way: “Now we can definitely say that the beginning of the 20th century was marked in our country by a renaissance of spiritual culture, a philosophical and literary and aesthetic renaissance, an religious and mystical sensibility. Never before has Russian culture reached such refinement as at that time.” Unlike critics who preferred the expression "silver age", Berdyaev did not oppose the beginning of the 20th century. Pushkin's era, but brought them closer: "There was a similarity with the romantic and idealistic movement of the early 19th century." He expressed the general feeling of a turning point, a transition that prevailed at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries: “In the part of the Russian intelligentsia, the most cultured, most educated and gifted, a spiritual crisis took place, there was a transition to a different type of culture, more perhaps close to the first half of the 19th century than to the second. This spiritual crisis was associated with the decomposition of the integrity of the revolutionary intellectual worldview, oriented exclusively socially, it was a break with Russian "enlightenment", with positivism in the broadest sense of the word, it was the proclamation of the rights to the "other world". That was liberation human soul from the yoke of sociality, the liberation of creative forces from the yoke of utilitarianism.

Apocalyptic aspirations, a sense of crisis both in life and in art, were associated with the spread in Russia of the ideas of Schopenhauer, Nietzsche and Spengler, on the one hand, and with the anticipation of new revolutions, on the other. Some directions fixed the state of chaos associated with the awareness of the “end” (expressionism), some called for renewal and hoped for a future that was already approaching. This focus on the future gave rise to the idea of ​​a “new man”: the Nietzsche Superman and the androgyne of the symbolists, the New Adam of the acmeists, the “future man” of the futurists ( cm. FUTURISM). At the same time, even within the same direction, opposite aspirations coexisted: extreme individualism, aestheticism (in the decadent part of symbolism) and the preaching of the World Soul, the new Dionysianism, catholicity (among the “younger” symbolists). The search for truth, the ultimate meaning of being, resulted in various forms of mysticism, and occultism, which was popular in the early 19th century, came into fashion again. A characteristic expression of these sentiments was the novel by V. Bryusov Fire Angel. There was an interest in Russian sectarianism (“Khlystism” by N. Klyuev, some motives in the poetry of S. Yesenin, a novel silver dove White). Turning inward, neo-romantic intoxication with the depths of the human "I" was combined with the rediscovery of the world in its sensually comprehended objectivity. A special trend at the turn of the century was a new myth-making, also associated with the expectation of the emerging future, with the need to rethink human existence. The fusion of everyday and existential, everyday life and metaphysics is distinguishable in the works of writers of different directions.

At the same time, there was a desire for renewal art form to new language acquisition. The modernization of verse, begun by the experiments of the Symbolists, who introduced rare words and combinations into poetry, was brought to a poetic "zaum" by the Futurists. The Symbolists, developing the precepts of Verlaine (“Music first!”) and Mallarme (with his idea of ​​inspiring a certain mood, “suggestive” poetry), were looking for some kind of “magic of words”, in which their special, musical combination would be correlated with a secret, inexpressible content . Bryusov described the birth of a symbolist work in the following way: “Words lose their usual meaning, figures lose their specific meaning, - there remains a means to master the elements of the soul, to give them voluptuous-sweet combinations, which we call aesthetic pleasure.” Bely saw in the “embodied”, “living” (creative) word a saving principle that protects a person from death in the “epoch of general decline”: “from under the dust of a collapsing culture we call and conjure with the sounds of words”; "humanity is alive as long as the poetry of language exists" ( Word magic, 1910). Picking up the thesis of the symbolists about the significance of the word for life-building, the Moscow futurists-“budetlyane” proposed a radical approach to updating linguistic means. They proclaimed the value of a "self-made word", "an existing word outside of life and life's usefulness", the need for word creation, the creation of a new, "universal" language. V. Khlebnikov was looking for "a magic stone for the transformation of all Slavic words from one to another." A. Kruchenykh wrote: “The greatest expressiveness is achieved by cut words and their bizarre cunning combinations (abstruse language), and this is precisely what distinguishes the language of rapid modernity. V. Mayakovsky, who reformed poetry not so much with the help of "zaumi", but rather through the introduction of colloquial words, neologisms, expressive images, also sought to "bring the future closer with the help of poetry." Acmeists, with a different meaning, called to appreciate the “word as such” - in its fullness, in the unity of its form and content, in its reality as a material, like a stone that becomes part of an architectural structure. The clarity of the poetic image, the rejection of the nebulousness and mysticism of the symbolists and the futurist sound game, the “healthy” relationship between word and meaning - these were the requirements of the acmeists who wanted to return poetry from the field of pure experiment to harmony and life. Another variant of the creative program was presented by Imagism. The orientation towards a bright, unexpected image and the “rhythm of images” was proclaimed by the Imagists in their Declarations(1919). The basis of their method was the creation of a metaphor by combining incompatible, remote in meaning concepts and objects, "an image as an end in itself", "an image as a theme and content".

Poetic achievements were developed and continued in prose. The “stream of consciousness” technique, non-linear narration, the use of leitmotifs and montage as principles of text organization, expressiveness and even illogicality of images characterize the prose works of symbolism and expressionism ( Petersburg white, Drops of blood and petty imp F. Sologub, prose by E. Gabrilovich and L. Andreev).

In their own way, writers who continued the tradition of realism (A. Chekhov, I. Bunin, A. Kuprin, I. Shmelev, B. Zaitsev, A. N. Tolstoy), and Marxist writers (M. Gorky) met the requirements for updating the artistic form . Neorealism in the early 20th century accepted the creative discoveries of the modernists. Comprehension of being through everyday life is the main feature of this direction. Not just to depict reality, but to listen to "the mysterious rhythm that is full of world life", to give contemporaries the necessary philosophy of life called on the theorist of the "new realists" V. Veresaev. The turn from the positivism of the "old realists" towards questions of being was combined with a change in poetics, which was reflected primarily in the "lyricization" of prose. However, there was also a reverse influence of realistic depiction, expressed in the "objectification" of poetry. This is how one of the essential features of this period manifested itself - the desire for artistic synthesis. Synthetic in nature was the desire to bring poetry closer to music, philosophy (among the Symbolists), and social gesture (among the Futurists).

Similar processes took place in other arts: in painting, in theater, in architecture and in music. So, symbolism corresponded to the “total”, which spread to all fine and applied arts, as well as to architecture, the “modern” style (in France it was called “Art Nouveau”, in Germany “Jugendstil”, in Austria the style of “Secession”). Impressionism, which arose as a trend in painting, created an equally powerful trend in music, influencing literature as well. The same can be said about expressionism, which gave equally significant results to painting, music, literature, dramaturgy. And this also affected the tendency towards synthesis, characteristic of that time. It was not accidental that such “synthetic” creators appeared as the composer and artist M. Churlionis, the poets and artists Voloshin, Mayakovsky, Kruchenykh and others.

The Russian theater experienced a special flourishing. Being basically synthetic, theatrical art absorbed influences coming from literature (drama), music (opera and ballet). Through scenography, he was connected with new artistic trends. Such artists as A. Benois, Bakst, M. Dobuzhinsky, N. Roerich turned to the design of dramatic, opera and ballet performances. Like other arts, the theater renounced the dictates of lifelikeness.

At the same time, along with the desire for unity, there was a desire for distinction, for a clear definition of one's own creative program. Numerous "trends", groups, associations that arose within each of the arts declared their artistic attitudes in theoretical manifestos, which were no less important part of creativity than its practical manifestations. The situation in successively replacing each other directions of modernist literature is indicative: each subsequent one determined itself in repulsion from the previous one, was affirmed through negation. Acmeism and futurism, inheriting symbolism, opposed themselves to it on various grounds, simultaneously criticizing each other and all other directions: acmeists in articles The legacy of symbolism and acmeism and Morning of acmeism, cubofuturists in the program manifesto A slap in the face of public taste (1912).

All these tendencies were reflected in philosophy and criticism.

In the same vein, the creativity of the figures of the first wave of emigration developed, transferring to the “other shores” the cultural forms developed in Russia.

Thus, the turn of the 19th–20th centuries. can be considered as a special stage of Russian culture, internally integral with all the diversity of its phenomena. He gave birth in Russia to a new consciousness of the “non-classical era” and a new art corresponding to it, in which the “re-creation” of reality was replaced by its creative “re-creation”.

Tatyana Mikhailova

Philosophy of the Silver Age

Conventionally, the beginning of the "Silver Age" in philosophy can be associated with the time between the two Russian revolutions. If before the first revolution of 1905 the Russian intelligentsia was more or less unanimous on the question of the need for political reforms (considering the form state government the main reason for the unsatisfactory state of affairs in the country and society), then after the introduction of fundamental constitutional freedoms in 1905, public minds are sent to search for new forms of views on the world and life.

Philosophers and writers of this period for the first time comprehended the state of personal freedom and sought an answer to the question: "How to realize the freedom of a person for his personal and social development?" After the revolution of 1917 and the civil war, most of the philosophers of the "Silver Age" found themselves in exile, where their interests were more and more focused on religious side life of the Russian Orthodox community abroad. As a result of this, such a phenomenon of the spiritual culture of the 20th century as Russian religious philosophy arises.

The philosophers of the Silver Age traditionally include N.A. Berdyaev, S.N. Bulgakov, B.P. Vysheslavtsev, S.L. Frank, N.O. Lossky, F.A. Stepun, P.B. Struve, V. N. Ilyina, Ivanov, E.N. Trubetskoy, Ern, Florensky, Bulgakov and others).

In 1907 the St. Petersburg Religious and Philosophical Society was founded. During that period, the traditional themes of philosophical and religious thought were developed in new literary forms. The era of the "silver age" Russian culture is rich in experiences of expressing metaphysical ideas in artistic creativity. Such examples of "literary" metaphysics are the work of two writers and polemicists - D.S. Merezhkovsky and V.V. Rozanov.

The main platform for philosophers of the "Silver Age" is participation in literary and philosophical journals ("Logos", "New Ideas in Philosophy", publishing house "The Way") and collections. Collection Milestones (1909) (cm. VEKHI AND VEKHOVTSY) has a pronounced ideological character. The authors – M.O. At the same time, the tradition of Russian radicalism was subjected to the main criticism. Meaning Milestones as the most important document of the era was a kind of change in the philosophical paradigm of Russian society. But it must be borne in mind that the main transition to religious and philosophical views occurred with Berdyaev, Bulgakov, and Frank much later, already in exile.

The philosophers of the Silver Age had different fates: some of them left their homeland together with the “white movement”, some were expelled from Soviet Russia and lived in exile, some were repressed and died in the Stalin years. There were also those who were able to fit into university and academic philosophical life in the USSR. But, despite this, it is legitimate to conditionally unite these thinkers under the name "philosophers of the Silver Age" on the basis of a combination of broad erudition based on the European cultural tradition, and literary and journalistic talent.

Fedor Blucher

Literature:

Ippolit Udushyev [Ivanov-Razumnik R.V.]. Look and Something. Excerpt.(To the centenary of "Woe from Wit"). - In: Modern Literature . L., 1925
Otsup N. silver Age. – In Sat: Numbers, ed. Nicholas Otsup. Book. 7–8. Paris, 1933
Weidle V. Russia's task. New York, 1956
Otsup N. Contemporaries. Paris, 1961
Makovsky S. On Parnassus« Silver Age» . Munich, 1962
Kolobaeva L.A. . The concept of personality in Russian literature at the turn 19 - start 20in. M., 1990
Gasparov M.L. Poetics« silver age". - In the book: Russian poetry of the "Silver Age": an anthology. M., 1993
Memories of the Silver Age. Comp. Kreid V. M., 1993
Berdyaev N. Russian spiritual renaissance of the early twentieth century and the journal« Path» (by the decade« Ways"). - In the book: Berdyaev N. Philosophy of creativity, culture and art. In 2 vols, v. 2. M., 1994
History of Russian Literature: 20th Century: The Silver Age. Ed. Niva J., Sermana I., Strady V., Etkinda E.M. M., 1995
Iezuitova L.A. What was called the "golden" and "silver age" in the cultural Russia XIX- early 20th century. – In: Gumilev Readings: Proceedings of the International Conference of Slavic Philologists . St. Petersburg, 1996
Etkind A. Sodom and Psyche: Essays on the Intellectual History of the Silver Age. M., 1996
Piast Vl. Meetings. M., 1997
Imagist poets. - Comp. E.M. Shneiderman. SPb. - M., 1997
Etkind A. Whiplash: Sects, Literature and Revolution. M., 1998
Bogomolov N.A. Russian literature of the early twentieth century and the occult. M., 1999
Hardy W. Art Nouveau guide. M., 1999
Ronen O. The Silver Age as intent and fiction. M., 2000
Keldysh V.A. Russian literature« silver age» as a complex entity. - In the book: Russian literature at the turn of the century (1890 - early 1920s) . M., 2001
Koretskaya I.V. Literature in the circle of arts. - In the book: Russian literature at the turn of the century (1890 - early 1920s). M., 2001
Isupov K.G. Philosophy and Literature of the Silver Age(approaches and intersections). - In the book: Russian literature at the turn of the century (1890 - early 1920s). M., 2001
Smirnova L.A. silver Age. - In the book: Literary Encyclopedia terms and concepts. M., 2003
Mildon V.I. Russian Renaissance, or Falsity« silver age» . – Questions of Philosophy. M., 2005, No. 1