The principle of demotia in the doctrine of the Eurasians. Culturology of Eurasianism The problem of man in the teachings of the Eurasians

First of all, it should be noted that the approach to the study of culture, the principles of cultural analysis, which the Eurasians used in their studies, are inextricably linked with their historiosophical concept. Despite the fact that the purely theoretical problems of the philosophy of history were of great interest to the Eurasianists, for the most part they adhered to precisely the unified concept of the world-historical process. This concept, which determined the Eurasianists' approach to the role of a separate national culture in history, was based on the multilinear scheme of the cultural-historical process developed in Western historiography of the 17th - 19th centuries. J. Vico and I. Herder, in Russian - N.Ya. Danilevsky and K.II. Leontiev. The distinctive features of the Eurasian culture are: the geographical features of the mesgo-development (the term of the Eurasians) of the Eurasian culture; features of the dialects of that linguistic union of peoples that inhabit Russia-Eurasia; a special attitude that distinguishes the Eurasian peoples and is due to the special warehouse of their spiritual life and a historical process that is different from the rest of the world. The Eurasianists believed that all the named physical, spiritual features are in deep internal connection and form the nature of the "cultural personality" - Russia-Eurasia.

One of the most famous works of Eurasianism "as a movement and a special concept of the place of Russia between East and West"" is the book of the founder of this trend N. Trubetskoy "Europe and Humanity", which contains the methodological basis of the cultural studies of Eurasianism. The main idea of this book is to prove illegality, unscientific absolutization of European (Western) culture, declaring it the highest stage of historical progress and ranking other cultures according to the degree of their proximity to European... In this regard, it should be noted that the Eurasians are sharp opponents of Mr. Eurocentrism.According to N. Trubetskoy , instead of the principle of dividing peoples and cultures according to degrees of perfection, traditionally used in European sciences, it is necessary to introduce a new principle of "equivalent and qualitative disproportion of all cultures and peoples"... The desire to Europeanize one's culture puts the development of a people's own culture at an extremely disadvantageous position, because in comparison with natural Europeanized or Europeanized people inevitably find themselves in less favorable conditions by Europeans: they have to spend their energy on coordinating various heterogeneous elements of cultures, etc. Thus, the “spiritual” price that a Europeanized people has to pay for the Europeanization of their culture is immeasurably high. Among other things, the achievements of the culture of a Europeanized people must comply with European psychological standards. All others will be discarded as the product of inferior, barbarian cultures. However, the Eurasians saw the greatest danger of Europeanization in the destruction of "national unity", in the dismemberment of the "national body of the Europeanized people". There is an aggravation of the class struggle, the confrontation in society intensifies, and so on. Thus, the Eurasianists came to the conclusion that the process of Europeanization leads to such dire consequences that it should be regarded not as a blessing, but as an evil. The Eurasians did not deny the achievements of European culture as a whole, they did not reject its socio-economic scientific concepts only on the grounds that they are European. However, the Eurasians were categorically against the mechanical transfer of some cultures to others. Trubetskoy denied the evolutionary vertical arrangement of human cultures, being convinced that “the moment of assessment should be banished once and for all from ethnology and the history of cultures, as well as from all evolutionary sciences in general, because assessment is always based on egocentrism. There are no higher and lower. There are only similar and dissimilar"(my italics - A.A.). P. Savitsky wrote in this regard: “There is no doubt that the ancient inhabitants of Easter Island in the Great Ocean “lagged behind” modern Englishmen in very many branches of empirical knowledge and technology; this did not prevent them from showing in their sculpture such a measure of originality and creativity, which is not available to sculpture in modern England.

It is important to emphasize the paramount importance in Eurasian historiosophy, in the entire Eurasian doctrine problems of the Mongol-Tatar period in the history of Russia. The Eurasians of the National Assembly were the first to seriously doubt the backwardness of the Mongol-Tatar culture in comparison with the Russian one. Trubetskoy, G.V. Vernadsky, P.N. Savitsky. In methodological terms, this doubt is based on the culturological postulate of the Eurasians about the impossibility of ranking cultures according to the principle of higher-lower. The Eurasians created their own concept of Russian history. A prominent place in this concept is occupied by the ideas of the Eurasians about the role of the Turanian element in the ethnogenesis of the Russian nation. N.S. Trubetskoy believed that the origins of Russian statehood did not lie in Kievan Rus, but in the Moscow principality, leading its direct origin from the Jochi ulus. P.N. Savitsky believed that the Russian spiritual identity was formed largely under the influence of trade and political contacts with the Steppe. Hence the combination in Russian culture of "sedentary" and "steppe" elements.

A significant place in the creation of the Eurasian concept of Russian history belongs to G.V. Vernadsky. The scientist developed the thesis, common for Eurasianism, about the positive influence of the Mongol-Tatar domination on the development of Russia. The thesis that, having fallen under the Mongol-Tatar yoke, Rus' escaped the European expansion that was much more dangerous for its culture, was later developed by G.V. Vernadsky in the article “Two feats of Ev. Alexander Nevsky" (1925).

Speaking about the fundamental theoretical foundations of Eurasianism, it is impossible not to mention the subject of personality, to which the Eurasians attached great importance in their philosophy and which played an important role in their doctrine of the state. The Eurasianists wrote that "the whole meaning and pathos of our statements boils down to the fact that we realize and proclaim the existence of some special Eurasian-Russian culture and its specific subject - a symphonic personality" . The main ideas of Eurasianism put forward by the founders of this doctrine in the field of historiosophy, geopolitics and the theory of state and law are organically interconnected by the main socio-philosophical idea - the idea of being (state and activity) of the symphonic (cathedral personality) of the cathedral subject. Such a person is a kind of "core" of the Eurasian state, the population of which will be made up of all those peoples who live on the territory of Russia. At the center of the doctrine of being of the Eurasianists is a person who “in the ontological sense is, as it were, self-concentration and self-disclosure of being in its special image, from which and with which it correlates other images of itself” . It should be noted that N.S. Trubetskoy was one of the first to propose a methodological principle for the descriptive study of national cultures. He considered the people as "a psychophysical whole in connection with the physical environment" or "a symphonic multi-human personality", the universal principle of which is self-knowledge. The peculiarity of such a person lies in the centuries-old period of existence, during which there are constant changes in this person, so that the results of the national self-consciousness of one era are only the starting point of any new work of self-consciousness. It is possible to speak about the specific results of the self-knowledge of a people only if its “spiritual nature, its individual character finds the most complete and vivid expression in its original national culture and this culture is harmonious, i.e. certain parts of it do not contradict each other. It is important to note that the Eurasians, when developing their concept of personality, "strived" to the cultural ideals of the peoples of the East, among whom the psychological subordination of the individual to the collective was very common. A person of this type “always recognizes himself as part of a certain hierarchical system and is ultimately subordinate not to a person, but to God.”

The world was conceived by the Eurasians as a universal human personality, or a hierarchy of symphonic personalities of different orders: individual and social. Like an individual, a socio-symphonic personality has a bodily-spiritual structure, i.e. spatial-spiritual substantiality. This ensures her self - knowledge . “In a social personality, every individual personality is wholly spatially determined in relation to all others, so that every moment of it confronts them as itself.” The most important are the social personalities of the widest functional completeness (family, people, state).

The Eurasianists emphasized that the culture of Russia is neither a Eurasian culture. None of the Asian, nor the sum or mechanical combination of the goy elements and others. It is a completely special, specific culture... Culture is an organic and specific being, a living organism. It always presupposes the existence of a subject realizing itself in it. A special symphonic personality.

Summarizing the above, we can say that the basis of the culturology of Eurasianism is the thesis of the equality of different cultures of the world, as well as the concept of a symphonic (cathedral) personality. Eurasians denied the possibility of the superiority of some cultures over others, noting that cultures can be different, not similar to each other, i.e. there are no higher and lower cultures. There are different cultures.

In this aspect of Eurasianism one can see a clearly marked anti-Western position. It is important to note that the Eurasianists were not apologists for the Slavophiles (as, for example, A.G. Palkin believes), who absolutize the opposition of the West to the East, or rather, the West to Slavism. Eurasians are trying to find the dialectical unity of the West and the East, a new integral quality rooted in the culture of both the East and the West. A unilateral orientation toward the West will inevitably lead Russian civilization to catastrophic consequences, but this by no means means an unconditional "rejection" of the West by the Eurasians. In good times, the Eurasians believed that it was necessary to adopt Western ideas, but without ".monkey".

Zhdanova G.V. Philosophy of the culture of Eurasianism (methodological aspects) // Bulletin of the Moscow University. Series 7. Philosophy. 2004. No. 5.S. 37.
Eurasianism. Declaration, formulation, theses. Prague, 1932. S. 7.
Russia between Europe and Asia: the Eurasian temptation. M.: Nauka, 1993. S. 12.
Pashchenko V.Ya. Social philosophy of Eurasianism. M., 2003. S. 50. See also: Kostyukovich N.V. Anthropological meaning of N.S. Trubetskoy. Diss. ... cand. philosopher, science. St. Petersburg, 2006; Kuptsova I.A. The philosophical concept of culture N.S. Trubetskoy. Diss. ... cand. philosopher, science. M., 2006 and others.

The so-called classical Eurasianism is a bright page in the intellectual, ideological and political-psychological history of the Russian post-revolutionary emigration of the 1920s and 1930s. From the moment of its active declaration of itself, Eurasianism was distinguished by isolationism, the recognition of the fact of revolution in Russia (in the sense that nothing pre-revolutionary is already possible), the desire to stand outside the “right” and “left” (the idea of a “third, new maximalism” as opposed to the idea of a third International), etc. As an integral worldview and political practice, Eurasianism not only constantly evolved internally, updated the composition of its participants, but often became the object of criticism, energetic and very emotional polemics, and categorical rejection in the emigrant environment. And today the perception of Eurasian ideas in Russia is ambiguous.

At the origins of Eurasianism was a group of young Russian scientists, emigrants from Russia, who met in 1920 in Sofia. These founders were: Prince N.S. Trubetskoy (1890-1938) - an outstanding linguist who substantiated structural linguistics, future professor of Slavic philology at the University of Vienna, son of the philosopher Prince S.N. Trubetskoy (1890-1938), P.N. Savitsky (1895-1968) - economist and geographer, former graduate student P.B. Struve (1870-1944), G.V. Florovsky (1893-1979), later a priest and an outstanding Orthodox theologian and P.P. Suvchinsky (1892-1985) - critic and philosopher of music, publicist and organizer of the Eurasian movement. The inspirer of friends for the publication of the first collective collection, the eldest of them was His Serene Highness Prince A.A. Lieven, but he himself did not write anything and soon took the priesthood. Eurasianism in the philosophical, historical and political thought of the Russian diaspora in the 1920s-1930s: annotations. bibliography decree. /Ros. state library, research and development department of bibliography; comp.: L.G. Filonova, bibliographer. ed. N.Yu. Butina. - M., 2011., S. 11

The work in which Eurasianism first declared its existence was the book by N.S. Trubetskoy “Europe and Humanity”, published in Sofia in 1920. In 1921, their first collection of articles “Exodus to the East. Premonitions and Accomplishments. Approval of the Eurasians”, which became a kind of manifesto of the new movement. During 1921-1922. Eurasians, having dispersed to various cities of Europe, actively worked on the ideological and organizational design of the new movement.

Dozens, if not hundreds of people of various levels were involved in the orbit of Eurasianism at its various stages: philosophers N.N. Alekseev, N.S. Arseniev, L.P. Karsavin, V.E. Seseman, S.L. Frank, V.N. Ilyin, historians G.V. Vernadsky and P.M. Bitsilli, literary critics D.P. Svyatopolk-Mirsky, such representatives of Russian culture as I.F. Stravinsky, M.I. Tsvetaeva, A.M. Remizov, R.O. Yakobson, V.N. Ivanov et al. Eurasianism in the philosophical, historical and political thought of the Russian diaspora in the 1920s-1930s: annotations. bibliography decree. /Ros. state library, research and development department of bibliography; comp.: L.G. Filonova, bibliographer. ed. N.Yu. Butina. - M., 2011., S. 12

In the almost twenty-year history of the movement, researchers distinguish three stages. Primary covers 1921-1925. and flows predominantly in Eastern Europe and Germany. Already at this stage, conspiracy moments are intensified, ciphers appear in correspondence. At the next stage, from about 1926 to 1929, the center of the movement moves to Clamart, a suburb of Paris. It was at this stage, at the end of 1928, that the Clamart split of the movement took place. Finally, in the period 1930-1939. the movement, having gone through a number of crises, gradually exhausted all the stock of its pretentious activism and came to naught.

In their fundamental works, collective manifestos, articles and brochures, the Eurasians tried to creatively respond to the challenge of the Russian revolution and put forward a number of historiosophical, cultural and political ideas for further implementation in the course of active social and practical work. One of the leading modern researchers of Eurasianism, S. Glebov, notes: “Despite various professional and general cultural interests, these people were united by a certain generational ethos and experience of the last “normal” years of the Russian Empire, the First World War, two revolutions and the Civil War. They shared a general feeling of crisis - more precisely, impending catastrophe - of contemporary European civilization; they believed that the path to salvation lies in drawing boundaries between different cultures, as Trubetskoy put it, erecting “partitions reaching to the sky” Glebov S. Eurasianism between empire and modernity. History in documents. M.: New publishing house, 2010. - 632 p. S. 6.

They had a deep contempt for liberal values and procedural democracy and believed in the imminent advent of a new, yet unseen order.

According to the Eurasianists, a new era is beginning, in which Asia is trying to seize the initiative and play a dominant role, and Russia, whose catastrophe is not as severe as the decay of the West, will restore its strength through unity with the East. The Eurasianists called the Russian catastrophe of 1917 a "communist coven" and recognized it as a gloomy result of the forced Europeanization of Russia that had been carried out since Peter I. While condemning the revolution, they, however, believed that it was possible to use its results to ideologically and politically consolidate the anti-Western choice of the ruling communist clique , suggesting that she replace the Marxist doctrine with the Eurasian one. As the Eurasianists declared, a new stage of the country's historical development should begin, oriented towards Eurasia, and not towards communism and not towards Romano-Germanic Europe, which egocentrically robbed the rest of humanity in the name of a universal human civilization invented by its ideologists with the ideas of "stages of development", "progress "and so on.

In his work “Europe and Humanity”, N. S. Trubetskoy writes that, according to the ideas of Western civilization, all mankind, all peoples are divided into historical and non-historical, progressive (Romano-Germanic) and “wild” (non-European). By and large, the idea of a progressive (linear) path of human development, in which some peoples (countries) have gone far “ahead”, while others are trying to catch up with them, has not fundamentally changed over the past hundred years since that time, the only difference is that the previous incarnation of progress in the image of Romano-Germanic Europe has now been replaced by American (Anglo-Saxon) centrism and hegemonism, only liberal-democratic (Western) values have the right to be considered as universal, and the rest of the non-Western world (which, nevertheless, is ѕ of mankind) is regarded as an object of inevitable and even forced modernization according to the Western model. Trubetskoy Eurasianism philosophy value

Even anti-globalists who are fighting against American hegemonism do not get out of the given parameters of the dichotomous perception of the modern world: West - Non-West (civilizational aspect), North - South (economic), Modernism - Traditionalism (socio-political) and the like. Such simplification significantly impoverishes the picture of the modern world. As G. Sachko writes, “just as an atheist perceives all religions as a false (or mythological) consciousness and is not interested in the “degree of falsity” of each of them, so the pro-Western mentality does not differentiate the striking differences between non-Western societies, non-democratic systems, illiberal ideologies” Sachko G.V. Eurasianism and fascism: history and modernity // Bulletin of the Chelyabinsk State University. - 2009. - No. 40 ..

According to this approach, everything that is unique in the national, ethnic, confessional aspects is considered as the antipode of the "universal", the traditional is considered as the antipode of the progressive, originality - as isolationism in the global movement, etc.

Eurasianism in its classical form is designed to eliminate this contradiction and confrontation. According to the concept of Eurasianism, the development of humanity as a whole is possible only if all its constituent regions, ethnic groups, peoples, religions and cultures develop in their originality and unique originality. Eurasians stand for diversity and against unified averageness. “The blooming complexity of the world” is K. Leontiev’s favorite image, which was perceived by the Eurasians: each people and nation has its own “color”, its own stage of “flourishing”, its own vector of movement, and only this variety of colors, shades and transitions can become the basis common harmony of mankind. Eurasians consider all cultures, religions, ethnic groups and peoples as equal and equal. N.S. Trubetskoy argued that it is impossible to determine which of the cultures is more developed and which is less, he categorically disagrees with the dominant approach to history, in which "Europeans simply took themselves, their culture as the crown of the evolution of mankind and, naively convinced that that they had found one end of the supposed evolutionary chain, quickly built the entire chain." He compared the creation of such a chain of evolution with an attempt by a person who has never seen the spectrum of a rainbow to put it together from multi-colored cubes.

Based on the concept of Eurasianism, which refutes the unilinear and Eurocentric civilizational development, a democratic regime has no advantages over the caliphate, European law cannot dominate Muslim law, and the rights of the individual cannot be higher than the rights of the people, etc.

Actually, there was nothing original in such a view of the development of human society. The civilizational approach was proposed even before the Eurasianists by the Russian philosopher Danilevsky, Western thinkers A. Toynbee and O. Spengler, by the way, who proclaimed the imminent "decline" of Europe, or rather, European civilization with its liberal values. Perhaps the most significant difference between the concept of Eurasianism and other plural-cyclical concepts of social development is a sharply negative attitude towards the Western European (Romano-Germanic) world, characteristic of many of its representatives, which is especially clearly seen in the work of N.S. Trubetskoy "Europe and Humanity".

Full text of the dissertation abstract on this topic ""

As a manuscript

ILYIN ALEXANDER GENNADIEVICH

INDIVIDUALITY OF THE MANIFESTATION OF THE ESSENCE OF HUMAN IN THE CONDITIONS OF THE EURASIAN SOCIETY

dissertations for the degree of candidate of philosophical sciences

Specialty 09 00 11 - social philosophy

The dissertation was completed at the Department of Philosophy and Sociology of the Yelabuga State Pedagogical University

Scientific adviser:

Official Opponents

Lead organization:

Doctor of Philosophy, Professor Sabirov Askadula Galimzyanovich

Doctor of Philosophical Sciences, Professor Fayzullin Fanil Saitovich Candidate of Philosophical Sciences, Associate Professor Vakhitov Rustem Rinatovich

GOU VPO "Kama State Engineering and Economic Academy" (Naberezhnye Chelny)

The defense will take place on June 27, 2008 at 10:00 am at a meeting of the dissertation council D 212 013.03. at the Bashkir State University at the address. 450074, Ufa, st. Frunze, 32 ch. building, room 339.

The dissertation can be found in the library of the Bashkir State University

Scientific Secretary of the Dissertation Council, l //

Doctor of Philosophy, Professor /L M Pozdyaeva

GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WORK

Relevance of the research topic. Modern Russian society is going through a difficult socio-political situation. The issues of social, political and cultural development of Russia are more often the subject of scientific discussions "Today, many researchers, scientists, politicians not only study the heritage of the Eurasians, but very widely use Eurasian ideas, theoretical constructions in social and political practice"1

The processes of globalization lead to the formation of a contradiction between national cultural and universal human values - actualization of socio-cultural identity Therefore, in our opinion, the identification of the potential and analysis of the Eurasian philosophical thought will allow not only to consider the specifics of the existence of a Russian person in a multinational society, but also to clarify some problems of socio-philosophical knowledge in modern Russia

It should be pointed out that in any unstable society, such as the Russian one, primitive values come to the fore - the desire to get rich quickly, achieve instant success and a high social position. At the same time, values that dominate modern public consciousness, such as pragmatism rationalism, selfishness, careerism, technocracy, etc., as is known, are borrowed from the West. Therefore, Eurasianism can be considered as a theory opposite to the theory of Westernization, and its main provisions can be applied to analyze the features of the development of modern Russian society in the context of increasing globalization

Thanks to its norms and values, society forms new generations of people, making them carriers of a number of specific features Russian society, as a multinational and multi-confessional society, forms a person with such qualities that the changing social reality requires - tolerance, tolerance, respect for representatives of another nation, culture , religions, etc. Positive experience of peaceful coexistence of indigenous peoples living since ancient times on the territory of Russia (Europe and Asia),

1 Pashchenko V Ya Social Philosophy of Eurasianism - M Alpha-M, 2003 -C 5

makes it possible to predict the processes of interethnic interaction in modern Russia from the position of Eurasianism

It should also be emphasized that in modern philosophical science two positions have been formed in relation to the Eurasian theory - the absolutization of Eurasian ideas and their total criticism Based on the social and cultural tradition that has been formed over a long time, it is necessary to look for a way out of the current crisis situation. , and Russians as a set of individuals who combine the features of the mentality of the East and West

Man, as one of the basic concepts of social philosophy and philosophical anthropology, is a set of qualities that characterize him as a special, spiritual being. Therefore, the study of the originality of the essence of man in the conditions of Eurasian society is an urgent task.

The degree of scientific development of the problem. The founders of the theory of Eurasianism are such prominent thinkers of the early twentieth century as N. Trubetskoy, P. Savitsky, G. Florovsky, P. Suvchinsky, N. Alekseev and others

The first manifesto of the trend they created was the collection Exodus to the East. Premonitions and Accomplishments Statement of the Eurasians”, published in Sofia in 1921. This collection defined the main provisions of the Eurasian theory: N. Trubetskoy singled out Eurasianism as a special direction of philosophical thought P. Savitsky developed the doctrine of Russia-Eurasia as a special geographical and cultural-historical a world that differs sharply from the European and Asian worlds, although it contains many elements of both. Both N Trubetskoy and P Savitsky emphasized in their works the disclosure of the historical ties between Russians and the Turkic peoples

It should be noted that various aspects of human development in the Russian sociocultural space were considered in their works by L Karsavin, N. Berdyaev, I Ilyin, L Gumilyov, G Vernadsky

So, N. Berdyaev, not being a supporter of Eurasian views, nevertheless, recognized that Russia is not only in Europe, but also in Asia. Pointing out in the "Russian Idea" the inconsistency of the Russian character, he understood that Russians, but also other peoples of Russia. The works of N Berdyaev played a big role in the formation of the Eurasian doctrine

G. Vernadsky considered the problem of Eurasianism in a historical context. He believed that the formation of Russia - Eurasia was influenced by the long coexistence of various peoples on its territory, which

resulted in the formation of a special Eurasian type of society and type of culture. He concludes that the way of life of Russians was significantly influenced by various types of social relations and communication with representatives of the Turkic peoples

The original researcher of Eurasianism as a socio-cultural phenomenon was the Soviet scientist L. Gumilyov, who, like G. Vernadsky, believed that the commonwealth of Russians with representatives of the Turkic peoples had a positive effect on the formation of Russian statehood. He also proved that the formation of the peoples of Eurasia was influenced by a special geographical environment.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, in the 1990s, interest in Eurasian ideas intensified. This was caused by the crisis of social identity in which Russia found itself. A society at a crossroads was trying to figure out which way to go - to designate its European, Eastern or Eurasian identity. Under these conditions, Eurasianism as a theory showed Russia's path to modern civilization. Sizemskaya, V Ilyin, A Sabirov, V Barulin, N Omelchenko, S Kara-Murza, T Aizatulin, V Khaziev, F S Faizullin, B S Galimov, U S. Vildanov, R R. Vakhitov and others

The first direction explores Eurasianism from liberal positions. These are the works of L. Novikova, I. Sizemskaya, O. Volkogonova, N. Omelchenko and others. They note that the Russian person is a special socio-cultural type that combines the features of the Eastern and Western.

On the other hand, in the works of L. Ponamareva, V. Khachaturian, attempts are made to inscribe the Eurasian theory into the world cultural and philosophical traditions. Thus, they consider a person from the point of view of world cultural practice, identifying universal human values in it and familiarizing with them.

The second direction interprets Eurasianism as a continuation of the "Russian idea". Among the representatives of this direction one can name S Khoruzhy, A Sobolev, V Kholodny, A Akhiezer. Their works emphasize that universal values are not alien to the Russian person, however, he is the bearer of a unique essence that makes him not like the eastern and western types of people.

The third direction is trying to “modernize”, modernize the theory of Eurasianism Its main representatives are A Panarin, V Zorin and V Pashchenko Particular attention should be paid to the works of A Panarin

Considering the problem of Russian identity, the author notes that “the drama of our identity is connected with the fact that from the very beginning it was not of a naturalistic nature, was not content with ethnic, geographical, and administrative-powerful persuasion, but was predominantly value-normative, spiritual”2 .

The problem of the “essence” of a person was dealt with by such scientists as P Gurevich, A. Sabirov, O. Bazaluk, V Barullin and others. From the analysis of their work, we can conclude that the essence of a person is determined by a combination of factors (natural, social, spiritual, etc.) Determine the essence of a person by of his nationality (Russian by nationality, means a Russian person), means considering him only as a “partial” person For A Sabirov, “Russian and Russian people are different characteristics of a person. to understand his ethnicity. To designate his systemic characteristics, it is better to use the phrase “Russian person”.

An attempt to use the possibilities of the Eurasian theory, its interpretation of the essence of man to analyze the state and development of modern Russian society constituted the problem field of this dissertation.

The object of the study is a person in the Russian Eurasian society

The subject of the study is the features of the formation and manifestation of the essence of man in the conditions of the Eurasian society

The purpose of the dissertation research is to identify the originality of the manifestation of the essence of man in the conditions of the Eurasian society.

The implementation of this goal involves the solution of the following research tasks:

Consider the problem of man in the Eurasian theory,

To prove that the Russian person is a kind of "product" of the Eurasian society,

Show the role of the natural factor of Russia-Eurasia in the formation of the Russian person,

To substantiate the essence of a Russian person as a synthesis of the qualities of a Western person and an Eastern person,

2 Panarin A S Orthodox civilization in the global world - M Eksmo Publishing House, 2003 -544s C 7

3 Sabirov, A. G. Phenomenon of Russian Man / A. G. Sabirov // The Problem of Man in the Light of Modern Social and Philosophical Sciences Collection of scientific papers of teachers and post-graduate students of the Department of Philosophy and Sociology of YSPU Issue 4 / Ed. un-ta, 2007,114 with C 61

To reveal the mentality of a Russian person as a Eurasian person,

Describe the prospects for human development in modern Russian society

Methodological foundations of the work The methodological basis of the study is a socio-cultural approach that allows you to see the cultural identity of modern Russian man

In addition, the author uses the possibilities of a comparative approach, which allows comparing different types of a person, including Russian, which differs in basic qualitative characteristics from Western and Eastern, elements of a synergistic approach, which allows us to consider society as a fairly stable functioning system of social life and as a chaotic diversity different cultural traditions

The work uses the possibilities of the dialectical-materialistic method, adequate to the set goal, the principles of objectivity, historicity and consistency. The principle of objectivity provides for the analysis of the problem of the Russian person in the context of the influence of natural, socio-historical and cultural reality

Identified in the context of the Eurasian concept of the features of the Russian person ("symphonic" personality, containing elements of the whole - society, the historical influence of the Turanian element, reliance on their own traditions), which help to interpret it as a special ethno-cultural type,

A variant of the system of characteristic, essential features of the Russian person in the conditions of the Eurasian society, revealed as a result of the synthesis of the principles of Eurasianism and general philosophical ideas (orientation to close people, restriction in the possession of property, submissive submission to power, mismanagement) is presented.

attitude to nature, faith in quick happiness, collectivism, internationalism, etc.),

The main prospects for the development of a Russian person in the Eurasian ethno-cultural space are determined: approaching the tradition of one's cultural heritage, understanding oneself not as a unique and unrepeatable being, but also as a person who is able to harmoniously fit into the modern world, having in its generative premise typical global facts and conditions for approaching global values,

It is shown that the provisions of the Eurasian concept alone cannot explain all the complexity and contradictory essence of the Russian person, it is also necessary to take into account convergent processes in the modern world, the presence of open societies, and the greater social mobility of people.

Theoretical and practical significance of the research. The obtained results of the work can be used in the further development of the Eurasian theory in general and the problem of the development of the Russian person in the modern world in particular. They can also be applied in studying the problem of interaction between man and society at the present stage in Russia with its trends aimed at creating a post-industrial society and integrating into the world community. This study can be useful in revealing the essence of a Russian person in order to understand his historical role in Russia and in the world. The provisions and conclusions contained in the dissertation can be used in the study of various philosophical disciplines, in particular, philosophical anthropology, socio-philosophical anthropology, in teaching a university course philosophy, cultural studies

Approbation of work. The main ideas of the work were presented at scientific and scientific-practical conferences, including the international scientific-practical conference "Ethno-cultural and ethno-political processes in the XXI century" (Ufa, December 13, 2007), the All-Russian scientific conference "Prospects for the development of modern society". (Kazan, 2002; Kazan, 2003); regional scientific and practical conference of teachers "Human problems in the light of modern social and philosophical sciences" (Elabuga, 2004), regional scientific and practical conference of teachers "The problem of man in modern social and philosophical sciences" (Elabuga, 2007), as well as in 8 publications of the author with a total volume of 2.3 p l

Dissertation structure. The dissertation consists of an introduction, two chapters, each of which contains three paragraphs, a conclusion and a bibliographic list of used literature.

The Introduction substantiates the relevance of the research topic, analyzes the degree of development of the problem, formulates the goal and main tasks, theoretical and methodological foundations of the work, reveals the scientific novelty of the research, theoretical and practical significance, approbation.

The first chapter "The Russian Man in the Conditions of the Eurasian Society" reveals the problem of understanding the Russian man in the Eurasian theory, the ways of forming his special essence under the influence of several determining factors, such as the Eurasian state (multinational, multi-confessional), as well as civilizational factors (natural and climatic, geographical, cultural and historical, etc.)

In the first paragraph "The problem of man in the Eurasian theory" the author analyzes the problem of man in the Eurasian theory. The dissertation author notes that, according to the "Eurasians" (hereinafter, adherents of the theory of Eurasianism), the problem of a person must be considered through its relationship with other personalities, as well as in its inextricable connection with "superpersonalities" - a collective, group, society. to realize his essence through connection with the Eurasian tradition N. Berdyaev adhered to a similar point of view, believing that “a person enters humanity through national individuality”4 Thus, the problem of the Russian person in the Eurasian theory is seen as the need to acquire their own essence, integrity

Firstly, the Russian people are understood by researchers of Eurasianism as a special personality that contains elements of the whole, that is, society. Here, “Eurasians” use the concept of a special “cathedral” or “symphonic” personality. , according to L Karsavin, which does not destroy the "individuality of its moments". Individuality exists only in relation to the symphonic whole - family, estate, class, people. Based on the fact that each of these formations is also a symphonic

Berdyaev N The fate of Russia M Thought, 1990, S 27

personality, supporters of the Eurasian theory consider it important to take into account their hierarchy. According to L Karsavin, each personality is (actually or potentially) an individuation of another, more “voluminous” personality. In this sense, a person is something absolutely established, not created or generated by another person, but only qualifies others and individualizes their qualifi- cations.

"Eurasians" paid special attention to the fact that, working on their own, individual self-knowledge, a person realizes himself, among other things, as a representative of this people. The inner life of every person always contains elements of the national mentality.

Secondly, the integrity of the essence of the Russian person is due to the historical influence of Eastern and Western cultural factors, the role of which is not in doubt. In addition, one should point to the influence of the internal Russian East, the so-called Turanian element, which, according to N. Trubetskoy, played a positive role in the development and formation of the specific qualities of a Russian person.

Thirdly, the Russian man should not, gaining originality, lose touch with his historical soil. Eurasian theory can give an answer to the problem of his essence as a whole and his present anthropological state, as part of this whole.

The Eurasianists argued that the Russian people should not borrow European ideas and seek their implementation without relying on the foundations of their own social and cultural tradition, which, in general, determines the worldview, mentality of a person. The applicability of certain provisions of Eurasianism to Russia plays a positive role, since in reality they explain the originality of the Russian person, firstly, they correspond to the heterogeneity of the cultural traditions of Russian society, and secondly, they realize the dual orientation of the East-West cultural interaction vectors.

In the second paragraph, "Russian man as a kind of" product "of the Eurasian society" reveals the social factor in the formation of Russian man In modern philosophical thought, society and social relations are considered one of the main factors in the formation and development of man, this idea is considered generally accepted. To Marx, E Durkheim, G Spencer and others considered society to be the main driving force of human development.

3 Karsavin, L P Philosophy of history - St. Petersburg - AO Komplekt-M 1993 C 76

L Gumilyov, one of the supporters of Eurasianism, paid great attention to the natural factor in human development. However, he pointed out that “man is a social being, because his personality is formed in direct communication with other people and objects created by the hands of his ancestors”6. At a certain stage of development, society, as it were, becomes a separate, independent organism, becomes an objective factor in the formation and development of a person.

Many modern researchers (A. Ignatov, N. Semenikova, S. Kara-Murza, I. Kondakov, etc.) dealing with the problems of Eurasianism were inclined to believe that, despite Russia’s territorial proximity to Europe, it nevertheless remains a special country, with unique, special Eurasian type of society

One of the factors influencing the formation of a Russian person is the multi-ethnic potential of the society in which he lives. Here we see a symbiosis of the Slavic and Turanian elements: with the historical spread of the Russian people to the East and mixing with the Turanian or Ural-Altaic tribes, as well as with the advancement of the Turkic peoples to the west On the basis of such an ethnic symbiosis, an original “Slavic-Turanian” ethnocultural community developed. This was pointed out by N. Trubetskoy in his work “On the Turanian element in Russian culture”, substantiating the positive role of the Turanian factor in the formation of Russian culture, emphasizing its Eurasian character

It should also be pointed out that the multi-confessional nature of Russian society (the presence of three world religions - Christianity, Islam, Buddhism) played a role in the formation of the Russian person. The presence of this feature in Russian society indicates the tolerant behavior of representatives of these religions. This is all the more relevant at the present time, when society in Russia is experiencing economic difficulties that can lead to an aggravation of ethnic and religious relations. In addition, it is worth pointing out that the multi-confessional nature of Russian society is not just the result of historical events, but serves as a stabilizing milestone. There are no interreligious conflicts in Russian society, which forms its stability and determines development in a single, Eurasian direction.

It is also worth pointing out that at the present stage, the influence of the world community is clearly visible. The processes of globalization cannot but affect Russia and Russian society. Here we see

6 Gumilyov, LN Ethnogenesis and the biosphere of the earth - M Rolf - 2002 C 236

positive for a Russian person further familiarization with world cultural values, which, however, must be assimilated based on their cultural traditions In this case, a Russian person will master global values without attaching an average, abstract meaning to them. , develop, own cultural traditions

The Eurasian society influences the Russian person through its own above-mentioned features. This is what determines the uniqueness of the manifestation of the essence of the Russian person in the Eurasian society. The mechanisms of influence of the Eurasian society on a person are the same as in the societies of the West and the East. Man is a “product” of society and the features of society leave an imprint on its essence, which, in turn, can be transformed depending on the social situation. It is also worth pointing out that, depending on a specific historical period, the essence of a person is peculiar, manifesting itself in its own way, especially

In addition to society, the formation of the characteristics of the essence of a person is also influenced by natural-climatic and geographical features. The Eurasians placed great emphasis on this factor. In particular, substantiating the integrity of Russia-Eurasia, defining it as a "place of development".

Therefore, in the third paragraph, "The role of the natural factor of Russia-Eurasia in the formation of the Russian person," the peculiarity of the Russian person, formed under the influence of certain factors that are of a civilizational nature, is considered. These include natural, climatic, geographical conditions, and the landscape of the area. The natural environment, of course, has an impact on the formation and development of a person, especially since a person is not only a social, but also a natural being. The formation of the Russian man was influenced by the special natural conditions of Russia-Eurasia. In this case, it should be pointed out that the harsh climate, for example, formed the corresponding character traits, such as tolerance, collectivism, hard work, etc. This was also pointed out by historians N Karamzin, B Vysheslavtsev, N Lossky and others. , for example, in many ways contributes to the formation of laziness, since responsibility is removed from a person, an individual

The natural factor is of no small importance for the formation and development of a Russian person, according to L Gumilyov “Having left the incubation period and fully included in the social environment, the human being is subject to some natural

patterns"7. The Russian man was formed under the influence of harsh climatic conditions Further, L. Gumilyov points out that “a monotonous landscape area stabilizes the ethnic groups living in it, a heterogeneous one stimulates changes leading to the emergence of new ethnic formations”8. Thus, we can talk about the formation of a special Russian, or Eurasian person, a very important role in the formation of which was played by the natural factor "Man is a biopsychosocial being with a system of needs and abilities that are different in nature, which are interconnected and interact with each other"9 Man is not only a product of social conditions, natural conditions of existence play an important role in its development, these conditions simultaneously affect the society in which a person lives

The concept of “place development”, widely used by the Eurasians, is of great importance for explaining the special essence of the Russian person. This is relevant in modern conditions, since the implementation of the ecological task requires a revision of many constants about a person and society. This allows you to harmoniously combine natural and social inclinations in a person.

Justifying the role of the geographical factor in shaping the essence of the Russian person, “Eurasians made unexpected conclusions Just as geographically Russia-Eurasia is not Europe, and not Asia, and not their intersection, but a special territory - Eurasia, and the peoples of Eurasia are not divided into Europeans (Slavs ) and Asians (Turanians), they are all Eurasians"10

Eurasia, as a place of development, has always existed, while Russia, as an integral ethno-cultural and socio-cultural entity, appeared later. The very nature of Eurasia caused the appearance on its territory of a single state - Russia-Eurasia. Various nations, with their own culture, have found fertile ground in the Eurasian world for their development for the benefit of all of Russia.

Thus, the Russian man was formed in special, Eurasian natural and climatic conditions, the main features of which were a harsh long winter, a short summer, the presence of various climatic zones with a comparatively flat landscape. All this corresponds to the integrity of Russia-Eurasia and allows us to consider it

7 Gumilev, LN Ethnogenesis and the biosphere of the earth / LN Gumilev - M Rolf, 2002 - C 236

8 Gumilyov, LN Decree op. C 197

® Sabirov, A G Substantive formation and constitution of socio-philosophical anthropology in modern society Diss Doctor of sciences Elabuga-1998 C 169

Vakhitov, R R Eurasian Civilization / R R Vakhitov // Eurasianism and the National Idea Proceedings of the Interregional Conference Sub-edited by Academician of the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Belarus F S Faizullina - Ufa, 2006 C 33

as a single continent - a "place of development" with special natural and climatic conditions During the period of a short summer, a Russian person had to stock up on everything necessary for a long winter. This left an imprint on the activity, and at the same time on the character of a Russian person. this was pointed out by Russian historians S Solovyov, N Karamzin, N Kostomarov and others

In the second chapter, "Peculiarities of the Russian person as a Eurasian", the essence of the Russian person is considered through the synthesis of the qualities of the Eastern and Western types of a person. However, in the process of life and interaction of Russian people with other peoples, the features of the East and West, being processed, turned into Russian or Eurasian ones. The need to perceive the Russian as Eurasian man, contributes to the understanding of its features. Therefore, as the author believes, the prospects for the development of the Russian man seem to be very relevant

In the first paragraph, "The Essence of a Russian Man as a Synthesis of the Qualities of a Western Man and an Oriental Man," the understanding of a Russian as a special type of person is analyzed. It is not entirely Western and not entirely Eastern, it embodies both Eastern and Western features. The essence of the Russian person must be revealed through a combination of the Eastern and Western components in it. The Russian person differs from the Western one in that it retains a communal, collectivist attitude to a person, society, state, etc.) A Western person forms his social environment based on the fact that he, a person, is the main link in society In terms of political organization, the Western state also sets a person as a defining goal in its activities. point of view, the Russian person is in a different interaction with society and the state, he is characterized by a changeable attitude towards society and the state fair power

The Russian person must be considered not just as a fusion of European and Asian qualities of a person, their mechanical interweaving “For us, Eurasianism is not just a junction of Europe and Asia, not even their spiritual and material convergence.

and Eastern) ways of a person to be a Human”11. The character of a Russian person is conditioned by the influence of East and West, and on the basis of this interaction, Eurasian qualities are formed.

Thus, the Eurasian theory for a Russian person is not only acceptable, it is able to answer his needs in the modern world related to spiritual search. This will allow the Russian people to take their rightful place in the world, as well as self-determination.

The second paragraph "The mentality of a Russian person as a Eurasian person" is devoted to the analysis of the mentality of a Russian person. Mentality cannot be reduced only to social nature, just as it cannot be explained only by the biological essence of man. Mentality can be considered as a condition for the personal manifestation of a person. Mentality is present in the spiritual world of a person, but it is not limited to the sphere of the spirit, it also manifests itself in human behavior. Mentality is always historical, that is, it exists depending on specific cultural and historical conditions. In Russia, these conditions contributed to the formation of a special mentality throughout the history of the country. Human mentality is a kind of stable system of attitudes. The mentality of a person cannot manifest itself clearly, it is elusive. However, it is a fact of reality Mentality manifests itself at a particular moment when interacting with representatives of other cultures

The Russian mentality cannot be considered as the sum of the mentalities of the peoples of Russia, it is not a mechanical mixture of mentalities, but an organic, living combination of the characteristics of different cultures and values. Such an understanding follows, firstly, from the very concept of Eurasianism, ideals. Depending on the specific circumstances, either Eastern or Western features and characteristics may appear in a Russian person. However, most often we encounter a kind of synthesis of these features. In this respect, Eurasianism embodies both purely Russian (Slavic) and Turkic (Turanian)

"Khaziev, V.S. Humanism of the Eurasian idea and practice / V.S. Khaziev // Eurasianism and the national idea materials of the interregional scientific conference Under the editorship of the Academy of Sciences of Belarus FS Fayzullina, - Ufa, 2006 C 66

The Russian person is focused on close people. He is not used to existing without the support of the people around him, whom he is also ready to help.

Russian people are inclined to a reasonable restriction in the possession of property. Property for a Russian person, as a rule, is not the goal of his life, but can act as a means of subsistence, to a certain extent, an indicator of his life among other people

In relation to the authorities, the Russian person is in obedient submission to it, while he does not exclude the possibility of declaring his “I”, resisting what is dictated “from above”. He is prone to constant doubt about the justice of power, although he prefers a "strong hand"

Russian people show a frivolous, sometimes mismanaged and costly attitude towards nature (there are so many reserves that they will last for a long time)

The lack of social mobility of Russian society, especially in the outback, is also a manifestation of one of the important features of the Russian person. He is not inclined to change, possessing a fair amount of conservatism

Russian people are focused on sensory perception of the world. As a rule, this explains his religiosity, and in general a certain mythical perception of the world.

The Russian person is also characterized by collectivism, the communal nature of the lifestyle. He is not alien to a sense of patriotism, as well as faith in the rightness of power.

The Russian person is characterized by a sense of internationalism, a desire for unity within the framework of Eurasia.

A Russian person believes in a better life, quick happiness Hence his long-suffering, ability to endure hardships and hardships, in the hope that "life will get better"

A Russian person is capable of vigorous activity, while leaving the possibility of irony over it.

The essential qualities of a Russian person, like any other person, cannot always be fully understood. Therefore, it is necessary to look for ways to implement them, based on his (Russian person) cultural and historical past, as well as taking into account modern cultural processes taking place in the world. as a unique, “East-West”, should approach the disclosure of its potential, its hidden capabilities

The third paragraph of the work “The State and Prospects for the Development of Man in Modern Russian Society” is devoted to the problem of the development of the Russian man. The modern world, as it were, has gone far ahead and now it is already difficult to solve the problem of the Russian man in the new conditions, which are characterized by the absence of high ideals. Darkness reigns in his soul, he unable to determine his place in this world. A modern Russian person finds himself in a kind of vacuum, in the absence of ultimate goals This is a consequence of the lack of a full-fledged upbringing, including a social environment Further development of a Russian person is presented as a comprehension of his historical experience and a search for identity This includes, among other things, an understanding of the Soviet experience , which, according to the author, the Russian people abandoned too quickly. In fact, in Soviet times, much was done to integrate different cultures, nations, to form a holistic, cultural heritage. The Soviet system also had negative features. , but you need to meaningfully study and take into account this experience for further free development.

In a globalizing world, Russian people must resist the universalization of values. According to the author, the Russian person has something to respond to the challenges of globalization. He must restore the cultural, historical, specific potential that has developed in him over a long period of the process of his formation in a single, Eurasian space.

A modern Russian person is faced with the task of making a choice, taking responsibility. However, it is ontologically necessary to decide and understand the correctness of the proposed actions. This requires the mobilization of the spiritual and moral potential of Russian society. At the same time, the Russian, Eurasian person should not deny the past Soviet experience, but use it for further development. Development does not begin on the unrestrained denial of the past, it is the result of balanced comprehension

The main points in the development prospects can be considered the peculiarity of the Russian person, the focus on self-knowledge, understanding one's place in this world

In the Conclusion, the results of the dissertation research are summed up, ways of further philosophical study of the problem under study are outlined. The implementation of Eurasian ideas in modern Russia is increasingly supported in the public environment, among politicians, but apart

This is why it is the subject of attention of scientists, philosophers, sociologists, etc.

The main provisions of the dissertation are reflected in the following publications of the author

1 Ilyin A G Eurasianism as a cultural phenomenon in a globalizing world // Vestnik MGUKI. -2007.-№4-p.47-49.

2 Ilyin A G Russian man in the context of the Eurasian concept / A G. Ilyin // Human problems in the light of modern social and philosophical sciences Sat st - Issue 2 - Elabuga, 2004 - P 34-41.

3. Ilyin A G Spirituality as the main factor in the survival of a Russian person in modern conditions / A G Ilyin // Traditional, modern and transitional in Russian society collection of articles of the 11th All-Russian Scientific and Practical Conference / Edited by R G Yanovsky and others - Penza, 2005 - C 132-134

4. Ilyin A G The phenomenon of man in the conditions of the Eurasian civilization / A G. Ilyin // Man and society at the turn of the millennium International collection of scientific papers issue 30 / Edited by O.I Kirikov - Voronezh, 2005 -С 119-123

5. Ilyin A G Eurasian factor in the formation of Russian man / A G. Ilyin // The problem of man in the light of modern socio-philosophical sciences Collection of scientific papers of teachers and graduate students of the Department of Philosophy and Sociology of YSPU Issue 3 / Edited by A.G Sabirov - Elabuga Publishing House in Elabuzhsk Pedagogical University, 2006 С 33-36

6 Ilyin AG Russian man in the globalizing world in the context of Eurasian doctrines / AG Ilyin // The problem of man in the light of modern social and philosophical sciences. Collection of scientific papers of teachers and post-graduate students of the Department of Philosophy and Sociology of YSPU Issue 4 / Under the editorship of A. G. Sabirov - Elabuga Publishing House of Elabuzhsk State Pedagogical University, 2007. P 66-71

7. Ilyin A G Eurasian factors in the formation of a Russian person as the basis of his identity / A G Ilyin // Ethno-cultural and ethno-political processes in the XXI century Materials of the international scientific-practical conference (Ufa, December 13, 2007) - Ufa Gilem, 2008 -472 c - C 349-353

8. Ilyin A G. Eurasianism and the role of "Soviet experience" in determining the identity of a Russian person in the post-Soviet period / A G Ilyin // Bulletin of History and Philosophy of the Kursk State University Series "Philosophy" -2008 No. 1 - C 288-291

Ilyin Alexander Gennadievich

INDIVIDUALITY OF THE MANIFESTATION OF THE ESSENCE OF HUMAN IN THE CONDITIONS OF THE EURASIAN SOCIETY

Publishing license LRM> 021319 from 05 01 99

Signed for printing May 15, 2008 Format 60x84/16 Print size 1.15 Uch-ed 1.38 Circulation 100 copies Order 374

Editorial and Publishing Center of the Bashkir State University 450074, Republic of Belarus, Ufa, Frunze st., 32

Printed at the reproduction area of the Bashkir State University 450074, Republic of Belarus, Ufa, Frunze st. 32

CHAPTER 1. RUSSIAN MAN

IN THE CONDITIONS OF THE EURASIAN SOCIETY.

1.1. The problem of man in the Eurasian theory.

1.2. Russian man as a kind of "product" of the Eurasian society.

1.3. The role of the natural factor of Russia-Eurasia in the formation of the Russian person.

CHAPTER 2. FEATURES OF THE RUSSIAN PERSON,

AS A EURASIAN MAN.

2.1. The essence of the Russian man, as a synthesis of the qualities of a Western man and an Eastern man.

2.2. The mentality of a Russian person as a Eurasian person.

2.3. The state and prospects for the development of Russian people in the modern world.

Dissertation Introduction 2008, abstract on philosophy, Ilyin, Alexander Gennadievich

Relevance of the research topic. Crisis phenomena in the modern life of Russian society have called into question the possibility of realizing many universal values without relying on one's own cultural values. This determines the increased interest in Eurasian thought, which seeks to rely on the national mentality, political, economic and spiritual originality of the national culture, oriented towards the organic combination of the interests of man and society, personality and state.

Revealing the anthropological potential of Eurasian thought makes it possible to clarify many problems of socio-philosophical knowledge, to determine its features on Russian soil, and to expand the theoretical and methodological base of socio-philosophical research. Therefore, the scientific understanding of the understanding of the Russian person in the Eurasian context is relevant, especially since the problem of man in the modern philosophy of Eurasianism has not been sufficiently developed.

In the pre-reform period, the Soviet (Russian) people experienced a certain discomfort, since there was no complete information, there was no publicity, bureaucracy prevailed, etc. The Soviet ideology as a whole was not identical, did not reveal and did not meet the understanding of the essence of the Russian person, who is a kind of “thinking subject”1.

The relevance of the study is also due to the fact that two major trends have played and are playing a big role in the formation of the Russian person: the influence of the West and the influence of the East. According to. N.A. Berdyaeva “Russia is a whole part of the world, a huge East-West, it connects two worlds. And all

See: Orlova, I.B. Contours of the modern Eurasian concept http://www.ispr.ru/Confer/EuroAsia/confer9-1 where two principles fought in the Russian soul, the eastern and the western. Under the influence of these tendencies ("Eastern" and "Western"), a special type of person was formed in Russia, which requires its identification as a Eurasian. The Eurasian concept, according to the author, is the most adequate characterization of Russia, its role in the world; Man, on the other hand, occupies a central place in Eurasian theory2.

The degree of scientific development of the problem. The founders of the theory of Eurasianism are such outstanding thinkers of the early twentieth century as N. Trubetskoy, P. Savitsky, G. Florovsky, P. Suvchinsky, N. Alekseev and others.

The first manifesto of the trend they created was the collection Exodus to the East. Premonitions and Accomplishments. Approval of the Eurasians”, published in Sofia in 1921. In this collection, the main provisions of the Eurasian theory were defined: N. Trubetskoy singled out Eurasianism as a special direction of philosophical thought. P. Savitsky - developed the doctrine of Russia-Eurasia as a special geographical and cultural-historical world, sharply different from the European and Asian worlds, although containing many elements of both. Both N. Trubetskoy and P. Savitsky emphasized in their works the disclosure of the historical ties between the Russians and the Turkic peoples.

It should be noted that various aspects of human development in the Russian socio-cultural space were considered in their works by L. Karsavin, N. Berdyaev, I. Ilyin, L. Gumilyov, G. Vernadsky1.

1 Berdyaev N. Russian idea. ~M.: Eksmo; St. Petersburg: Midgard, 2005.- 832p. C544.

2 See: Savitsky P.N. Eurasianism as a historical concept. In book. Fundamentals of Eurasianism / comp.: N. Agamalyan, V. Galimov, A. Guskov, N. Melentyeva, P. Zarifullin, M. Khrustov.-M .: Arktogeya -Center, 2002.-800s. P.282.

3 Alekseev, H.H. Russian people and state / H.H. Alekseev; ed. A. Dugin, D. Taratorin. -M.: Agraf, 1998. - 635s.; Trubetskoy, N. Pan-Eurasian nationalism / N. Trubetskoy // Free Thought. - 1992. - No. 5. - S. 46-53; Trubetskoy N.S. About true and false nationalism. Reader on the history of philosophy. At 3 o'clock Ch.Z.-M.: Humanit. Ed. Center VLADOS.-1997. 560s.; Florovsky, G. Eurasian temptation / G. Florovsky // New World. - 1991. - No. 1. - S. 23-31; Savitsky, P. In the struggle for Eurasianism: The controversy around Eurasianism in the 1920s / P. Savitsky // The thirties: Statements of the Eurasians. - Paris, 1931. - Prince. 7.; Savitsky, P. Eurasianism / P. Savitsky // Our contemporary. - 1992. - No. 2. - S. 37-44; Savitsky, P.N. Continent Eurasia / Savitsky P.N. - M.: Agraf, 1997. -461s.

So, N. Berdyaev, not being a supporter of Eurasian views, nevertheless, recognized that Russia is located not only in Europe, but also in Asia. Pointing out in The Russian Idea the inconsistency of the Russian character, he understood that he was analyzing not only the character of Russians, but also of other peoples of Russia. The works of N. Berdyaev played a big role in the formation of the Eurasian doctrine.

G. Vernadsky considered the problem of Eurasianism in a historical context. He believed that the formation of Russia-Eurasia was influenced by the long-term coexistence of various peoples on its territory, which resulted in the formation of a special Eurasian type of society and type of culture. He concludes that the way of life of Russians was significantly influenced by various types of social relations and communication with representatives of the Turkic peoples.

1 Vernadsky, G.V. Inscription of Russian history / G.V. Vernadsky; foreword S.B. Lavrova, A.S. Lavrov. - M.: Iris-press, 2002. - 368 p.: ill. - (B-ka history and culture).; Vernadsky, G.V. Russian history / G.V. Vernadsky. - M.: Agraf, 2001. -542s.; Berdyaev H.A. Eurasianism // Way. - Sept. 1925.- No. 1. - P. 134-139 "Eurasian Bulletin". Book Four. Berlin 1925; Berdyaev, H.A. The fate of Russia: experiments on the psychology of war and nationality / H.A. Berdyaev. - M.: Thought, 1990. - 208 p.; Gumilyov, L.N. Black legend: Friends and enemies of the Great Steppe / L.N. Gumilev. - M.: Iris-press, 2002. - 576 p.; Gumilyov, L.N. Ethnogenesis and biosphere of the Earth / L.N. Gumilev. - M.: Rolf, 2002. - 560 e.; Ilyin, I.A. About humility / I.A. Ilyin // Psychological journal. - 1992. - T. 13. - No. 6. - S. 34-37; Ilyin, I.A. Our tasks / I.A. Ilyin // Youth. - 1990. - No. 8. - S.34-46; Ilyin, I.A. Why did the monarchical system collapse in Russia? / I.A. Ilyin // Sociologist, researcher. - 1992 - No. 5. - S. 23-28; Karsavin, L.P. Philosophy of history / L.P. Karsavin. - St. Petersburg: Kit, 1993. - 352p.; Karsavin, L.P. Fundamentals of politics / L.P. Karsavin // Fundamentals of Eurasianism / comp.: N. Agamalyan et al. - M .: Arktogeya -Center, 2002. -800s. understand which way to go: designate your European, Eastern or Eurasian identity. Under these conditions, Eurasianism as a theory showed Russia's path to modern civilization.

Among the modern researchers of Eurasianism, one can name such names as A. Panarin, I. Novikova, I. Sizemskaya, V. Ilyin, A. Sabirov, V. Barulin, S. Kara-Murza, T. Aizatulin, V1Khaziev, F.S. Faizullin, B.S. Galimov, U.S. Vildanov, R.R. Vakhitov1 and others.

At present, the variety of approaches and concepts associated with the use of Eurasian theory for the analysis of modern social changes in Russia necessitates their systematization.

Panarin, A.S. Russia in Eurasia: geopolitical challenges and civilizational responses / A.S. Panarin // Ibid. - 1994. - No. 12. - S. 35-46; Panarin, A.S. Eurasianism: for and against, yesterday and today / A.S. Panarin // Ibid. - 1995. - No. 6. - S. 3-25; Panarin, A.S. Russia between Eurasianism and Atlanticism/

A.C. Panarin//Ros. provinces. - 1993.-№1, -S. 27-31; Novikova, JI. Eurasian art / JI. Novikova, I. Sizemskaya // The World of Russia - Eurasia: an anthology. - M., 1995. - S. 24-32; Novikova, L. Two faces of Eurasianism / JI. Novikova, I. Sizemskaya // Free Thought. - 1992. - No. 7. - P. 47-59; Ilyin, V.V. Philosophy of history / V.V. Ilyin. - M.: Publishing House of Moscow. un-ta, 2003. - 380s.; Vakhitov P.P. Nationalism: essence, origin, manifestations / R.R. Vakhitov // http://redeurasia.narod.ru; Vakhitov P.P. Eurasian essence of Russian culture (typology of Russian culture according to the teachings of the Eurasians) / R.R. Vakhitov // http://redeurasia.narod.ru; Vakhitov P.P. - The Eurasian project and its enemies (criticism of the criticism of Eurasianism) / R.R. Vakhitov // http://redeurasia narod.ru: Vakhitov, P.P. Eurasian Civilization / P.P. Vakhitov // Eurasianism and national idea. Materials of the interregional conference. Ed. Acad. AN RB F.S. Fayzullina - Ufa, 2006. - S. 31-37 .; Barullin, B.C. Russian people in the XX century. Loss and finding oneself: monograph / B.C. Barullin. - St. Petersburg: Aletheya, 2000. - 431s.; Kara-Murza, S.G. The disappearance of the people / S.G. Kara-Murza // Our contemporary. - 2006. - No. 2. - S. 170-183; Kara-Murza, S.G. Ideology and its mother science / S.G. Kara-Murza. - M.: Algorithm, 2002. 734 p.; Kara-Murza, S.G. Manipulation of consciousness // http://www.kara-rnur7a.ru/index.htrn; Khaziev B.C. Humanism of the Eurasian idea and practice //

B.S.Khaziev // Eurasianism and national idea. Materials of the interregional conference. Ed. Acad. AN RB F.S. Faizullina - Ufa, 2006. - S. 64-70 .; Faizullin, F.S. Eurasianism and national idea: methodological issues of research / F.S. Fayzullin // Eurasianism and national idea. Materials of the interregional conference. Ed. Acad. AN RB F.S. Fayzullina - Ufa, 2006.

C.5-12.; Galimov B.S. We deserve a special place in the philosophical community / B.S. Galimov // Philosophical Thought. - 2001.- No. 1.- p. 4-9

2 Volkogonova O.D. N.A. Berdyaev: intellectual biography / O.D. Volkogonova. - M.: Publishing House of Moscow State University, 2001. 112p.; Volkogonova O.D., Titirenko I.V. Ethnic identification of Russians, or the temptation of nationalism // http://ww\v.hse.rii/iournalsAvrldross/vol01 2/volkogonova.htm; Omelchenko N. Exodus to the East: Eurasianism and its criticism / N. Omelchenko // Eurasian idea and modernity. Moscow: RUDN University, 272 p. pp. 10-29

On the other hand, in the works of L. Ponamareva, V. Khachaturian1 attempts are made to fit the Eurasian theory into the world cultural and philosophical traditions. So, they consider a person from the point of view of world cultural practices, identifying universal human values in it and familiarizing them with them.

The second direction interprets Eurasianism as a continuation of the "Russian idea". Among the representatives of this direction can be called S. Khoruzhy, l

A. Sobolev, V. Kholodny. Their works emphasize that universal values are not alien to the Russian person, but he is the bearer of a unique essence that makes him not like the eastern and western types of people.

The third direction is trying to "modernize", modernize the theory of Eurasianism. Its main representatives are A. Panarin; V. Zorin and V. Pashchenko. Particular attention should be paid to the works of A. Panarin. Considering the problem of Russian identity, the author notes that the "drama of our identity" is due to the fact that from the very beginning it was not of a naturalistic nature; spiritual"4.

The problem of the "essence" of man was studied by such scientists as P. Gurevich, A. Sabirov, O. Bazaluk, V. Barullin5 and others. From an analysis of their work, one can conclude

1 Khachaturyan V. Historiosophy of Eurasianism / V. Khachaturyan // Eurasian idea and modernity. Moscow: RUDN University, 272 p. pp. 93-97; Ponomarev J1. Around Eurasianism: disputes in Russian emigration / L. Ponamareva. Eurasian idea and modernity. Moscow: RUDN University, 272 p. pp.30-37

2 Khoruzhy, S.S. About the old and the new / S.S. Horuzhy. - St. Petersburg: Aletheya, 2000. - 477p.; Kholodny, V.I. The idea of catholicity and Slavophilism. The problem of cathedral phenomenology / V.I. Cold. - M., 1994. -438 p.;

2 Zorin, V.I. Introduction to Eurasian Philosophy // http://www.sofiogonia.webhost.ru; Pashchenko V; Ya. Social Philosophy of Eurasianism / V.Ya. Pashchenko. - M.: Alfa-M, 2003.-368s.

4 Panarin A.C. Orthodox civilization in the global world. - M.: Eksmo Publishing House, 2003. -544s. C.7.

5 Gurevich, P.S. Philosophical anthropology: experience of systematics / P.S. Gurevich7/ Question. philosophy. - 1995. - No. 8. - S. 21-38; Gurevich P.S. Philosophy of man / P.S. Gurevich, M .: Izd-vo IFRAN, 1999, v2h. Part 1, 224 e.; Bazaluk, O.A. The essence of human life / O.A. Bazaluk. - Kyiv, Naukova Dumka. -2002.-380. S. 155.; Sabirov, A.G. Socio-philosophical anthropology: principles of construction and subject definition / A.G. Sabirov. - M.: Publishing House of Moscow. ped. un-ta, 1997. - 120p.; Sabirov, A.G. Human studies: humanization and humanitarian functions / A.G. Sabirov. - Yelabuga: YSPI Publishing House, that the essence of a person is determined by a combination of factors (natural, social, spiritual, etc.). To define the essence of a person by his nationality (Russian by nationality, meaning a Russian person), means to consider him only as a “partial” person. For; A. Sabirova, “Russian and Russian people are different characteristics of a person: In order to distinguish these characteristics more logically, under the phrase; "Russian people" to understand his ethnicity. To designate! its system characteristics? better: use the phrase "Russian people"1.

An attempt to use the possibilities of the Eurasian theory; her interpretation of essence! a person to analyze the state of modern development; of the Russian society, made up the problem field1 of this1 dissertation.

The object of the study is a person in the Russian Eurasian society.

The subject of the study? - features of the formation and manifestation of the essence of man in the conditions of the Eurasian society. ,;y

The objectives of the dissertation research d are to reveal the originality of the manifestation of the essence of man in the conditions of the Eurasian society.

Implementation; This goal involves the solution of the following research tasks:

Consider the problem of man in the Eurasian theory;

To prove that the Russian person is a peculiar? "product" of the Eurasian society;

Show the role of the natural factor of Russia-Eurasia in the formation of the Russian person;

1996. - 210p.; Sabirov A.G. The phenomenon of Russian man / A.G. Sabirov // The problem of man in the light of modern social and philosophical sciences. Collection of scientific works of teachers and post-graduate students of the Department of Philosophy and Sociology of YSPU, Issue 4. / Ed. A.G. Sabirova: - Elabuga: Publishing house of Ela-buzhsk. state ped. un-ta, 2007, 114 p. pp.60-66.

1 Sabirov, A.G. The phenomenon of the Russian man / A.G. Sabirov // The problem of man in the light of modern socio-philosophical sciences. Collection of scientific works of teachers and post-graduate students of the Department of Philosophy and Sociology of YSPU. Issue 4. / Ed. A.G. Sabirov. - Elabuga: Publishing house Elabuzhsk. state ped. un-ta, 2007, 114 p. p.61

To substantiate the essence of a Russian person as a synthesis of the qualities of a person, Western and Eastern;

Reveal the mentality of a Russian person as a Eurasian person;

Describe the prospects for human development in modern Russian society.,. ■. ;"

Methodological foundations", works. The methodological basis of the study is the socio-cultural approach, which allows you to see the cultural identity of modern Russian man.

In addition, the author uses the possibilities of a comparative approach, which allows you to compare; different types of people, including Russian, different; according to the main;, qualitative, characteristics from the western and eastern; elements of a synergistic approach; which allows us to consider society as a fairly stable functioning system of social life and as chaotic: a variety of different: cultural traditions;

The work uses the possibilities of the dialectical-materialistic method, principles of objectivity, historicity, and systemicity that are adequate to the set "goal. The principle of objectivity provides for the analysis of the problem of the Russian person in the context of influence; natural, socio-historical and cultural reality. The principle; systemicity is aimed at comprehensive: knowledge of the subject of research; ©sh allows us to consider the Russian person in the systems: "man - society" and "man - nature".

The scientific novelty of the study lies in the fact that the author:

Revealed - in the context of the Eurasian: the concept of the "feature" of the Russian* person! ("symphonic" personality, containing "in itself: elements" of the whole (- society;, historical influence: Turanian element, reliance on one's own traditions), which help to interpret it as a special ethno-cultural type;

It is substantiated that, taking into account the current socio-cultural situation, it is necessary to understand Russia-Eurasia not from the standpoint of the traditional concept of "Russian people", but from the standpoint of the concept of "Russian people". This explains the legitimacy of including in the systemic understanding of the modern Russian man knowledge about the formation of an ethnos in an environment of interaction between different cultures;

The main prospects for the development of a Russian person in the Eurasian ethno-cultural space are determined: approaching the tradition of one's own cultural heritage; awareness of oneself not as a unique and inimitable being, but also as a person who is able to harmoniously * fit into the modern world, having in its generative * premise typical global facts and conditions for approaching global values;

It is shown that the provisions of the Eurasian concept alone cannot explain the complexity and contradictory essence of the Russian man; it is also necessary to take into account the convergent processes in the modern world, the presence of open societies, and the greater social mobility of people.

Theoretical and practical significance of the research. The theoretical significance of the work is that the results can be applied in studying the problem of interaction between a person and society at the present stage in Russia with its trends aimed at creating a post-industrial society and integrating into the world community. * This study can be useful in revealing the essence Russian man to understand his historical role in Russia and in the world.The practical significance of the study lies in the fact that the provisions and conclusions contained in the thesis can be used in the study of various philosophical disciplines, in particular, philosophical anthropology, socio-philosophical anthropology, in teaching university course of philosophy.

Approbation of work. The main ideas of the work were presented at scientific and scientific-practical conferences, including: the international scientific-practical conference "Ethno-cultural and ethno-political processes in the XXI century." (Ufa, 2007); All-Russian scientific conference "Prospects for the development of modern society." (Kazan, 2002; Kazan, 2003); regional scientific-practical conference of teachers "Human problems in the light of modern socio-philosophical sciences". (Elabuga, 2004); regional scientific-practical conference of teachers "The problem of man in modern socio-philosophical sciences". (Elabuga, 2007); as well as in 8 publications of the author with a total volume of 2.3 p.l.

Dissertation structure. The dissertation consists of an introduction, two chapters, three paragraphs each, a conclusion and a list of references. The total volume of the dissertation is 143 pages.

Conclusion of scientific work dissertation on the topic "The peculiarity of the manifestation of the essence of man in the conditions of the Eurasian society"

CONCLUSION

At present, the Russian person is faced with the task of comprehending their own uniqueness in the process of identifying with their spiritual and moral identity. The search for this identity must be seen in the cultural and historical past of Russia. Also, the ethno-cultural originality of Russia makes it possible to identify the national identity of the Russian people and the individual identity of a particular Russian person, this logical correlation, in turn, determines the ways of knowing the object and subject of our work.

As a result of a theoretical study of the human problem in the Russian sociocultural space, as a Eurasian one, we have identified the following features:

1. At present, the problem of Russia plays an increasing role in world practice, and it is necessary to determine the national and cultural identity of Russian society. One of the theories that makes it possible to carry out such an attempt is the Eurasian theory of the civilizational affiliation of Russia. The theory of Eurasianism denies the universality of progress, the hegemony of the “West in cultural relation to other states and the decisive role of the technogenic factor in the development of mankind. The central place in the Eurasian theory of civilizational development was occupied by the problem of Russia and the Russian people. It reveals the following features of Russia: Russia is a special country, unique in its historical development, unlike either the West or the East. The main feature of Russia is that, due to its geographical position, it is located simultaneously on two continents, which play a decisive role in. development of mankind. Russia should focus mainly on its internal, national characteristics, it should be aware of its originality and, in accordance with this, build its policy: both internal and external.

Eurasian theories gives an answer to all the challenges of time, defining; Russia as unique; special country; Accordingly, the Russian person in the theory of Eurasianism is considered as a special, unique type of person, unlike either Western or Eastern people, but at the same time combining the features of both:

2.- Russia, in terms of civilizational affiliation, is a "special, unique" country; not similar to a purely European civilization, nor to a “purely Asian one; at the same time, it contains the features of both of them. Its feature is: firstly, its geographical location on two continents - Europe and; Asia. This causes not: its homogeneity behavior in: geopolitical terms in the arena of world politics; secondly, Russia "has a rich, natural potential and, thanks to this, plays an important role in the world, in the world economy, in particular; thirdly, thanks to! huge territories! Russia has the opportunity to influence the geopolitical component of world politics, to determine the course and development of the world community.In terms of internal development and development I

Russia; is a / state with a strong central; power; It's called; mainly; its geoclimatic and cultural characteristics, as circumstances require that in the event of an external danger, internal forces must be quickly mobilized. Process. mobilization often occurs not through the channels of power mainly; but spontaneously;

3. The type of civilization forms the corresponding type of person who; could fit in; within the framework of this; civilization and correspond to its features and principles. Toynbee expressed the following thought on this subject: we will take a situation where a new dynamic force of foreign origin has lost its connection with its native soil and has found itself in an alien and hostile environment. An isolated wandering element, placed in a social body alien to it, begins to produce chaos, because it has lost its original function and meaning, and also: it has lost its usual balances and connections”1. Since Russia is a distinctive, Eurasian country, the type of person who is formed in its depths must have some special features: signs due to which he will be his own in this country, will be able to fully realize his creative potential, his capabilities, will reveal his inner world .

4. Should a Russian person be considered as a special type of person, combining universal human qualities? and qualities formed under the influence of “Russian (Eurasian) factors? civilizations; The latter: can be regarded as a synthesis in the Russian man of the eastern and western principles. This is the manifestation of the person's own essence in the Russian socio-cultural space. Depending on the circumstances, the features of both Eastern and Western people can appear in a Russian person, however, most often it manifests its own - Russian.

5: Does modern reality confront Russian people? a lot of problems to solve which: it is necessary for him; Russian! a person must develop new qualities in himself to adapt< к современным"ус-ловиям, в.данном случае перспектива его развития видится как основаннаяша принципах евразийства. Евразийство способно раскрыть, истинную * суть=российского человека, ответить на многие вопросы, которые ставит перед ним современная действительность. Российский человек может, реализовав тот потенциал, который в нём заложен, учитывая его особенности, занять соответствующее место в мире. Он может свободно и полноценно развиваться.

In conclusion, it is also necessary to give a point of view that is gaining an increasing number of supporters; About; that "Eurasian country - Russia -

1 Toynbee A.J. civilization before the court of history: Per. from English - M.: Rolf; 2002.-594p. P.64. destined to be a spiritual leader in the world, because apart from Russia there is no one to lead the spiritual renewal of mankind”1.

A modern Russian person needs to develop those values that have been formed over the centuries-old history of Russia. This will serve as the creation of a system of values, cultivating which each nation in Russia will gain independence and autonomy, while simultaneously making its cultural contribution to the development of Russian society.

It should also be said that the problem of finding an identity, defining identity based on specific conditions, will never lose its relevance. And as time passes, researchers will again and again return to this problem, especially the problem of Russian identity.

At present, one can only talk about the alleged ways of Russia's development, based on. real, ontological prerequisites for its existence. The past historical experience of Russia is not a chain of random coincidences, as a result of the unconscious or semi-conscious activity of the leaders of Russia and the entire people as a whole. This experience is a manifestation of the inner forces and mental attitudes of the people and man. In Russia, the historical path was not very simple, all the events that took place could not but affect the formation of the essential qualities of a Russian person. Having gone through the trials, having fully comprehended the past, having drawn the appropriate conclusions, Russia will take its rightful place in the world community. Although by and large, Russia has always been in its place, ontologically no one can take someone's place. It is only necessary to realize your belonging to Russia, to feel like a master.

1 Kapranov V.A. Moral Foundations of the Russian Spirit // Russia: Past, Present Future: Proceedings of the All-Russian Scientific and Practical Conference. St. Petersburg, December 16-19, 1996 / Ed. ed. M.S. Uvarov. - St. Petersburg: BSTU Publishing House, 1996. - S. 68.

Speaking about Russia-Eurasia, it is worth saying that Eurasia has always existed - Russia appeared later. The very nature of Eurasia caused the appearance on its territory of a single state - Russia-Eurasia. Different nations, with their cultures, have found fertile ground in the Eurasian world for their development for the benefit of all of Russia.

An important aspect of the Eurasian vision of Russia is the convergence of the modern world. Globalization causes the unification of mankind. A person must be a “Man”, without losing his identity, his face, only in this case he will not lose his “self”, his actions will be in the nature of free action. The Russian person, as a person historically formed under the influence of Eurasian factors, will also feel the influence of the world community, the consolidation with which is necessary to solve global problems. Russian people also experience environmental problems, will this teach them rationality? Will it teach him to protect his native nature? In our opinion, these problems cannot touch her and not affect the essence of the Russian person. This is not the only thing that causes the convergence of the world. The culture of a people can develop in close interaction with other cultures. The denial of universal progress by the Eurasians clearly shows the cultural diversity of the world, the culture of the peoples of Russia-Eurasia makes a great contribution to it.

List of scientific literature Ilyin, Alexander Gennadievich, dissertation on the topic "Social Philosophy"

1. Avchenko, V ^ Know Russia / V. Avchenko // Our contemporary. - 2001. - No. 3. -S. 21-30.

2. Aizatulin, T.A. Theory of Russia and Russian ethnic contacts // http://redeurasia.narod.ru/biblioteka/aizat l.html

3. Alekseev, H.H. Russian people and state / H.11. Alekseev; ed. A. Dugin, D. Taratorin. M.: Agraf, 1998. - 635s.

4. Ananiev, B.G. Man as an object of knowledge / B.G. Ananiev.--St. Petersburg: Peter, 2001.-288 p.

5. Anikeeva, E.H. Dialogue of Civilizations: East-West / E.H. Anikeeva, A.B. Se-mushkin // Ibid. 1998. - No. 2. - S. .1

6. Antoshchenko A.B. .Eurasia or "Holy Rus'"? Russian emigrants, the "first wave" in search of historical self-awareness: author. dis. d,-ra ist. Sciences: 07.00.09 / A.B. Antoshchenko. SPb., 2004: - 38s.

7. Akhiezer A.S. Russia: criticism of historical> experience / A.S. Akhiezer.-M .: New Chronograph, 2008! - 938s.

8. Bagramov, E. Is Eurasianism the national idea of Russia? / E; Bagramov.// http://www.nasledie.ru/oboz/N09 01/9 OZ.NTM.

9. Bazaluk, O.A. The essence of human life / O.A. Bazaluk, - Kyiv, Naukova Dumka. -2002.-380. S. 155.

10. Yu. Barullin, B.C. Russian people in the XX century. Loss and finding oneself: monogr. / B.C. Barullin. St. Petersburg: Aleteyya, 2000: - 431s.

11. Berdyaev H.A. Eurasianism; // Path. Sept. 1925.- No. 1. - P. 134-139 "Eurasian Bulletin"; Book Four. Berlin 1925

12. Berdyaev, H.A. The fate of Russia: experiments on the psychology of war and nationality / H.A. Berdyaev. M.: Thought, 1990. - 208s.

13. Berdyaev, H.A. Man and machine / H.A. Berdyaev // Vopr. philosophy. - 1989. -№2.-S. 23-41

14. Berdyaev, N.A. Existential dynamics of the divine and human / Y;A. Berdyaev. The world of philosophy;. Human. Society: Culture. - Mi, 1991. -350 p.

15. Berdyaev, N:A. About Russia and "Russian * Philosophical Culture" M.: "Nauka". -1990. G. 43.16; Berger, Sh Capitalist> revolution / Shberger. "M;, 1994. 348s.

16. Vagimov, E.K. Man as philosophical. problem // http://anthropology.ru/ru/texts/vagimov/modphil0206.html " ■ i-" "

17. Vakhitov, R.R.: Eurasian civilization / R:R. Vakhitov // Eurasianism and national idea. Materials of the interregional conference. Ed. Acad. AN RB F.S. Fayzullina Ufa, 2006. - S. 31-37

18. Vakhitov P.P. Nationalism: essence, origin, manifestations / R.R1Vakhitov // http://redeurasia.narod.ru

19. Vakhitov R.R.; Eurasian essence of Russian culture (typology of Russian culture according to the teachings of the Eurasians) / R.R. Vakhitov // http://redeurasia.narod:ru

20. Vakhitov P.P. -Eurasian project and its enemies (criticism of criticism of Eurasianism) / R.R. Vakhitov // http://redeurasia.narod.ru

21. Vakhitov, P.P. Eurasian Civilization / P.P. Vakhitov // Eurasianism and national idea; Materials, interregional conference; Ed. Acad. A#RB F: S. Fayzullina Ufa; 2006: - O. 31-37.

22. Introduction to cultural studies: a course of lectures / ed. Yu;N; Corned beef; E.F. Sokolova ;, - St. Petersburg ;, 2003:

23. Vernadsky, G.V.: Inscription of Russian history / F.B. Vernadsky; foreword S.B. Lavrova, A.S. Lavrov. M.: Iris-press, 20021 - 368s.: ill. - (B-ka history and culture).

24. Vernadsky, G.V. Russian history / G.V. Vernadsky. M.: Agraf, 2001. -542s.

25. Voeikov, M. Eurasian theorists about the Soviet system / M. Voeikov / / Alternatives. 2002. - No. 2. - pp. 43-59

26. Volkogonova, O.D. N.A. Berdyaev: intellectual biography / O.D. Volkogonova. M.: Publishing House of Moscow State University, 2001. 112s

27. Vysheslavtsev, B.P. Russian national character / B.P. Vysheslavtsev; foreword to publ. N.K. Gavryushina // Vopr. philosophy. 1995. - No. 6. - S. 5781

28. Vielmini, F. Eurasian ideas in modern Kazakhstan / F. Vielmini // Russia and the modern world. 2002. - No. 3. - S. 24-32

29. Galimov, B.S. We deserve a special place in the philosophical community / B.S. Galimov // Philosophical Thought. 2001.- №1.- p. 4-9

30. Gershenzon, M.O. Creative self-consciousness / M.O. Gershenzon // Milestones: Sat. Art. about the Russian intelligentsia. M., 1990. - 210 S.

31. Guenon, R. Essays on tradition and metaphysics / R. Guenon; per. from fr. V.Yu.Bystrova. St. Petersburg: Azbuka, 2000. - 320s.

32. Girenok, F.I. Metaphysics stalemate. The tongue-tied tongue of a tired person. M.: "Labyrinth", 1995.

33. Goryaev, A.T. Eurasian idea in the modern dimension / A.T. Goryaev // Russia and the modern world. 2003. - No. 3. - S. 112-122.

34. Goryaev, A.T. Eurasian Idea and the Problem of Russia's Self-Identification: Abstract of the thesis. dis. . cand. philosophy Sciences: 09.00.11 / Goryaev A.T. Volgograd, 2003. -47p.

35. Groys, B. The search for Russian "national identity / - B. Groys // Issues of philosophy. 1992. - No. 1. - P. 55-63.

36. Gromov, M.N. Eternal values of Russian culture: to the interpretation of Russian philosophy / M.N. Gromov // Ibid. 1994. - No. 4. - S.

37. Gulyga, A.B. Russian idea and its creators / A.V. Gulyga. M.: Eksmo, 2003. - 448 p.

38. Gulyga A.V! On the identity of Russia // Young Guard.- 1996.- No. 5

39. Gumilev, JI.H. “They call me a Eurasian.” / JI.H. Gumilyov // Our contemporary. 1992. - No. 2. - S. 78-85

40. Gumilyov; JI.H*. from Rus' to Russia / L.N: Gumilyov: ■.-■■ SPb:,. 1992. 540s.

41. Gumilyov, L-iHi Black legend:: Friends and enemies; Great; Steppe / JI.H. Gumilev. M:: Iris-press, 2002.-576s.

42. Gumilyov, J1.H. Ethnogenesis and Biosphere/Earth/ JI.H. Gumilev. M.: Rolf, 2002: "-560 p.

43. Gurevich; P1S. Philosophical anthropology: experience, systematics? / PS. Gurevich<; ,// Вопр; философии. 1995. - № 8. - С. 21-38;

44. Gurevich P.S. Philosophy of man / P.S. Gurevich.-M.: Izd-voIFRAN, 1999, v2h. 4.1, 224 p.

45. Diligenskisch G.G. "The End of History" or the Change of Civilizations? / G.G. Diligensky // Ibid. 1991. - No. 3. - pp. 53-61

46. Dugin, A.G. Philosophy of traditionalism / A.G. Dugin. M.: Arktogeya-Center; 2002. - 624s.

47. Evlampiev, I.I. Dostoevsky and Nietzsche: on the way to a new metaphysics, human / I.I. Evlampiev // Vopr. philosophy. -2002. No. 2. -S. 65-76

48. Eurasian concept of the modern Russian state // Philosophy of law. 2000. - No. 2., -G. 5-13:

49. Eurasianism: The experience of a systematic presentation. // Fundamentals of Eurasianism. M.: Arktogeya-Center. 800s.

50. Erasov, B.S. Sociocultural and geopolitical principles of Eurasianism / B.S. Erasov // Polis. 2001. - No. 5. - S. 65-74.

51. Zhdanova, G.V. Eurasianism in modern research. Philosophical aspects: author. dis. . cand. philosophy Sciences: 09.00.03 / G.V. Zhdanov. M., 2002. - 24 p.

52. Zailalov, I.I. Socio-philosophical aspects of the functioning of the culture of an ethnos in a multinational society (on the example of the Bashkir culture) / dissertation abstract for the degree of candidate of philosophical sciences. Ufa, 2006.

53. Zakovorotnaya, M.B. Human identity. Socio-philosophical aspects / M.V. Zakovorotnaya. Rostov - on - Don: Publishing House of the North Caucasus. scientific center of higher education, 1999. - 242 p.

54. Zenkovsky; Q:W. History of Russian Philosophy: in 2 volumes / V.V. Zenkovsky. - Rostov-on-Don: Phoenix, 1999. V.1, V.2.

55. Zorin, V.I. Introduction to Eurasian Philosophy // http://www. sofiogonia.webhost.ru

56. Zotov, V.D. Eurasian idea: political aspects in the past and present / V.D. Zotov // Social-Humanist. knowledge. 2000. - No. 5. - S. 23-38

57. Ivanov, A.B. Eurasian outlook and geopolitical priorities of Russia in the 21st century / A.V. Ivanov // Vestn. Moscow State University. Ser.12, Polit, science. 2000. - No. 3. - S. 3-20.

58. Ignatov, A. "Eurasianism" and the search for a new Russian cultural identity / A. Ignatov // Vopr. philosophy. 1995. - No. 6. - pp. 56-70

59. Ilyin, V.V. Philosophy of history / V.V. Ilyin. M.: Publishing House of Moscow. un-ta, 2003. - 380s.

60. Ilyin, V.N. Eurasianism / V.N. Ilyin // Steps. 1992. - No. 2 (5). - WITH.

61. Ilyin, I.A. About humility / I.A. Ilyin // Psychological journal. 1992. - T. 13.-No. 6.-S. 34-37

62. Ilyin, I.A. Our tasks / I.A. Ilyin // Youth. 1990. - No. 8. - S.34-46

63. Ilyin, I.A. Why did the monarchical system collapse in Russia? / I.A. Ilyin // Sociologist, researcher. 1992 - No. 5. With. 23-28

64. Kapto, A. Creative potential of Eurasianism / A. Kapto // Security of Eurasia. 2000. - No. 2. - S. 34-48.

65. Kapranov, V.A. Moral foundations of the Russian spirit / V.A. Kapranov // Russia: past, present future: materials of Vseros. scientific-practical. conf., St. Petersburg, 16-19 Dec. 1996//http://webwafer.net/ww/~ au/ap111goro1ogu.gi/gi/1ex18/kargapou/sh8rrG02.M.

66. Karasaev, L.V. On the symbols of Dostoevsky / L.V. Karasaev // Vopr. philosophy. 1994. - No. 10. - S. 10-18

67. Kara-Murza, S.G. The disappearance of the people / S.G. Kara-Murza // Our contemporary. 2006. - No. 2. - S. 170-183

68. Kara-Murza, S.G. Ideology and its mother science / S.G. Kara-Murza. Moscow: Algorithm, 2002. 734 p.

69. Kara-Murza, S.G. Manipulation of consciousness // http://www.kara-murza.ru/index.htm

70. Karsavin, L.P. Philosophy of history / L.P. Karsavin. SPb.: Kit, 1993. -352p.

71. Karsavin, L.P. Fundamentals of politics / L.P. Karsavin // Fundamentals of Eurasianism / comp.: N. Agamalyan et al. M .: Arktogeya-Center, 2002. - 800s.

72. Karpitsky, N.N. The meaning of history, http://tvfi.narod.ru/antropog.ht

73. Kireeva, I.S. Universal and National in Philosophy // II International Scientific and Practical Conference of KRSU (May 27-28, 2004): materials of speeches / ed. ed. I.I. Ivanova. - Bishkek, 2004. - S.348-355.

74. Kozhinov, V. Historiosophy of the Eurasians / V. Kozhinov // Our contemporary. - 1992.-№2.-S. 23-34

75. Kolerov, M.A. Brotherhood of St. Sophia: "Vekhi" and Eurasians (1921-1925) / M.A. Kolerov // Vopr. philosophy. 1994. - No. 10. - S. 24-37

76. Kondakov, I.V. "On the other side" of Europe / I.V. Kondakov // Vopr. Philosophy: -2002.-№6.-S. 8-17

77. Kondakov, I.V. Introduction to the history of Russian philosophy. M:, 1997.

78. Kontor, V.K. Democracy as a historical problem in Russia / V.K. Kontor, // Ibid. 1996. - No. 6. - pp. 25-31

79. Kontor, V.K. Spiritual heritage of Europe / V.K. Kontor // Ibid. 1995. -№8. -WITH. 10-19

80. Kontor, V.K. Westernism as a problem of the "Russian way" / V.K. Office.// Ibid.-1993.-№4.-S. 36-47!

81. Kontor,1 V.K. Element and civilization: two factors of Russian fate / V.K. Kontor // Ibid. 1994 - No. 5. - S. 3 7-45 f.

82. Korolev, M.A. Brotherhood - St. Sofia: Vekhi and Eurasians (1921-1925) / M.A. Korolev // Ibid. 1994. - No. 10. - S. 23-31

83. Krivosheeva, E.G. Post-revolutionary emigrant trend of Eurasianism (1917-1932) / E.G. Krivosheeva; ed. G.G.Kasarov; Moscow avtodor. in-t (technical university). -M.: B.I., 1996. - 136s.

84. Smith, A.M. Russia in search of a national idea / A.M. Blacksmith // Vopr. Philosophy: 2002. - No. 1. - S. 34-41

85. Kurashov V.I.: Philosophy of the meaning of life // East and West: globalization and cultural identity. Materials of the international congress dedicated to the 1000th anniversary of Kazan, (May 23-25, 2005), Kazan University Press, 2005. P.76.

86. Kurashov, V.I. Philosophy: man and the meaning of his life / V.I. Kurashov. Kazan: Publishing House of KSTU, 2001. - 351p.

87. Lapin, N.I. The problem of socio-cultural reformation in Russia, trends and obstacles / N.I. Lapin // Vopr. philosophy. 1996. - No. 5. - pp. 66-73

88. Lebedev, A.B. Spiritual production: essence and functioning / A.B. Lebedev. Kazan, 1999. - 320s.

89. Levi-Strauss K. Structural anthropology / Per. from fr. Vyach. Sun. Ivanova. - M.: Publishing House of EKSMO-Press, 2001. - 512 p.

90. Lossky, N.O.: Conditions for absolute good / N.O. Lossky. M., 1991. -380s.

91. Lukyanova, E.A. On the issue of the specifics of Russian statehood / E.A. Lukyanova // Vestn. Moscow State University. Ser. 12, Polit, sciences. 2002. - No. 1. - S. 13-34.

92. Lux, L. Eurasianism and the conservative revolution / L. Lux // Vopr. philosophy. 1996. - No. 3. - pp. 43-51

93. Lux, L. Russia between East and West: Sat. Art./L» Suite. M.: Mosk. Philos. Fund, 1993. - 348s.

94. Malyavin, S.N. History of Russian socio-philosophical; thoughts / S.N. Malyavin; ed. NOT. Rudomazin. M.: Bustard, 2003. - 256s.

95. Malkovskaya, I.A. Globalization and the transcultural challenge of the non-Western world / I.A. Malkovskaya // Sicis. 2005. - No. 12. - S. 3-13.

96. Marx, K. Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts/ K. Marx // Marx, K. Soch./ K. Marx. F. Engels 2nd ed. - T. 42. - pp. 256-270

97. Marcuse, G. One-Dimensional Man: A Study of the Ideology of the Advanced Industrial Society / G. Marcuse. M.: KER-Look, 1994. - 420p.

98. Mildon. Russian idea at the end of the 20th century / Mildon // Vopr. philosophy. -1996.-№3.-S. 34-42.

99. Mineev, E.M. Formation of a national idea in the context of the redistribution of power in the Russian Federation / E.M. Mineev // Eurasianism and national idea. Ufa, 2006. S. 224-225

100. Minyushev, F.I. Social anthropology: (course of lectures). - M.: Inter-nar. University of Business and Management, 1997. - 192 p.

101. Mikhailov, F.T. Social consciousness and self-consciousness of the individual / F.T. Mikhailov. M.: Nauka, 1990. - 520s.

102. Mnatsakanyan, M.O. Globalization and the nation state: three myths / M.O. Mnatsakanyan // Socis. 2004. - No. 5. - S. 137-142.

103. Myalo, K. The challenge of globalization and Russia / K. Myalo // Our contemporary. -2006. -№1.- S. 190-196

104. On the way to the spiritual and ecological civilization: (Eurasian project). - Kazan: Antiyader, Tatarstan, 1996. -131p.

105. Neretina, G.C. Berdyaev and Florensky: on the meaning of the historical / S.S. Neretina // Vopr. philosophy. 1991. - No. 3. - pp. 34-41

106. Nikitin, V.P. We and the East / V.P. Nikitin // Eurasia. 1928. - No. 1. - P.5.

107. The latest philosophical dictionary: 3rd ed., corrected. Minsk: Book House. 2003.-1280s.

108. The latest philosophical dictionary / V.A. Kondrashov, D.A. Cheklov, V.N. Caporulina; under total ed. A.P.Yareshenko, Rostov n / D .: Phoenix, 2005.- 672p.

109. Novikova; J.I. Eurasian art / L. Novikova, I. Sizemskaya // World of Russia Eurasia: an anthology. - M., 1995. - S. 24-32 ^

110. Novikova, JI. Two faces of Eurasianism / JI. Novikova, I. Sizemskaya // Svobodnaya, thought. 1992. - No. 7. - P. 47-59 (

111. Orlov, B. Eurasianism: what is the essence? / B. Orlov // Society and economy. -2001.-№9.-S. 45-53

112. Orlova, I.B. Eurasian civilization: Sots.-ist. retrospective and perspective / I.B. Orlov. M.: Norma, 1998. - 280s.

113. Orlova, I.B. The contours of the modern Eurasian concept / I.B. Orlov http://www.ispr.rU/Confer/EuroAsia/confer9-l.html#bb.

114. Omelchenko N. Exodus to the East: Eurasianism and its criticism / N. Omelchenko // Eurasian idea and modernity. Moscow: RUDN University; 272 p. pp. 10-29

115. Panarin, A.S. Orthodox civilization in the global world / A.S. Pana-rin. -M.: Eksmo, 2003. 544s.

116. Panarin, A.S. "Second Europe" or "Third Rome" / A.C. Panarin // Vopr. philosophy. 1996. - No. 10. - S. 53-61

117. Panarin, A.S. Russia in Eurasia: geopolitical challenges and civilizational responses / A.S. Panarin // Ibid. 1994. - No. 12. - pp. 35-46

118. Panarin, A.S. Eurasianism: for and against, yesterday and today / A.S. Panarin // Ibid. 1995. - No. 6. - pp. 3-25

119. Panarin, A.S. Russia between Eurasianism and Atlanticism / A.S. Panarin // Ros. provinces. 1993; - No. G. - S.27-3 K

120. Panarin, A.S. 13 What kind of world are we going to live in? / A.C. Panarin http: // www.archipelag.ru/ru mir/ostrov-rus/cymbur/composition.

121. Panarin, A.S. Russia: in Eurasia: geopolitical challenges! and civilizational responses / A.S. Panarin // Vopr. philosophy. 1994. - No. 12. - S. 87-94

122. Pantin, I.K. Iostcommunist democracy in Russia: foundations and features / I.K. Pantin // Vopr. philosophy; 1996. - No. 6. - pp. 65-71

123. Pashchenko, V.Ya. Eurasianism is 80 years old / V.Ya. Pashchenko // Vesti., MCU. Ser.7, Philosophy. - 2001. - No. 4. - S. 21-29

124. Pashchenko V.Ya. Social Philosophy of Eurasianism / V.Ya. Pashchenko. M.: Alfa-M, 2003.-368s.

125. Pivovarov, Yu.S. Russian property, Russian power, Russian thought, / Yu.S. Pivovarov // Russia and the modern world. 2002. - No. 1. - S. 54-63

126. Pishun, C.B. Political Doctrine of Eurasianism: (Experience of System Reconstruction and Interpretation): dis. . cand. political science: 23. 00. 01/ S.V.; Pishun C.B. Vladivostok, 1999. - 176s.

127. Poletaev, A. It is interesting to live in Russia in Russia everything is not so / A. Poletaev // Knowledge is power; - 1994^ - No. 6; - pp. 68-75

128. Polikarpov, B.C., Polikarpova*V;A. The phenomenon of man yesterday and tomorrow / B.C. Polikarpov, V.A. Polikarpov. - Rostov-on-Don: Phoenix, 1996. -576s.

129. Polyakov, A.B. Between East and West: the revival of the gifts of the Russian^ soul / A.B. Polyakov // Vopr. philosophy. - 1993. No. 10. - pp. 65-74

130. Polyakov, L.V. Clinton Gardner. Between East and West. Revival of the gifts of the Russian soul / L.V. Polyakov // Vopr. philosophy. 1993. - No. 10. - S. 34-42

131. Ponomareva L. Around Eurasianism: disputes in Russian emigration / L. Ponamareva. Eurasian idea and modernity. Moscow: RUDN University, 272 p. pp.30-37

132. Redel, A.I. Russian mentality: towards sociological discourse / A.I. Redel // Sociologist, research. 2000.- No. 12. - S. 25-33

133. The risk of historical choice in * Russia: (materials of the "round table") / were: A.S. Panarin and others // Vopr. philosophy. 19941 - No. 5. - S.

134. Rormoser, G. To the question of the future of Russia / G. Rormoser // Ibid. - 1993. -№3. - pp. 43-49

135. Russian idea: essence, content, development: materials of interuniversity. scientific conf. Kazan, 1997. - 109s.

136. Russian mentality: (materials of the "round table") /, were: G.D. Gachev and others // Vopr. philosophy. 1994. - No. 1. - S. 86-93

137. Russian idea / comp. and ed. intro. Art. M.A. Maslin. M.: Respublika, 1992. -496s.

138. Russian knot of Eurasianism. East in Russian thought: Sat. tr. Eurasians / comp. S. Klyuchnikov; ed. N.I. Tolstoy; RAS, Institute of world literature. M.: Belovodie, 1997. - 525p.

139. Sabirov, A.G. Socio-philosophical anthropology: principles of construction and subject definition / A.G. Sabirov. M.: Publishing House of Moscow. ped. un-ta, 1997. - 120s.

140. Sabirov, A.G. Human studies: humanization and humanitarian functions / A.G. Sabirov. Elabuga: Publishing House of YSPI, 1996. - 210p.

141. Savitsky, P. In the fight? for Eurasianism: Controversy around Eurasianism in the 1920s / P: Savitsky // Thirties: Statements; Eurasians. -Paris, 1931. Book. .7.

142. Savitsky, P. Eurasianism/P. Savitsky//Our contemporary. 1992; - No. 2. - From:. 37-44;150; Savitsky, GSH. Continent Eurasia / Savitsky P.N. Ml: Agraf, 1997. -461s.

143. Savkin, I. Eurasian future of Russia / I: Savkin, V. Kozlovsky // Steps. 1992. - No. 2 (5). - pp. 75-81

144. Senderov, V.A. Eurasianism-myth of the 21st century?/ V A. Senderov // Vopr. philosophy. 2001. - No. 5. - pp. 41-53

145. Senderov; B;A. Society and power in Russia / V A. Senderov // New World. -2005.-№12. pp. 35-48

146. Sioran. The Temptation of Existence / Jer. from French, foreword. In: A. Nikitina;, ed., approx. I. S. Vdovina. - M:: Republic: Palimpsest, 2003. - 431s.

147. Sobolev, A. On the issue of internal tensions and contradictions in the Eurasianism of the 1920s / A. Sobolev // Russia XXI. 2002. - No. 5. - S. 18-25

148. Solozobov Y. Unrecognized Eurasia / Y. Solozobov // Logos.- 2004.-№6.-p. 130-139

149. Stepanyants, M.T. Man in the traditional society of the East (the experience of a comparative approach) / M.T. Stepanyants // Vopr. philosophy. 1991. - No. 3. -WITH. 57-65

150. Struve, P. Orthodoxy and culture / P. Struve. M., 1992. - 256s.

151. Struve, P. The historical meaning of the Russian revolution and national tasks / P. Struve // From the depths: Sat. Art. about the Russian Revolution / S.A. Askoldov, H.A. Berdyaev, S.A. Bulgakov and others - M .: Publishing House of Moscow. un-ta, 1990. 298s.

152. Stolovich, JI.H. About universal values / JI.H. Stolovich // Vopr. philosophy. 2004. - No. 4. - pp. 36-43

153. Sukharev, Yu.A. Religious and Moral Problem of Personal Freedom in the Works of Dostoevsky / Yu.A. Sukharev // Philosophy and Society. 1999. -№3.-S. 35-42

154. Titarenko, L.G. Socio-cultural threats in the context of globalization / L.G. Titarenko // Security of Eurasia. 2003. - No. 3 (13). - pp. 57-63

155. Titarenko, M.L. Russia: security through cooperation. East Asian vector / M.L. Titarenko; ed. B.T. Kulik and others; RAS, Institute of the Far East. - M .: Monuments of ist. thoughts, 2003. 406s.

156. Toynbee, A.J. Comprehension of history: per. from English. / A.J. Toynbee; comp. A.P. Ogurtsov; intro. Art. IN AND. Prickly; zakl. Art. E.B. Rashkovsky. M.: Progress, 1991.-736s.

157. Toynbee, A.J. Civilization before the court of history: collection: per. from English / A.J. Toynbee. M.: Rolf, 2002. - 592s.

158. Troyanov, A. The study of Eurasianism in modern foreign literature / A. Troyanov // Beginnings. 1992. - No. 4. - pp. 21-28

159. Trubetskoy, N. Pan-Eurasian nationalism / N. Trubetskoy // Free Thought. 1992. - No. 5. - S. 46-53

160. Trubetskoy N.S. About true and false nationalism. Reader on the history of philosophy. In "Z h. Ch.Z. - M .: Humanit. Publishing house. Center VLADOS. - 1997. 560s.

161. Trubetskoy, N.O. To the problem of Russian self-knowledge / N.S. Trubetskoy. - "Eurasian publishing house, 1927.

162. Trubetskoy, N.S. The legacy of Genghis Khan / N.S. Trubetskoy; comp. A. Dugin. -M.: Agraf, 1999. 554s.

163. Trubetskoy, N.S. Legacy of Genghis Khan. A look at Russian history is not from the West; and from the East. - Berlin, 1925. 346s.

164. Trubetskoy, N.S. Russian problem / N.S. Trubetskoy // Europe between Russia and Asia: Eurasian temptation: anthologies M.: Nauka; 1993. - 260s.

165. Trubetskoy, S.N. Collected works: in volume / S.N. Trubetskoy. M., 1994. -V.2. - 526s. ,

166. Tugarinov, H.A. Eurasianism and modernity / H.A. Tugarinov // Faces of Russia.- 1993.-№5.-S. 36-45

167. Tulaev, P.V. Opening of the covered / P.V. Tulaev// Russia and Europe: the experience of conciliar analysis. M., Heritage, 1992. - pp. 54-60

168. Tyugashev, E.A. Eurasianism as a sociocultural type: socionic interpretation // http://filosoflO.narod.ru/special.htm.

169. Sustainable development: materials of inter-region, philos. seminar. Ulan-Ude: Buryat, book. publishing house, 2002! - Issue. 4-5:

170. Ustich, H.A. Education in the spiritual life of Russians / H.A. Ustich, A. Neva-lennaya // Traditional; modern and transitional in Russian society: Sat. Art. II All-Russian. scientific-practical. conf. / ed. R.G. Yanovsky and others - Penza, 2005.-S. 128-13V

171. Fedotova, .V.G. Russia in the global and internal * world / V. G. Fedotova // World of Russia. 2000. - V. 9, No. 4. - P. 36-42

172. Florovsky, G. Eurasian temptation / G. Florovsky // New world. 1991. -№1.- S. 23-31

173. Franky, V. Man in search of meaning / V. Frankl. M., 1990. - p.

174. Khaziev B.C. Humanism of the Eurasian idea and< практики // В".С.Хазиев // Евразийство и национальная идея. Материалы межрегиональной конференции. Под ред. Акад. АН РБ Ф.С.Файзуллина Уфа, 2006. - С. 64-70.

175. Huntington, S. Clash of Civilizations / S. Huntington; per. from English. T. Velimeeva, Yu. Novikova.- M.: ACT, 2003. 603, 5. p. - (Philosophy).

176. Khachaturian V. Historiosophy of Eurasianism / V. Khachaturian // Eurasian idea and modernity. M.: publishing house ^ RUDN University, 272 p. pp. 93-97

177. Tails; A.A. Silence of rabbits "(reflections on the radicalism of modern workers) / A.A. Khvostov // Alternatives. 2002. - No. 2. - P. 74-79

178. Horuzhy, S.S. About the old and the new / S.S. Khoruzhy. - St. Petersburg: Aleteyya, 2000. -477p.

179. Cold, V.I. The idea of catholicity and Slavophilism. The problem of cathedral phenomenology / V.I. Cold. M., 1994. - 438 p.

180. Man: Thinkers of the past and present about his life, death and immortality. The ancient world - the Age of Enlightenment / Ed.: I. T. Frolov and others; Comp. P. S. Gurevich. - M.: Politizdat, 1991. - 422 p.

181. Schweitzer, A. Culture and ethics / A. Schweitzer. -M.: Progress, 1973. 334s.

182. Schubart, V. Europe and the soul of the East / V. Schubart; per. with him. M.V. Nazarova, Z.G. Antipenko. M.: Eksmo, 2003. - 480 p.

183. Shchelkunov, M.D. Russian national idea: with hope for the future / M.D. Shchelkunov // Russian idea: essence, content, development: materials of interuniversity. Conf. - Kazan, 1997. S. 34-45

184. Shtrik-Shtrikfeld, V. Secret report to Hitler / V. Shtrik-Shtrikfeld // Word. 1992. - No. 1-6. - pp. 44-51

185. Yakovets, Y. The future of Russia in the coordinates of the Eurasian civilization / Y. Yakovets // Society and Economics. 2000. - No. 1. - S. 65-72

186. Jaspers, K. The meaning and purpose of history / K. Jaspers. M., 1991. - 620s.

187. Gemeinschaft und Gerechtigkeit. Hrsg. von M. Brumlik and H. Brunkhorst. -Frankfurt; Moscow, 1993.

188. Moehler, J.A. Die Einheit in der Kirche oder das Prinzip des Katholizismus/ J.A. Moehler. Darmstadt, 1957. - S. 114.

189. Gans, E. Mimetic Paradox and the Event on Moehler J.A. f Human Origin/ E. Gans // Anthropoetics 1, no. 2 (December 1995).

190. Gabora, L. The Origine and Evolution of Culture and Creativity/ L. Gabora // Journal of Mimetics Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission,. - 1997. - No. 1.,

191. Gergen, K.J. Constructing the Self in a Mediated World/ K.J. Gergen. Sage, 1996.

192. Gergen, K.J. Social Psychology as History |/ K.J. Gergen // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Vol. 26. - No. 2.

193. Rappoport, D. The Structure of Psychoanalytical Theory/ D. Rappoport // Psychology: a Study of a Science. 1959. - Vol. 3.

194. Redfield, R. Peasant Society and Culture. An Anthropological Approach to Civilization / R. Redfield. Chicago, 1956.

195. Steiner, R. Human and Cosmic Thought/ R. Steiner. London, 1967.

480 rub. | 150 UAH | $7.5 ", MOUSEOFF, FGCOLOR, "#FFFFCC",BGCOLOR, "#393939");" onMouseOut="return nd();"> Thesis - 480 rubles, shipping 10 minutes 24 hours a day, seven days a week and holidays

Palkin Alexey Gennadievich. The concept of the state in the doctrine of the Eurasians: dissertation... Candidate of Law: 12.00.01 / Palkin Aleksey Gennadievich; [Place of protection: Ohm. state un-t im. F.M. Dostoevsky].- Yekaterinburg, 2009.- 196 p.: ill. RSL OD, 61 09-12/842

Introduction

CHAPTER 1. Ideological prerequisites and the essence of the state in the Eurasian doctrine 20

1. Ideological premises of the Eurasian doctrine of the state 20

2. Eurasian understanding of the essence and functions of the "state of truth" 48

CHAPTER 2 Eurasians about the specifics of the formation and development of the Russian state - 61

1. The problem of the genesis of the Old Russian state and its development in the Middle Ages - 61

2. Eurasian analysis of the October Revolution of 1917 as a transition to a new stage in the development of the Russian state 80

CHAPTER 3 Views of Eurasians on the future state structure of Russia 98

1. Eurasians about the ways of transformation of the Soviet model of the state - 98

2. Eurasian project of the state structure of Russia 116

Conclusion - 168

Bibliography 178

Introduction to work

The relevance of the dissertation research topic due to the need for an organic reform of the Russian statehood and the political and legal system based on domestic political and legal traditions, taking into account the original versions of the legal statehood, corresponding to the understanding of law as truth, justice, spiritual and moral ideal. The national-ideocratic model of the rule of law, which does not contradict the political and legal creativity and mentality of the Russian people in their historical development, developed within the framework of Eurasianism, until recently remains practically unknown not only to the general public, but also to specialists.

The problem put forward by the indicated political, philosophical, cultural trend is especially relevant for a society that has not yet decided on its own civilizational identity, that has not found the most optimal vector of development. The superficial revival of national and religious traditions, the change of names of cities and streets, etc., cannot remove the acuteness of the problem of returning to the foundations of proper political, spiritual, economic existence, nor can they fill the value and spiritual vacuum that formed after the collapse of the one-party communist system. One of the possible ways to creatively fill this ideological vacuum is connected, in our opinion, with the implementation of a consistent reconstruction and interpretation of the concept of the state in the teachings of the Eurasians, which entails the representation of organically built into this concept and mutually related definitions of the essence, form and ways of development of the Russian state .

The Eurasian movement arose in 1920 in Sofia among the Russian emigration. Various representatives of emigration tried to comprehend

4 causes and nature of the revolution, as well as determine their place in the further development of events in Russia.

The picture of political currents among the Russian emigration was very diverse at that time. On the extreme left were the Socialist-Revolutionaries, the Social Democrats (Mensheviks), the Smenovekhists and, subsequently, the Trotskyists. The emigrants who united around the Vozrozhdeniye newspaper, which was published by P. Struve, belonged to the liberal-democratic direction. Members of the fascist Parisian and Harbin groupings (Young Russians, etc.) who arose under the influence of B. Mussolini's victory in Italy in the 1920s adhered to extreme right-wing views.

Eurasianism was a kind of movement that is difficult to fit into the framework of any particular political orientation. Eurasians stand outside the right and the left. After 1928, some of them, the so-called Clamart group, moved to the radical left. The ideological predecessors of the "Clamard bias" in Eurasianism were the "Smenovekhites"

Talented scientists stood at the origins of the Eurasian doctrine: philologist N.S. Trubetskoy, musicologist and publicist P.P. Suvchinsky, geographer and economist P.N. Savitsky, religious writer V.N. Ilyin, jurist N.N. Alekseev, historians G.V. Vernadsky, L.P. Karsavin and M.M. Chess. Eurasianism was ideologically heterogeneous, in connection with which the composition of the participants in the movement often changed.

The lack of ideological and theoretical unity among the Eurasians makes it difficult to study their scientific heritage. It should be noted that almost every ideologist of Eurasianism claimed theoretical independence, but we are interested in the general outlines of the Eurasian concept of the state. Therefore, the focus of our attention is on issues that, in our opinion, constitute the problem field of the Eurasian concept of the state proper in the form of consideration of the essence, form and ways of development of the Russian state.

Prince Nikolai Sergeevich Trubetskoy (1890-1938), a Russian linguist, is rightfully considered the founder and ideological leader of Eurasianism. He was born into a family that belonged to the intellectual elite of Russian society. His father, Sergei Nikolaevich, was a professor at Moscow University, a well-known researcher of ancient philosophy. The intellectual atmosphere of the family had an undeniable influence on the spiritual development of N.S. Trubetskoy. After graduating from the Faculty of History of Moscow University with a degree in linguistics, N.S. Trubetskoy gained fame as an outstanding philologist. After the October Revolution, Trubetskoy left Russia. In exile, he founded the Eurasian movement and became its leading theorist. The work of N.S. Trubetskoy's "Europe and Humanity" (1920), in which he opposed the ideology of Eurocentrism, served as the starting point for the formation of Eurasian historiosophy. Research N.S. Trubetskoy developed in two directions: substantiation of the role of the Turanian influence on the cultural development of Russia and the development of the concept of "true and false nationalism". Throughout the existence of the Eurasian movement, N.S. Trubetskoy took an active part in it.

Another prominent representative of Eurasianism, Pyotr Nikolaevich Savitsky (1895-1968), was born in Chernigov in 1895. Before the revolution, he gained fame as the author of a number of studies in the field of economic geography. During the civil war, Savitsky emigrated to Bulgaria, where he edited the journal Russkaya Mysl, and then to Czechoslovakia, where he headed the economics department of the Russian Agrarian Institute and lectured at the Russian Free University. In 1922, together with N.S. Trubetskoy, P.N. Savitsky led the Eurasian movement. He became a regular editor of Eurasian publications, where he published his research on economics and geopolitics. During the occupation of Czechoslovakia by Hitler

P.N. Savitsky was the director of the Russian gymnasium. In 1945, he was arrested by the NKVD and sentenced to 10 years in the camps. After rehabilitation in 1956 he returned to Prague, where he worked as a member of the state commission on agrarian geography. P.N. Savitsky died in Prague in 1968. He wrote many works, in particular "Geographical features of Russia" (1927), "Russia is a special geographical world" (1927), as well as a large number of articles.

A prominent place in the development of the Eurasian concept on legal issues belongs to the theorist of state and law, Nikolai Nikolaevich Alekseev (1879-1964). He was born in the family of a professional lawyer and, following the family tradition, entered the law faculty of Moscow University. In 1911 he defended his master's thesis on the topic "Social and natural sciences in the historical relationship of their methods." From 1912 he was a staff professor at Moscow University. The main area of his scientific interests was the philosophy of state and law. During the years of the civil war, N.N. Alekseev took part in the preparation of the Constituent Assembly. In 1921 he emigrated and was soon invited to Prague as a professor at the Russian Faculty of Law. In Prague, N.N. Alekseev became close to the circle of future participants in the Eurasian movement and, from 1927, he began to constantly collaborate in Eurasian publications, where he published a number of articles, in particular “Eurasians and the State” (1927), “Eurasianism and Marxism” (1929) and others. He died in Switzerland in 1964.

Georgy Vladimirovich Vernadsky (1887-1973) was one of the leading historians of the Russian diaspora. He was born into the family of the outstanding scientist Vladimir Ivanovich Vernadsky, who had been seriously interested in history all his life. G.V. Vernadsky received a university degree in history. Already in his student years, the center of the scientific interests of the young scientist was history.

7 relationships of ancient Rus' with the East. For some time G.V. Vernadsky taught at St. Petersburg and then Tauride Universities. After the revolution, he emigrated to Prague, where he met P.N. Savitsky and joined the Eurasian movement. Published a number of articles on the history of Ancient Rus' and Eurasia. After 1927 he settled in the USA, where he taught at Yale University and created his own historical school.

A prominent place in the development of the Eurasian doctrine is occupied by L.P. Karsavin (1882-1952). Lev Platonovich Karsavin, Russian religious philosopher and historian, was born in 1882 in St. Petersburg, in the family of a ballet dancer. He graduated from the Faculty of History of St. Petersburg University, where, after an internship in Italy and in the south of France, he began working as a professor. The main areas of his scientific interests were religious culturology and historiosophy. In 1922 Karsavin was expelled from Russia. While in exile, he became close to the Eurasians on the basis of the messianic idea of the historical destiny of Russia. Having become the ideological leader of the movement, Karsavin moved to the position of justifying the revolution and Bolshevism. In 1929, due to ideological differences with other members of the movement, L.P. Karsavin moved away from Eurasianism. Later he worked at the Department of World History at Kaunas University (Lithuania). After the accession of the Baltic states to the USSR, Karsavin was arrested by the NKVD. He died in the camp in 1952. Since 1926, when the center of Eurasianism moved to Paris, Karsavin actually became the ideological leader of the movement. Under his leadership, Eurasianism acquired the outlines of the theoretical unity of a rigid ideology. Karsavin is largely responsible for the creation of the program document “Eurasianism. The experience of a systematic presentation ", which marked the transformation

Eurasianism. Experience of systematic presentation // Ways of Eurasia. M., 1993.

8 Eurasianism into a single ideological platform. This document reveals the concept of an ideocratic state, an attempt is made to outline specific ways of transition to the post-Bolshevik Eurasian state system in Russia. Karsavin assumed that such a transition would take place peacefully, as a result of a dialogue with the reborn party elite of the USSR. Beginning in 1928, the Eurasian movement began to decline. In this situation, Karsavin's claims to theoretical and ideological leadership in the movement led him to aggravate relations with other members of the Clamart group and move away from the movement.

Summing up a brief acquaintance with the main participants in the Eurasian movement, it is necessary to emphasize again its noticeable ideological heterogeneity. The participants in the movement were united primarily by their patriotic sentiments, the denial of Eurocentrism, and their belief in Russia's special historical mission. Traditional Eurasianism associated with the development of the Eurasian model of the state is represented, in our opinion, by the names of N.S. Trubetskoy, P.N. Savitsky, G.V. Vernadsky, N.N. Alekseev and, in part, L.P. Karsavin (in those of his publications where he tried to summarize the fundamental principles of "traditional Eurasianism").

Two main periods can be traced in the development of the Eurasian movement.

First period: 1921-1925. Development of geographical and historical-cultural aspects of the doctrine. The first collective Eurasian collection was the work “Exodus to the East”, the authors of which were N.S. Trubetskoy, P.P. Suvchinsky, P.N. Savitsky and G.V. Florovsky. In 1923, G.V. joined the Eurasian movement. Vernadsky, who became one of the authors of the Eurasian historical concept.

Second period: 1926-1938. Active development of political

9 problems, the search for ways to overcome Bolshevism and create an ideocratic state in Russia. The center of Eurasianism moved from Prague to Paris, L.P. Karsavin. In 1928, there was a "Clamard split" in Eurasianism, when a part of the Eurasians, united around the newspaper "Eurasia", moved to the position of justifying Bolshevism. The newspaper "Eurasia" was published in Clamart (France) in 1928-1929, in addition to P.P. Suvchinsky and D.P. Svyatopolk-Mirsky collaborated with P.S. Arapov, A.S. Lurie, V.P. Nikitin, S.Ya. Efron and others.

From the moment of the split, the gradual extinction of the Eurasian movement began. After the death of N.S. Trubetskoy (1938), it ceased to exist.

The main source that allows revealing the specifics of the socio-cultural philosophy of Eurasianism is the work of the Eurasians themselves, as well as materials from archival funds. In addition to monographic works and collections of articles, the Eurasians published thematic collections: “On the Ways. The affirmation of the Eurasians” (Berlin, 1922); "Eurasian Chronicle" (Edited by P.N. Savitsky, Prague, 1925-1926; Paris, 1926-1928); "Eurasian Time" (Berlin, Paris, 1923-1927); "Eurasian" (Brussels, 1929-1934); "Eurasian notebooks" (Paris, 1934-1936). In 1928-1929, the weekly newspaper "Eurasia" was published in France.

The publications of the Eurasians were accompanied by heated discussions among the intellectual milieu of the Russian emigration. G.V. Florovsky and P.M. The Bitilli, initially close to the movement, later came out with sharp criticism of it. N.A. also entered into polemics with the Eurasians. Berdyaev, I.A. Ilyin, A.A. Kizevetter, P.N. Milyukov, F.A. Stepun, V.A. Myakotin and others.

The degree of development of the problem. After its appearance in the early 1920s. Eurasianism has become the object of attention from various critics, whose sympathy or antipathy towards

10 to the newly emerged current depended on their political and ideological predilections. The book by P.N. Savitsky "In the struggle for Eurasianism". Between the 40s and the end of the 70s. 20th century we see a certain decline in interest in the Eurasian political heritage. The exception is the historical and ethnographic studies of L.N. Gumilyov, in which the problems of the state were practically not considered. The revival of interest in this issue begins with the publication of the report by M.I. Cheremisskaya "The concept of historical development among the Eurasians" (Tartu, 1979) and one of the chapters in the monograph by V.A. Kuvakin "Religious philosophy in Russia: the beginning of the XX century" (M., 1980). In the mid 80s. were deposited in INION AN USSR articles by D.P. Shishkin "The Historiosophy of the Eurasians and Russian Conservatism in the Second Half of the 19th - Early 20th Centuries" (M., 1984) and A.V. Guseva "The concept of Russian identity among the Eurasians: a critical analysis" (L., 1986), which touched upon certain problems of the ideological and state-legal heritage of Eurasianism. But a real surge of interest in Eurasian political theories occurs at the turn of the 1980s and 1990s. 20th century

The modern bibliography on the history of development and the content of the theory of the state in Eurasianism is very extensive. Among a large number of sources, three levels of research on the state and political views of Eurasianism researchers can be distinguished. At the initial level, we meet with the study of "primary material", the texts of the leaders of Eurasianism, which, as a rule, is accompanied by comments, prefaces, afterwords, historical references, bibliographic notes, etc. In this case, one can point to the publications of L.N. Gumilyova 1 , S.S. Khoruzhy,

1 Gumilyov L.N. “... If Russia is saved, then only through Eurasianism” // Beginnings. 1992. No. 4.

A.G. Dugin, D. Taratorina, L.I. Novikova, V.V. Kozhinova, I.N. Sizemskaya, N.I. Tolstoy, V.M. Zhivova, SM. Polovinkina, A.V. Soboleva, I.A. Isaeva, I.A. Savkin. Thanks to their active work, a significant number of primary sources were introduced into the history of the doctrines of law and the state, including a number of previously unpublished materials from the archives. Among all this amount of materials, there is much that is directly related to the views of Eurasians on law and the state. At this level, we are faced with the process of accumulation and primary processing of information, which consists in putting forward the opinions of these authors on the identification of the views on the state of each of the prominent representatives of Eurasianism with a retelling of the ideas of the latter.

The reprinting of the most interesting articles from the Eurasian "Collections" and "Chronicles" has been basically completed, and at present, partial reprinting of the richest archival material (mainly from domestic funds) is being carried out in anthological collections. In particular, we note the publication of A.G. Dugin of a number of handwritten texts by P.N. Savitsky, kept in the State Archive of the Russian Federation.

At the second stage of the study of the heritage of N.S. Trubetskoy, P.N. Savitsky, N.N. Alekseev and others assumed a comprehensive study of the Eurasian doctrine of the state through the consideration of its individual aspects in their internal unity. The indicated level of research implies some immersion in the subject, which inevitably leads to an understanding of the presence in Eurasianism of many concepts about the state, which often contradicted each other. Ignoring internal conflicts within Eurasianism can only give rise to a mythological interpretation of it, which has nothing to do with the historical realities of the life and work of the emigrant intelligentsia in the 20-30s of the 20th century. However, a number of authors come

12 to understanding the existence in Eurasianism of a number of cementing principles pointing to internal unity. In this regard, one can point to the publications of S.N. Baburina, F.I. Girenka 1 , A. Vodolagina and S. Danilova 2 , V.I. Ivashchenko 3 , I.A. Isaeva 4 , I.I. Kvasovoy 5, St. Kodana, Yu.V. Linnik 6, SP. Mamontova 7 , M.V. Nazarova 8 , N.A. Omelchenko 9 , A.Orlova 10 , A.V. Sobolev".

Understanding the unity of the Eurasian doctrine becomes possible only at the level of studying the ontology of the state, which requires an appeal to the metaphysical, axiological and anthropological roots of this direction of Eurasian thought. This leads the researcher to the third, actually scientific, theoretical level of studying the concept of the state in the Eurasian doctrine, which, however, involves the use of a synthetic method. Actually, an intuitive and at the same time complex approach was substantiated by the Eurasians themselves, in particular, in N.N. Alekseev.

Special attention should be paid to modern critical literature on Eurasianism. The most serious criticism of Eurasian approaches to politics comes from those who point to the diminishing role of Russia in world affairs, the weakening of its influence in Eurasia, and expresses

Girenok F.I. Eurasian paths // Global problems and prospects of civilization. (The Phenomenon of Eurasianism). M., 1993.

2 Vodolagin A., Danilov S. Metaphysical axis of Eurasianism. Tver. 1994.

3 Ivashchenko V.I. Formation of the Eurasian historical concept // "Humanitarian Research".
Almanac. Ussuriysk, 1997. Issue. 1.; Ivashchenko V.I. Socio-historical and ideological determination
Eurasian doctrine // "Humanitarian research". Almanac. Ussuriysk, 1998. Issue 2.; Ivashchenko V.I.
Eurasian concept of Russian history // Third culturological readings at the IPPK MSU. Collection
articles. Series "Sciences of culture and man". M., 1998.

4 Isaev I.A. Ideas of culture and statehood in the interpretation of Eurasianism // Problems of legal and
political ideology. M., 1989.

5 Kvasova I.I. Human values in the Eurasian concept of culture // Actual
problems of the humanities. Abstracts of a scientific conference at the Peoples' Friendship University of Russia.
M., 1995.

6 Linnik Yu.V. Eurasians//North. 1990. No. 12 S. 138-141.

7 Mamontov SP. Eurasianism and Bolshevism // Civilizations and cultures. Russia and the East:
civilizational relations. M., 1994. Issue. 1.

8 Nazarov M.V. Missions of the Russian emigration. Stavropol. 1992.

9 Omelchenko N.A. Disputes about Eurasianism (the experience of historical reconstruction) // Political
research. 1992. No. 3.

10 Orlov V. The hour of geopolitics has struck // Russia. XXI. 1993. No. 1.

11 Sobolev A.V. Poles of Eurasianism//New World. 1991. No. 1.

13 concerns about the geopolitical and cultural-political prospects of Russian civilization. Much more often, Eurasianism is mentioned in negative tones on the pages of ideologically biased "Western" publications, especially in the materials of the journal "Problems of Philosophy". Here, Eurasianism is reproached for “great self-delusion”, “confusion” (L. Luks), “ambiguity” (A. Ignatov), “paganism” (V.K. Kantor), etc. There is also "Orthodox-church" criticism of the Eurasians, originating from the article of their former like-minded G.V. Florovsky "Eurasian temptation" . A position similar to Florovsky's point of view is taken by V.L. Tsymbursky, N.A. Narochnitskaya and K.G. Myalo 2 .

Among the defenders of the Eurasian civilizational and partly cultural and political model, A.S. Panarin and especially B.S. Erasov, who publishes the scientific almanac "Civilization and Culture", on the pages of which the opponents of Eurasianism were repeatedly rebuked. It should be noted that the controversy around the content of the legal and civilizational theories of Eurasianism continues to this day.

Among the dissertations devoted to Eurasianism, one can note the research: “Eurasianism as an ideological and political trend in Russian culture of the 20th century” (Moscow: Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 1992) R.A. Urkhanova, "Social Philosophy of Eurasianism: Origins, Essence, Current State" (Moscow: Russian State Social Institute, 1994) SI. Danilova, "The concept of personality in the philosophy of Eurasianism" (M.: MGU, 1994) Yu.V. Kolesnichenko, “Eurasianism as a phenomenon of Russian culture:

1 Florovsky G.V. Eurasian temptation // Modern notes. 1928. No. 34.

2 Myalo K. Is there a place for Russians in Eurasia? // Literary Russia. 1992. No. 32; Myalo K.G. Russian
question and the Eurasian perspective. M., 1994; Narochnitskaya N.A., Myalo K.G. Once again about the "Eurasian
temptation” // Our contemporary. 1995, p. 4.

3 Erasov B.S. Civilization theory and Eurasian studies // Civilization and cultures.
Scientific almanac. Issue Z. M., 1996. S. 3-28

14 historical and philosophical aspect” (M.: 1993) A.G. Goryaeva, "Historical and philosophical analysis of the Eurasian doctrine" (Moscow: Moscow State University, 1995) SV. Ignatova, “The Political Doctrine of Eurasianism (An Experience of Systemic Reconstruction and Interpretation)” (Vladivostok: 1999) K.V. Pishuna, “Russian legal statehood: the Eurasian project of N.N. Alekseev "(Rostov-on-Don: 2001) SP. Ovchinnikova and “State - legal views of N.N. Alekseev” (Ufa: 2002) I.V. Novozhenina.

All of these works, to one degree or another, address issues related to the development of the ideological and political heritage of the Eurasians, but there is no systematic view of the Eurasian doctrine of the state.

Among the foreign publications devoted to Eurasianism, we note a series of articles by the American historian and literary critic N.V. Ryazanovsky, the works of M. Bass and K. Galperin, and especially the monograph of the German author O. Boss "The Teaching of the Eurasians" 4 . A brief analysis of all these publications is devoted to the article by A.A. Troyanova 5 .

The object of the dissertation research- the genesis and development of the concept of the state in the views of the Eurasians.

The subject of dissertation research- the essence, form and ways of development of the Russian state from the point of view of the Eurasian model of statehood.

The purpose of the dissertation research- scientific analysis

1 Riasanovsky N.V. Prince N.S. Trubetskoy. Europa and Mankaind II Eahrbucherfur Geschichte Osteuropas
Cahice. Wiesbaden, 1964, Band 12, pp. 207-220; Riasanovsky N.V. The Emergence of Eurasianism II California
Slavic studies. California. 1967 Vol. 4. P. 39-72. Riasanovsky N.V. Asia Through Russian Eyes II Russia and Asia.
Essays on the influence of Russia on the Asia Peoples. Stanford. 1972. P. 3-29.

2 Bassin M. Russia between Europe and Asia: The ideological Construction of Geographical Space II Slavic
review. 1991 (Spring).

3 Halperin C. J. G. Vernadsky. Eurasianism, the Mongols and Russia II Slavic Review.1982. Vol. 41. P. 447-
493.

4 Boss O. Die Lehre der Euraiser. Ein Beitrag zur russischer Ideengeschichte des 20. Jahrhunderts. Wiesbaden,
1961.

5 Troyanov A.A. The study of Eurasianism in modern foreign literature (Short review) // Beginnings.
1992. No. 4. pp. 99-102.

15 of the Eurasian concept of Russian statehood, in the framework of studying its essence, form and ways of development, taking into account modern problems of the theory and history of state and law.

To achieve this goal, in this work we set the following main goals:

comparative analysis of the theoretical origins of the Eurasian concept, the study of their conceptual connection with the ideological views on the state of the main ideological schools of the XIX century;

disclosure of the Eurasian understanding of the essence of the state in the form of defining the functions of the "state of truth";

studying the views of Eurasians on the problem of the genesis of the original form of the Old Russian state, with subsequent evolution in the Middle Ages;

analysis of the assessment by Eurasians of a new form of development of the Russian state, which began with the October Revolution of 1917;

study of the Eurasian view on the development of the Russian state and the transformation of the Soviet model of the state;

consideration of the state ideal of the Eurasians and the project of the future state structure of Russia.

Methodological and theoretical foundations of dissertation research. While working on the dissertation, the principles of historicism, determinism, pluralism, objectivity, as well as general scientific and private scientific methods were used: historical-comparative, problem-theoretical, systemic, chronological, a combination of civilizational and institutional approaches.

Source base of the dissertation research consists of published works of Eurasians, as well as analytical and critical publications of contemporaries of Eurasianism. In particular, the study is based on the analysis of the works of the founders of Eurasianism - N.S. Trubetskoy, P.N. Savitsky, N.N. Alekseeva, L.P. Karsavina, G.V.

Vernadsky.

Scientific novelty of the dissertation research is that for the first time in the system of political and legal knowledge, the state-legal ideas of the Eurasians are conceptually presented in the form of their views on the essence, form and ways of development of the Russian state. The concept of the state in the teachings of the Eurasianists is considered for the first time in a complex system of philosophical, political and historical ideas and is evaluated from the point of view of modern historical and legal knowledge.

Basic provisions for defense are as follows:

The ideological premises of Eurasianism, as an ideology, and the concept of the state in the teachings of the Eurasians, firstly, are within the framework of understanding the place of Russia in the system of relations between East and West, secondly, they are created by the impulse of the conceptual dispute between Westerners and Slavophiles, thirdly, they are mainly in worldview field of the ideology of Slavophilism, as well as F.M. Dostoevsky, K.N. Leontieva, N.Ya. Danilevsky and others, fourthly, based on the views of G.V.F. Hegel on the state, is an alternative version of the Western European version of the legal state and the legal ideal.

The understanding of the essence of the state in the Eurasian doctrine is based on several provisions: firstly, a necessary prerequisite for institutional improvement is the problem of the spiritual perfection of the individual, which is revealed in the original development of national culture, and secondly, the value of the state is determined by the ability to be a form that ensures the development of an original culture underlying at the heart of the mental dimension of statehood, thirdly, the desire for the Russian ideal of the “state of truth”, as a state that meets the beginning of eternity, justice and the moral whole.

At the heart of the Eurasian idea of the origins of Russian statehood, its genesis is the idea that the original form of the Russian state was historically born from a combination of the Tatar-Mongolian tradition of a centralized state with the tradition of Church-Byzantine Orthodox statehood.

The ideology of Eurasianism was one of the intellectual reflections on the event of the October Revolution of 1917, which was perceived by Eurasians as a logical milestone in the history of the Russian state, opening the way for the formation of a new culture, new forms of state and law in Russia. Despite the ambiguous assessment of the 1917 revolution by the Eurasianists, it, in their opinion, gave Russia-Eurasia the last chance to preserve the Eurasian culture and statehood in opposition to the aggressive West.

The Eurasian transformation of the Soviet model of the state, which determined the further development of the Russian state, provided for the rejection of unacceptable elements in the Soviet statehood in the form of Marxist ideology, proletarian internationalism, "militant economism", socialism with the absolutization of public property; and the introduction of Eurasian elements into the Soviet system in the form of the Eurasian ruling selection, the party, "general Eurasian nationalism", the implementation of the concept of "subordinate economy", the third way in the economy according to the formula "neither capitalism nor socialism".

The Eurasian project of the future state structure of Russia is the conceptual unity of the following basic concepts: "ideocracy", "democracy", "guarantee state", "social and technical radicalism"; as a result of which the future Eurasian system can be called demotic ideocracy or ideocratic demotic, realizing originality in the development of further development of the Russian state.

Scientific and practicalsignificancedissertation

research lies in the desire to expand the field of knowledge of the subject of the theory of state and law of the Eurasians, the history of legal doctrines. The main conclusions of this study can be used for further research of a state-legal nature, as well as in teaching the history of legal doctrines, the theory of state and law, and for creating teaching aids.

Approbation of the results of the dissertation research. The dissertation was discussed at the Department of Theory and History of State and Law_Ural Academy of Public Administration. Various aspects of the dissertation research were reflected in the author's speeches at the following scientific forums: International Scientific and Practical Conference "The Role of Border Regions in the Development of the Eurasian Space". (Kostanay, April 22-23, 2004); International Eurasian Scientific Forum: "Peoples of Eurasia: Culture and Society", dedicated to the 10th anniversary of the Eurasian Initiative of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan N.A. Nazarbayev and the Year of Russia in Kazakhstan (Astana, October 1-2, 2004); International Scientific and Practical Conference "Extremism as a Social Phenomenon" (Kurgan, December 1-2, 2005); round table at KSU A. Baitursynov "World against violence and terrorism" (Kostanay, 2005); IV International Scientific and Practical Conference of KRSU “Universal and National in Philosophy” (Bishkek, May 25-26, 2006); symposium with international participation: V Slavic Scientific Council "Urals in the Dialogue of Cultures" "Orthodoxy in the Urals: the historical aspect, the relevance of the development and strengthening of writing and culture" (Chelyabinsk, May 24-25, 2007); International scientific-practical conference "Identity and dialogue of cultures in the era of globalization" (Issyk-Kul, August 27-29, 2007).

19 is dictated by the logic of the study. The dissertation consists of an introduction, three chapters (two paragraphs each), a conclusion and a list of references and references.

Ideological premises of the Eurasian doctrine of the state

Our study must begin with an examination of the ideological origins and spiritual premises of the Eurasian doctrine. The study of the genesis of Eurasianism shows its deep connection with the previous Russian spiritual tradition. At the same time, the problem is rather complicated, since each of the thinkers of the Eurasian direction, within the framework of a common tradition, had his own interpretation of the special path of development of Russia. In this regard, N.S. Trubetskoy, P.N. Savitsky, L.P. Karsavin used various traditions of domestic and foreign thought. So, G.V. Vernadsky was close to the works of Russian historians of the turn of the century (V.V. Klyuchevsky, S.F. Platonov and others), and L.P. Karsavin relied heavily on the Western European spiritual tradition.

The Eurasian concept was highly original, and even some aspects of borrowing were acts of independent creativity. The Eurasians themselves recognized themselves as "being in a certain Orthodox-Russian spiritual succession", and it included the Slavophiles, Gogol, Dostoevsky, Leontiev. The feeling of belonging to a certain tradition gradually grew among the Eurasians, because their first collections were their personal reaction to the Russian revolution, based on a personal sense of the catastrophe that had happened. And only then the Eurasians remembered the tradition. As they wrote: "For ourselves, our historical ties have been clarified to a great extent through subsequent, and not preliminary comparisons." And yet, the Eurasians were aware of themselves as the successors of the spiritual and scientific-theoretical traditions. In the context of the study of the political heritage of Eurasianism, it is advisable to turn to Russian social thought of the 16th-17th centuries, Slavophilism and neo-Slavophilism, the philosophy of the “common Cause” of N.F. Fedorov.

Thus, in this section, the historical method will be applied, requiring the study of phenomena in their sequential temporal development, determining the connection between the past, present and future.

According to N.N. Alekseev, Russia in its Moscow period of history up to the 2nd half of the 17th century was a kind of true world in itself, the spiritual prerequisites of which were precisely “Eurasian”. The problems of the Eurasian existence of Russia to a certain extent were outlined already in the treatises of domestic authors of the period of strengthening the Russian centralized state. The same N.N. Alekseev called the creative heritage of the early Russian publicists a reflection of the “Russian (political primitive”). The content of their teachings reflected the spirit of that direction of social thought that separated the secular and ecclesiastical spheres. Nil Sorsky. The central idea of the non-possessors was in the "symphony" of spiritual and secular power, and not in their mutual absorption. It was borrowed from the writings of the Byzantine canonists. The self-restraint of the state and the church contained the potential of the idea of a legal state with its separation of powers, an idea actively defended by the Eurasians "The latter preferred Nil Sorsky in his opposition to the Josephite concept of unlimited monarchy, which was in demand in the political theory of Ivan the Terrible. The Eurasianists pointed out the absurdity of recognizing Josephism as the only "people's" political doctrine. At the same time, one should not assume that the Trans-Volga elders acted as apologists for any political passivity. The credo of Nil Sorsky is an Orthodox legal state that allows "liberties", a certain respect for human rights. The Church, on the other hand, should be placed “on the first spiritual beauty”, so that “her pastors would become true owners of a purely spiritual authority, restraining all sorts of illegal aspirations of a secular state”1. In this case, the Church would become the moral leader of the state.

In the Eurasian opposition of the Josephites and the Trans-Volga elders, one can feel the opposition of two moral orientations - the Old Testament and the New Testament. At the same time, the Eurasianists extended these orientations to politics. The political law of the ancient Jews is the law of retribution, punishment for the slightest disobedience. Enemies here deserve only "perfect hatred" and the ruler must be able to use "divine cunning." The god of the Nile of Sorsky, on the contrary, is merciful, benevolent to his subjects. The ruler must be correspondingly meek and truthful. An Orthodox tsar must rule with the "rod of truth". Moreover, this mercy, as N.N. Alekseev writes, was "necessary not only in domestic, but also in foreign policy"3. At the same time, unlike the nonpossessors, the Eurasians did not associate the form of government of the "state of truth" exclusively with the monarchy, emphasizing that legal issues related to the establishment of the "state of truth" are of secondary importance; a more important place is occupied by the connection of the subject of state policy with the very nature of this policy.According to Mstislav Shakhmatov, who is close to the Eurasians, the “state of truth” is not only an external institution, but at the same time also an institution that “is inside us.” For the well-being of the “state of truth” it is not enough that the external, state institutions are immortal, but “it is even more important that the institutions that exist within us are immortal” .

Eurasian understanding of the essence and functions of the "state of truth"

So, in the previous paragraph, it was established that when referring to modern political and legal theories of the state, some paradigmatic one-sidedness, monism of the presented doctrines is revealed. This situation is explained by the fact that the modern theory of the state was built in the period of European history, the distinguishing feature of which is the common ideological ground, which was created by the teachings of natural law, which were widely spread in the West, mainly in the Romanesque and Anglo-Saxon world. The European state world has developed and in many ways still continues to take shape under the influence of the liberal ideas of the English and French revolutions.

These revolutionary, liberal-democratic ideas recognized as fair and valid only that state, which is based on an agreement between citizens and those in power or among themselves. Proceeding from this, it followed that the power to which the consent of the majority of those subject was given is legal, and in the first theories it was positioned that such consent could be given once and for all (Montesquieu), and subsequently a logical conclusion was made that the right of agreement is inalienable and that every act of power must be subject to an act of consent.

Thus, in place of the power union, the state, an atomic personality with its interests was put. It was not in the interests of such a person to achieve any social ideal. The individual tore himself away from society and the state, became an independent, sovereign, autarkic entity. The nation has become a conglomeration of empowered individual individuals, collections of atomic personalities. These individuals were purely abstract, determined neither by historical conditions, nor by social differences, nor by any other position in society. The interests of such a person displaced, overshadowed all other interests and goals in the idea of the state, thereby relativizing its goals and objectives.

First of all, we observe such relativism in the system of a liberal state, where the political union acts only as a “night watchman” and limits its activities to providing protection in case of violation of the interests of citizens.

A slightly different direction of the German law school is based on the axiom of recognizing the state as a special personality. However, the gradual development of the legal theory of the state led to the erosion of the remnants of etatism. The state-personality gradually became only a fiction, a scientific abstraction with no real life.

The identity of the state has turned into an auxiliary scientific representation, into a model for the personification of legal norms, the establishment of the law in force. At the same time, the normative theory of the state tried to separate the “norm” from reality, to transfer it from the world of “existing” to the world of the unreal “duty”.

Thus, the state has become a set of norms, the personification of the rule of law. Some important elements reflecting the reality of state phenomena were gradually ousted from the concept of the state. The results of applying this approach are understandable: by identifying the state with the rule of law and overshadowing the state by law, it led to the loss of the essence of goal-setting and goal-fulfillment of the state, to the relativism of the supreme power. Similar results followed logically from the essence of Marxism: “the unjustified narrowing of the concept of the state in the system of Marxism and the resulting denial of state registrations in the future socialist society were the causes of a peculiar loss of a sense of state reality among modern European socialists and the popular masses led by them. The state has become a historical category, the consciousness of the necessity of state existence has been lost.

Power relations and the very idea of power underwent transformation along with other cultural heritage. For many centuries there existed that leading stratum of Western society, which was called the feudal aristocracy and nobility. The processes of change observed in it did not change its essence as a whole. In the rapid revolutionary process, this layer was supplanted by a new class, the bourgeoisie. But as soon as the bourgeoisie emerged as the leading group, the ideological foundations of its existence were subjected to merciless criticism. And at the same time, a new social stratum appeared on the arena of history, claiming to predominate in the state - the industrial proletariat. All these processes took shape over the course of several decades, and this could not but influence the very idea of power.

The instability of the "leaders" cast doubt on the idea of power in general - a crisis of power arose. “Faith in the universally accepted and revered principle of authority has disappeared, the state of the prevailing fragility everywhere forced to listen to the crazy ideas of all the perpetrators of coups and to be carried away by love for senseless adventures”

The problem of the genesis of the Old Russian state and its development in the Middle Ages

Eurasian historiosophy distinguishes several key periods in the history of Russia: the genesis of the Old Russian state and its development in the Middle Ages, the period of the revolution of 1917, together with the post-revolutionary period. This periodization stems primarily from the fact that understanding the issues related to the Russian revolution, with its necessity, required and still requires the solution of many “passing” problems, the search for answers to the traditional questions of the Russian public consciousness: “Who are we?”, “Who is to blame? ", "What to do?" and so on. Even before the Eurasianists, these questions were the subject of sharp theoretical battles, in particular between the Slavophiles and the Westernizers. But if for many social and political movements in Russia the question is “What to do?” was the most important in a series of issues requiring immediate resolution, followed by the importance of the question "Who is to blame?", And the question "Who are we?" relegated to the background, then for Eurasians it acquires the meaning of a kind of root cause, knowing which, you can build a deterministic chain and predict the future of Russia. Eurasian thinkers proceeded not from Chaadaev's thesis, which states that we do not know and therefore do not have our history, but from the postulate, according to which we do not know our true history. Being a prisoner of Eurocentric reflections, we use perverted, untrue historical knowledge, and the latter, turning into clichés and stereotypes, lead to illegal actions that contradict our essence and, therefore, are doomed to failure from the very beginning. Not knowing our true past, we doom ourselves to failure in the present and catastrophe in the future - such is the main leitmotif of the epistemological aspect of Eurasian historiosophy. Such an approach, according to the deep conviction of the Eurasianists, is extremely important not only for the restoration of historical truth, but also in practical terms. It was the Eurasians who were the first to connect the questions of Russia's future in a concentrated form with the problem of Russian self-identification. Understanding the place, role and purpose of the country is the most important prerequisite for maintaining the integrity, ensuring the security and well-being of both the country itself and its citizens. That is why the Eurasianists are focusing their attention on the question of the origins of Russian statehood, its genesis.

This formulation of the problem remains of paramount importance for the responsible choice of the strategic path of development of modern Russia.

The main proposition, fundamentally different from traditional historiosophy, was Trubetskoy’s shocking statement: “The notion that the later Russian state is a continuation of Kievan Rus is fundamentally wrong.” ”, and L. Gumilyov, who questioned the very concept of the “Mongol-Tatar yoke”. In 1480, there was no liberation from the Mongol-Tatar yoke, but the replacement of the Horde Khan by the Moscow Tsar with the transfer of the Khan's headquarters to Moscow. "The conclusion is rather strange from the point of view of traditional historiosophy. The arguments of Trubetskoy, Savitsky, Vernadsky, in our opinion, are very reasonable, we will consider separately.Here it is important to emphasize the paramount importance in Eurasian historiosophy, in the entire Eurasian teaching of the problem of the Mongol-Tatar period in the history of Russia.

The Eurasian characterization of the Mongolian period has always been and remains today one of the most favorite objects of criticism of the Eurasianists by their opponents. In this regard, they were accused of absolutization of the Turanian element. “Eurasian studies”, “Eurasian fantasies” are by no means the most harsh definitions addressed to Eurasians. On this issue, a sharp ideological (whether we like it or not) struggle does not stop, bringing ideological grounds for practical, primarily geopolitical, actions of various socio-political forces. Today, when there is a search for a new ideology of Russia, the analysis of turning points in Russian history is of paramount importance. The originality and dissimilarity of the historiosophical constructions of the Eurasians, especially with regard to the Mongol-Tatar period in the history of Russia, the scientific nature and objectivity of their conclusions are indicated by domestic researchers who not only share their views, but also adhere to a Western orientation. The idol of modern Westerners N.A. Berdyaev was forced to emphasize the originality possessed by the "Turanian-Tatar concept of Russian history in Prince. N.S. Trubetskoy"1, although it is immediately stipulated that the Eurasians are too fond of the Turanian element in Russian culture. “Sometimes it seems that they are close not to Russian, but to Asian, Eastern, Tatar, Mongolian in Russian. They prefer Genghis Khan to St. Vladimir. For them, the Muscovite kingdom is a baptized Tatar kingdom, and the Muscovite tsar is a justified Tatar khan... The love for Islam, the propensity for Mohammedanism is too great among the Eurasians. The Mohammedans are closer to the Eurasian heart than the Christians of the West. Eurasians are ready to create a united front with all East Asian, non-Christian denominations against the Christian denominations of the West.

Eurasians can, of course, be called idea romantics, idealists, and even idealistic utopians. But, giving priority, and unconditional priority, to the idea of spirituality, they understood that it was impossible to make a revolution in consciousness, to convince the multimillion-strong masses of the primacy of spirituality with the help of theory alone, even the most attractive one. They understood that in order to fulfill the tasks set, material resources and a political mechanism were needed - the Eurasian Party, which would carry out practical work.

Some Eurasians, including Trubetskoy, insisted that their activities should be mainly theoretical and educational, but most Eurasians were convinced of the need to engage in practical organizational work and political activity. “Eurasianism is imbued with movement. It is all in becoming, in effort, in creativity. Dialectic is the favorite word of the Eurasians. It is for them a symbol and a way of movement. Dialectics, on the other hand, requires not only the creation of a new synthetic ideology, but also its inextricable relationship with practice, primarily with political practice. This requires the creation of a new political party, which will become the bearer and material embodiment of the new ideology. This party must take the place of the Communist Party, which is the bearer of the communist ideology hostile to Russia. "This party should, instead of the Bolsheviks, become the main and guiding force for the new ruling stratum that has already been created in Russia." One of the program documents of the Eurasianists emphasizes that this new Eurasian party, built on a new Eurasian ideology and designed to replace the Bolshevik party, will be fundamentally different from European political parties. This is a special kind of party, “governing and not sharing its power with any other party, even excluding the existence of other similar parties. She is a state-ideological union; but at the same time it spreads the network of its organization throughout the country and descends to the bottom, not coinciding with the state apparatus, and is determined not by the function of management, but by ideology. Formally, something similar to this is Italian fascism, devoid, however, of a deep ideology; but, of course, the Bolsheviks themselves provide a greater analogy. The possibility of such a party is connected not only with the fact that it is conceived as part of the same ruling stratum, of which the Bolsheviks are now a part, but also with the fact that the forms of democracy that currently exist in Russia (the system of Soviets with multi-stage elections) are preserved. After all, it is they who eliminate the dangers of Western democracy, i.e. the dominance of a group of professional politicians and the multi-party system that this explains.

The teaching of the Eurasianists on the national question, which becomes especially acute in the period of social storms and cataclysms, organically fits into the concept of a symphonic personality. A single state ideology, by definition, must also be an ideology of national catholicity, for each nation is a symphonic personality, which in the hierarchy of symphonic personalities follows the catholicity of the state. Based on this, we can confidently assert that the attitude of the founders of the Eurasian doctrine to the fact that in a number of subjects of the Russian Federation they fought for the recognition of the priority of the laws of the subjects of the Federation over national laws would be extremely negative.

Eurasians consider individual nations as symphonic personalities, which in their totality quite naturally form a single supranational union. The basis of the supranational union is made up of a common local development, which determines the geopolitical unity of the nationalities of Russia-Eurasia; commonality of ideals in the construction of social life, found with particular clarity in revolutionary quests and pointing to spiritual unity; common historical destiny, different from the fate of European and Asian peoples.

Proceeding from these principles, as well as from the “geopolitical indivisibility” of the nationalities that form Russia-Eurasia, the Eurasians at the same time recognize and insist on the fundamental equality of nations in moral and spiritual terms. “All the nations that form Russia-Eurasia create a multinational “cultural personality”, which has the quality that its culture does not cancel individual national cultures, but absorbs them and, on the basis of them, forms the highest, most complete and characteristic culture for all nationalities of Eurasia. called Eurasian.

With regard to political relations between the various nations that make up the Eurasian state, then "Eurasianism strives for the development of the current forms of the Soviet Federation."

Problems of Society and Communication in the Teaching of Eurasianism

G. V. ZHDANOVA

The phenomenon of Eurasianism is by no means reduced to a politological concept that serves the political alignments that have developed after the civil war among the Russian emigration. Its conceptual roots are much deeper. This can be seen when considering the Eurasian social constructions. Among modern studies of the last decade, considering the Eurasian current, one can mainly note two trends in determining the date of the emergence of this current. A number of authors (V.Ya. Pashchenko, S.M. Polovinkin, L.V. Ponomareva, A.I. Sobolev and others) associate this date with the publication in 1920 in Sofia of the book of Prince N.S. Trubetskoy titled "Europe and Humanity". This book does not yet mention the term "Eurasianism", there is no specifically Eurasian analysis of the socio-political processes in Russia, it does not report on the ways of transforming Russian society, there is nothing concrete about countries and peoples. Nevertheless, the book lays down the methodology of a new concept, formulates the principles and models of socio-historical research that are applicable not to individual countries, but to the relations of cultures and civilizations. A different point of view is shared by most modern researchers (among them M.G. Vandalkovskaya, I.V. Vilenta, L.I. Novikova, I.N. Sizemskaya, N.I. Tolstoy, R.A. Urkhanova, etc.). In their opinion, the date of the emergence of Eurasianism should be shifted a year later, thus linking it with the appearance in August 1921 in Sofia of the collective work of the founders of a new ideological current of socio-political thought under the general title “Exodus to the East. Premonitions and Accomplishments. The affirmation of the Eurasians". Both the term “Eurasianism” itself and the foundations of an unconventional emphasis in the analysis of the historical development of Russia, expressed in the very title of the collection, new projects for the transformation of Russia - all this was included in this collection, therefore this point of view seems to be quite reasonable.

The name of the current was proposed by P.N. Savitsky and is connected with the desire of the Eurasians to explain the historical and cultural originality, the special path of Russia from the features of its “location” and “place of development”. “Russia occupies the main space of the lands of Eurasia,” the conclusion that its lands do not fall apart between two continents, but rather constitute some third and independent continent, has not only geographical significance. Since we attribute to concepts

“Europe” and “Asia” also have some cultural and historical content, we think of it as something specific circle of “European” and “Asian-Asian” cultures, the designation “Eurasia” acquires the meaning of a concise cultural and historical characteristic”1.

Among the founders of Eurasianism, modern authors primarily single out the philologist N.S. Trubetskoy (1890-1938) as the founder and spiritual leader of the Eurasian movement, the "Eurasian Marx". As the second figure of the founders of the current, the “Eurasian Engels”2, A.G. Dugin calls P.N. Savitsky (1895-1968). He was a brilliant economist, geographer, historian, culturologist, diplomat, fluent in six European languages.

The creators of the Eurasian concept also include the outstanding art critic, music theorist, aesthetics, publicist P.P. Suvchinsky (1892-1985) and a prominent religious thinker, philosopher, scientist G.V. Florovsky (1893-1979). The name of the priest A.A. Lieven (Andrey's father) is not listed among the authors of the first Eurasian collection "Exodus to the East ...", meanwhile, as noted by R.A. Urkhanov, he took an active part in its organization3.

The Eurasian movement included philosophers and publicists - L.P. Karsavin, whom V.V. Vanchugov calls the “Socrates” of the Eurasian movement4, V.N. Ilyin, B.N. Shiryaev, A.V. Kartashev, historians and literary critics - G.V. Vernadsky, D.P. Svyatopolk-Mirsky, V.P. Nikitin, writers - V.N. Ivanov, E. Khara-Davan, lawyer N.N. Alekseev, orientalists - Ya.A. Blomberg, N.P. Tol and many other researchers. For some time, the movement was supported by the famous culturologist P.M. Bicilli and one of the greatest Russian philosophers S.L. Frank and others

The Eurasian program assumed the construction of a new "synthetic" science, the highest expression of which was the personology of N.S. Trubetskoy. Trubetskoy saw positivism and the idea of progress in "Romano-Germanic science", to which he opposed a more complex holistic approach generated by the "Eurasian" way of thinking with its characteristic concepts of originality and the special logic of individual systems. It is with this difference in epistemological worlds that Trubetskoy connects, for example, the "anarchy of French linguistics." His scientific program is at the same time a program of struggle: “We must completely get rid of the mode of thought characteristic of Romano-Germanic science”5. He describes this "mode of thought" as a rationalistic, analytical and utilitarian science.

R.O. Yakobson also often proclaimed the originality of "Russian science". He compares Saussure's doctrine of diachrony with "the European ideology that prevailed in the second half of the 19th century", which is characterized by the image of "mechanical accumulation, due to chance and heterogeneous factors"7. In the same work, he speaks of the "Russian linguistic tradition"8, of Russian biology and geography9 as

1 Savitsky P.N. Eurasianism // Eurasian Timepiece. Book. 4. Berlin, 1925. S. 6.

2 See: Dugin A.G. Overcoming the West // Trubetskoy N. The Legacy of Genghis Khan. M., 1999. S. 5.

3 See: Urkhanova R.A. To the criticism of Western culture in the work of Eurasians // Philosophy of Russia in the 19th - early 20th centuries: continuity of ideas and the search for originality. M., 1991. S. 120.

4 See: Vanchugov VV. The Status of Philosophy in the Eurasian Movement // Eurasian Idea and Modernity. M., 2002. S. 107.

5 Trubetskoy N.S. Europe and humanity. Sofia, 1920. S. 15.

6 See: N.S. Trubetskoy. The Tower of Babel and the confusion of languages // Evraziyskiy vremennik. Book. 3. Berlin, 1923, pp. 114-115.

7 Jakobson R. Remarques sur l "évolution phonologique du russe compare a celle des autres langues slaves // Travaux du Cercle linguistique de Prague-II // Selected writings, 1. 1971. P. 110.

8 Ibid. S. 7.

9 Ibid. S. 110.

fields of knowledge, which are characterized by the rejection of causal explanation and the search for internal laws of development. In 1929, he writes that the category of mechanistic causality is alien to Russian science”10.

From the point of view of the Eurasianists, ideology leads the way, and science follows it: science is pushed forward not by discoveries of new facts, but by a new look at old facts. Eurasians believe in the possibility of a single knowledge within the framework of a single ideology. Eurasianism as a scientific discipline involves the study of the totality of characteristics (material and spiritual) of Eurasia - a subject that is considered to exist before any study. Eurasian thinkers are alien to the idea that “the point of view creates the object”, they are alien to the falsificationist epistemology of Popper's type: the main premise is that Eurasia simply exists. Thus, the researcher does not need to struggle with the proof of its existence, he only needs to confirm by all possible means the predetermined thesis about the existence of this harmonic and organic integrity.

Trubetskoy subordinates his entire system of scientific disciplines to personology, which is called upon to “correlate” them11. Thus, a system of two correlated series of sciences arises, in which, along with descriptive sciences, there are interpretive sciences that make it possible to understand the facts under study12, to discover their hidden meaning, not limited to the description of phenomena. Only on the basis of all the sciences taken together can an "exhaustive theory of personality" emerge.

This synthesis of the sciences can be achieved only through the new scientific discipline of "personology", the only one capable of harmonizing the sciences with each other. Without it, only an "encyclopedia" of sciences is possible, a chaotic conglomeration of more or less scientific ideas. The absence of such a "personology" is the greatest shortcoming of Western thought.

The essence of the main position of the Eurasian personology is that the human community, as an individual, should be considered, first of all, as a person, and between one and the other there are only differences in degree: in both cases, all aspects of the personality are interconnected and form an organic (at best, even a harmonious ) integrity: “There is no fundamental difference between an individual person and an organic multi-human personality in this respect, but there is only a difference in the degree of complexity of the corresponding phenomena14.

In contrast to the individual taken in isolation as a pure abstraction, the individual is born into the community. Consequently, the state should not be an abstract product, an arithmetic sum of disparate, separate individual wills: it is a union of "symphonic" groups, gathered into a higher unity by a common Faith.

Thus, in Trubetskoy's concept, tension arises between the requirement for the completeness of the individual and the impersonality of philosophy, due to historical and cultural determinism. His program of maintaining the indecomposable self-sufficiency of each consciousness is undermined by the concepts of "level" or "cohesion", as well as the indistinguishability between the individual and the community: the identity of the community is provided at the expense of the identity of the individual. In general, Trubetskoy fits into the personalism characteristic of that time, but in the end he paradoxically shifts to the pole of the impersonal.

10 Jacobson P.O. On the Modern Perspectives of Russian Slavic Studies // Yakobson R. Texts, Documents, Researches. M.: RGGU, 1999. S. 24.

11 Trubetskoy N.S. Introduction // To the problem of Russian self-knowledge. Paris, 1927. S. 7.

14 Trubetskoy N. S. The decline of creativity // Eurasian Chronicle. Book. 12. Edition of the Eurasians, 1937. P. 10.

One of the sources of Trubetskoy's personology is Christian reflections on the Trinity (trinitarian divine nature) and on the incarnation (about a person who has a dual nature - divine and human), which are especially important for the Orthodox world.

Following the socio-philosophical tradition of the XIX century

For further reading of the article, you must purchase the full text. Articles are sent in the format PDF to the email address provided during payment. Delivery time is less than 10 minutes. Cost per article 150 rubles.