CC BY
21DOI
y^K 930
S. V. Sinyakov, A. N. Nechuhrin
Philosophical ideas and principles in historical cognition
Philosophical ideas and principles are the mechanisms of connecting ideological values with the subject and methodological means of historical cognition. Among the factors, which determine historical cognition, it is necessary to distinguish philosophy as a special worldview cognition. However, it should be noted that the functions of philosophy are much broader, than just to be a theoretical and methodological prerequisite of scientific cognition in general and historical cognition in particular. as you know, philosophy is the theoretical core of the worldview, the spiritual quintessence of its period. It synthesizes in the most general form of cognition, morality, hope, including the faith of people, peoples and all mankind. Philosophy is not only the self-knowledge of science, it is a theoretical reflection on the foundations of the whole culture. Its tasks include: analysis of the ratio of
| spiritual and material problems of existence, the meaning of human life,
«
s «
o
freedom, etc. As the soul of culture, the enduring value of human civilization, every great philosophy carries an eternal content. "The philosophical | foundations of science should not be identified with the bulk of philosophi-
cal cognition. From a large field of philosophical problems and solutions arising in the culture of each historical era, science uses only some ideas
tr1 S
O
o and principles as justifying structures", writes V. S. Stepin1. Philosophical
=g systems and concepts cannot be considered without taking into account
g their connection with those or other prevailing attitudes in society that
\o
permeate all spheres of spiritual activity and leave their mark on the products of spiritual culture.
In the philosophical and methodological literature in recent decades, carefully and comprehensively studied philosophical and conceptual foundations of scientific knowledge (V. S. Stepin, V. S. Shvyrev, A. A. Nikiforov, A. M. Korshunov, B. G. Yu-din, etc.). The results of this work showed that scientific knowledge is loaded with various social and cultural components, human relations, emerging between scientists in the process of creating ideas, hypotheses concepts2. At the same time, the question of the features and mechanisms of socio-cultural, philosophical and ideological conditionality of the social and humanitarian complex of Sciences in General and historical cognition in particular remained insufficiently investigated. The task of this article is to clarify the specifics of the impact of philosophical ideas, concepts and principles on conceptual construction, categorical apparatus methodology and subject field in historical science. This direction of analysis provides an opportunity to take a fresh look at the structure and organization of historical research, opens up other ways and possibilities of studying the regulators and incentives of cognitive activity of the historian, the conditions of choice and preference of theoretical and methodological means of cognition and direction of research.
Philosophical ideas and principles justify the ideals and norms, ontological principles of history and ensure the inclusion of historical ideas in the spiritual culture of society. The philosophical foundations of science in a broad sense include the whole set of fundamental ideological, epistemological and methodological principles, as well as the laws of the theory on which the entire system of knowledge of this science and the picture of reality developed in it. The inclusion of philosophical ideas in science as its prerequisites can be carried out in two different forms like the action of spontaneous philosophical prerequisites and as the implementation of philosophical concepts created by professionals, which influence the subsequent course of development of science. The philosophical foundations of science themselves have three important sources and determinants of development: their own history and theory of this science; interdisciplinary integration of sciences on the basis of mutual enrichment of their theories and methods; the increasing degree of penetration of philosophical methodology into the worldview and structure of scientific theories, methods and thinking style of science. Philosophical ideas participate in the formation of historical concepts in a variety of ways, but primarily through the conceptual 21 means of historical science, as the latter depend on which philosophical and socio- "g logical categories become the theoretical and cognitive apparatus of research. This g does not mean that other components of historical cognition (fact, problem, source) ^ should not be compared with philosophical and methodological guidelines. But the -a most serious penetration into the internal logic of historical thinking philosophical ideas and principles are carried out through theoretical and methodological means of historical research. First of all, they should be the object of analysis in terms of the J3 impact of philosophical ideas on them. §
Categorical apparatus of historical science is a tool for the production of new knowledge, an instrument of theoretical consciousness of the historian. Therefore, g
the development and change of systems of historical cognition from this point of view is a consequence of changes in categorical structures, each of which has its own semantic field of scientific explanations, its composition and method of problem formulation. Ideological conditionality of the categorical structure of historical cognition, being fixed in the fundamental philosophical and sociological theories, turns into ideals, norms and goals of historical research of a particular period. Categorical system of thinking in historical science is a synthesis of philosophical, economic, sociological and historical concepts. But at the same time, it remains a protective mechanism that protects a certain direction of research from the influence of other scientific systems, but at the same time, complicating the vision of new problems. Let us consider more fully the process of formation of new concepts related to the philosophical conditionality of historical cognition.
Historical concepts, being the result of the development of both historical and social science knowledge, at the same time serve as the main tool of cognition of the past. The nature of historical concepts is determined both by the peculiarities of the subject area of historical cognition and by the system of philosophical categories. The source of the content of historical concepts is the past itself as an object of cognition, and the whole set of theoretical tools of modern science. In the formation of historical concepts involved the most mature, developed forms of social and philosophical cognition. Philosophical categories, being extremely broad, fundamental concepts, represent the most stable moments in cognition, the most important results, and at the same time the basic points of development of science and spiritual culture of society. Actually historical concepts are not able to take into account all the specifics and complexity of the historical past, a variety of historical conditions, and this determines the need to make their content philosophical and axiological information. The philosophical saturation of the categorical system of historical thinking is theoretically fruitful for the historian and leads
5 him to the deepening of historical cognition. The philosophical conditionality of the conceptual system of historical science is supplemented by cultural determinate^ tion, since the categorical model of history, taken in its specific content, includes « the foundations of the culture of a certain era. Penetrating all historical cognition, jH the concepts of philosophy and culture act as deep research programs that provide % a connection of historical facts, their explanation, with the worldview of each his-J§ torical period. In the process of historical cognition, a significant part of the pre-
6 viously developed historical concepts is revised, partially discarded and partially HU retained. This happens not only in accordance with the new data found in the £ sources, but also in connection with the development and change of philosophical s cognition. The change of historical concepts in general form fixes the change in the § existing ideas about the subject and tasks of historical science, as well as the main ^ features and peculiarities of modern society, the specifics of the spiritual world,
the values of various social and national groups to which historians belong. The h remaining historical concepts are filled with new content, concretized, which al-c
lows, thanks to them, to reveal new features, new moments of the historical past. "The introduction of new categories is the most important innovation in the methodology of history. Their hierarchization and analysis of interaction constitute an important problem of historical science, the solution of which should radically transform the practice of research"3. Having conceptual stability, ideological certainty, historical concepts and categories, unlike natural science concepts, are not so rigid generalizing character and can be applied to the study of various fragments of history. For scientific areas and schools in historiography, as a rule, characterized by the use of "iconic" for them concepts related to worldview. For example, in French historiography of the 19th century (F. Guizot, F.-O. Minier, O. Thierry) the concept of "nation" occupied a central place and was widely used, and in the German — the same period (L. von Ranke, T. Mommsen, J. G. Droysen, G. Siebel, G. von Treitschke) — the concept of "state".
At the same time, it is necessary to take into account the specifics of historical cognition, its focus on the study of individual, unique social phenomena of the past. Otherwise it is possible to come to an obvious simplification — to consider the content of the historical concept as a set of features repeating in the phenomena. Historical concepts and categories, on the one hand, logically record the general and repeated, on the other hand, must simultaneously express the specifics of historical types of culture, peoples and eras in different periods of historical development. Historical concepts should be specific, meaningful and flexible, especially when it comes to their own micro-concepts used by historical science along with macro-concepts that connect it with philosophy and theoretical social science. The analysis of the history of historical science in this aspect allows a more thorough analysis of the relationship, the interaction of philosophy and history.
Let us consider the process of changing the conceptual apparatus of historical science in the transition from one to other philosophical prerequisites of historical research. For example, the conceptual apparatus of historical science, created in the USSR by the 1970s, on the basis of the philosophy of historical materialism, formed during the active discussion of philosophical and theoretical problems of historical research, dominated until the end of the 1980s. O-
The predominance of "social history", which focused on social groups, their rela- ^ tionships, their role in economic, cultural and social processes, was characterized by a wide use of theories and concepts of social sciences. Analyzing the conceptual appa- g ratus of Marxist historiography, considering such typological concepts as "society", ^ "formation", "class", "state", "property", "economic relations", we can assume that it was extracted not only from the sources available to historians, but also included in the historical science from the theoretical social sciences — historical materialism, political economy, etc. "Meanwhile, today it is impossible not to notice that almost in parallel with the rethinking of the ideal of science and with a sharp drop in the prestige of social and scientific history in historiography in the last quarter of the 20th century there was a change of research orientations, which led to the updating g
of the methodological framework, a significant expansion of problems and the formation of new subject fields", L. P. Repina4.
The rethinking of the categorical apparatus in soviet historical science during Gorbachev's perestroika showed that macro-historical concepts are not enough for an authentic understanding of history, that there is a long series of micro-historical concepts (for example, "mushkenum", "Polis", "ethnic identity", "Church parish", "shop", "Guild", "brotherhood", "cultural tradition", etc.), used autonomously in specific historical practice. In contrast to macro-concepts, historical data used in micro-concepts are directly related to historical sources. In addition, at the level of microanalysis can detect such phenomena of life in the distant ages, which elude as a result of macro-historical analysis.
The methodology of the French "Annals" school were influenced by the change in the conceptual framework and the goals of historical research (M. Block, L. Febvre, F. Braudel, J. Le Goff and others). The fact is that the conceptual analysis of the first and third "Annals", focused on the study of the history of mentality and everyday life (life, way of life, thinking, customs, forms of housing and fashion, cultural values, etc.), operates mainly micro-concepts. The pluralistic philosophical foundations of "Annales" school oriented the research efforts of its representatives to achieve the synthesis of production, social psychology, social relations and other different levels of content of the historical process. Jacques Le Goff, for example, notes that next to the political, economic, social, cultural history there was a "history of representations", which appears before us in a variety of forms. It can be "the history of global concepts of society, the history of ideologies, the history of mental structures, the history of spiritual production, the history of the imaginary, which allows us to interpret literary and artistic documents as a kind of historical sources, the history of behavior, religious rituals, rituals that refer to a deeply hidden reality, or the history of the symbolic, which may someday lead to psychoanalytic history..."5 He sought
5 to reveal the content of the work of the historian and from the standpoint of the philosophy of history to show how in certain circles and in certain epochs there was
J conceptualization and idealization of history.
« According to the movement for interdisciplinary history in the last third of the jH 20th century "the so-called new social history was born, which put forward the task % of interpreting the past in terms of sociality, describing the internal state of society, J§ its individual groups and the relations between them", indicates L. Repina6. As a re-
6 sult, the very concept of social history has expanded: as a subject of study there were HU social microstructures: family, community, parish, other communities and corpora-£ tions. The new social history owes its variability and susceptibility to the utmost s openness to other areas of cognition — historical, humanitarian, social and scientific, § which is inherent in the very nature of its integral object of cognition7.
^ Noting the dependence of historical concepts on philosophical knowledge and attitudes, socio-cultural conditions of their formation, it should not be forgotten that h these concepts are formed primarily on the basis of the subject of historical research, c
and are not introduced into the knowledge of the creative activity of thinking of the subject. The historical past is always the starting point and source of construction of historical concepts. Therefore, the saturation of concepts with theoretical a priori content, not verifiable materials of historical sources, has its limits.
Another important mechanism of philosophy's influence on history is the method of cognition of the past, which is always summarized in a certain set of concepts and is largely formed on the basis of philosophical premises. At the disposal of researchers studying the place and functions of philosophical knowledge in the system of methodological tools of historical science, there are quite large materials from historiography, the history of ideas and ideas. The history of historical science shows that no new methodology has been ignored by the best representatives of historical thought. The role of philosophical ideas and principles, their impact on the methodology of history is best seen in the period of change of philosophical and philosophical foundations of historical cognition. The dawn of Russian historiography begins in the second half of the 19th century. Russian historians and sociologists have reached the European level. The "Russian school" of studying the social system and popular movements in medieval England and revolutionary France was represented by the names of V. I. Luchitsky, M. M. Kovalevsky, N. So. Kareeva, E. V. Tarle, P. G. Vino-gradova, D. M. Petrushevsky, A. N. Savina etc. At the end of the 19th century ideals and norms, sociological principles of the study of history, formed in the middle and second half of the 19th century, began to be questioned and revised. Beginning with the unconditional recognition of positivism as the theoretical basis of historical science (the serious influence of positivism persisted throughout the period of the last quarter of the 19th — early 20th centuries), Russian liberal historiography, continuing its methodological search, accepted the elements of neo-Kantianism, "second positivism" and Marxism. At the beginning of the 20th century, Russian historical thought already had three types of ideological and methodological normative structures: objectivist, subjectivist and Marxist-dialectical. The objectivist methodology associated with positivism concentrated its attention mainly on the objects of research and sought to set aside everything that relates to the subject and the means of its cognitive activity. The implementation of the principles of the positivist a philosophical doctrine in the methodology of history (the cult of positive fact and 21 experience, the idea of the evolutionary nature of the development of society, united "g by the recognition of his laws, pluralism in the explanation of the historical process g on the basis of the "theory of factors", comparative-historical method in the study ^ of social phenomena, the requirements of the preferential use of objective method, -a denying the introspective approach to the knowledge of the phenomena of the past) impact on specific historical writings of the historians, positivists8.
The fact of increased attention to the theoretical and cognitive issues of history J3 led to the development of a new scientific discipline, the boundary between philoso- § phy and history — the theory of historical knowledge9. Subjective methodology also contributed to the development of epistemological problems of historical science. g
If classical positivism actually removed the question of the specifics of the knowledge of historical phenomena, identifying the reality of the past with our idea of it, then empiric criticism and neo-Kantianism, on the contrary, saw the problem here. Refracting the ideas of Mach and Avenarius in the interpretation of the cognitive process in the field of history, the Russian scientist R. Yu. Whipper brings to the fore the contradictions arising in the process of research between the object and the cognizing subject. In the theoretical and methodological works of R. Yu. Whipper, the main efforts were directed to the explication of the means of cognitive activity of the historian. On the basis of Machist epistemological attitudes he seeks to analyze how the thinking subject reflects in its scientific representations and concepts of the historical past10.
The subject of methodological research of the Russian historian A. S. Lappo-Danilevsky and other neo-Kantians are the thinking of the historian, his original dependence on the qualities rooted in human nature, from the cognitive apparatus of the subject11. The subjective element is considered by them as defining in the process of historical cognition. The practice of historical research of Russian historians was not connected only with the influence of philosophical schools of positivism, Machism and neo-Kantianism. The end of 19th — beginning of 20th century is characterized by the spread of Marxism among the representatives of historical science. Materialistic ideas influenced the formation of socio-economic direction. Some researchers considered the development and change of various forms of economic structure as the foundation and decisive factor in changing certain aspects of social life (A. N. Savin, E. V. Tarle, P. G. Vinogradov, D. M. Petrushevsky). However, the materialistic interpretation of history, economic reduction encountered serious criticism from other researchers (N. I. Kareev et al.)12.
Another demonstration of the influence of philosophical ideas on historical knowledge is the attempt of psychological interpretation of social actions. The interpretation
5 of history in terms of social psychology is contained in the works of the famous German historian C. Lamprecht. In its historical concept, an attempt is made to explain
J the movement of history by the laws of the human psyche and to build a historical in« terpretation on the basis of certain mental states13. This methodological approach was jH innovative for the historical science of the late 19th — early 20th century and meant the % desire to rethink the existing periodization of the historical process. Psychoanalytic J§ research opened up new opportunities for historical cognition, especially in the study
6 of individual historical figures and their actions. Ideas of behaviorism and Freudianism ^ were subsequently included in the general structuralist scheme of psychohistory, and £ its followers sought to interpret the social process in terms of psychological complexes s of historical figures. Psychoanalytic analysis enriched historical research, created new § ideas about the content of the events of the past, brought novelty to the overall picture ^ of historical development, making it more lively and emotional.
A successful attempt to apply the psycho-deterministic approach is found in the h modern Russian historian V. P. Buldakov, who uses socio-psychological models to c
describe the chain of events associated with the revolution and the civil war in Russia. Consideration of the phenomena of the Russian history of the early 20th century from the point of view of psychological factors allowed him to take into account the motives of the masses, historical figures, often aggravated by various pathological complexes. "The revolutionary process was carried out according to the laws of self-development of chaos, imperiously pushing back any restraining barriers of abstract lawmaking"14.
Philosophical and methodological prerequisites can radically change the understanding of the goals, objectives and subject of historical science. So, a few generations of Russian Medievalists (I. V. Luchitskii, N. I. Karev, G. P. Vinogradov, M. M. Kovalevsky, A. N. Savin, D. M. Petrushevsky, E. A. Kosminsky, A. I. Pushin, S. D. Skazkin, etc.) in the 19th and early 20th century investigated the peasantry, the genesis of agrarian relations and other problems socio-economic history of the peoples of Western Europe in the middle ages. The positivist and Marxist orientations of these historians led them to study various forms of economic structure as a process of purposeful activity of people based on their awareness of their economic interests, in search of historical necessity, which expresses the integral interests of different social groups and coincides with the general direction of development. Fully justified the transition from a feudal to a capitalist economic structure as a cost-effective and progressive. The recognition of the historical regularity of class struggle by some of them was combined with the consideration of the history of society as an internal dynamic process subordinated to the laws of development. If in 1860-1870s the center of gravity in the study of the past focused on religious and political issues in connection with the domination of philosophical ideas of Hegelian, the positivist philosophical doctrine undermined the foundations of theological and idealistic teachings about absolute spiritual values. In the arsenal of positivist historiography entered and strengthened the concept of natural, natural, progressive nature of historical development. Marxism, which came to the Russian historical science at the end of the 19th century, also influenced the choice of fields of historical research. He introduced the problems of interaction of the economic structure of society with its political and spiritual life, which influenced the assessment of the required know- a ledge and the choice of methodological strategy for obtaining historical conclusions. 21
Philosophy of life, personalism and existentialism have changed the ideas about "g the subject, goals and objectives of historical science. Historians are gradually mov- g ing to the study of culture, mentality, family, historical demography, social psychol- ^ ogy. In the first place, among the diverse interests of historians, goes the study of -a human subjectivity and individualism. A new essential element in the structure of the subject of historical research is a person previously lost in social structures, and ^ many other objects of historical reconstruction take a human dimension. Weber's J3 methodology of studying religious and ethical teachings as an integral part of the § development of socio-economic processes becomes an integral part of the cognitive means of historical science. The subject of historical cognition becomes culture, g
understood not in the spirit of I. Fichte and F. Schelling, as a set of achievements of human spiritual development, and as a system of human life orientations, as the real content of the consciousness of each person. Revision of the problems of historical research has allowed historians to go beyond the traditional range of sources, to analyze new historical texts, materials that involve the study of value systems and cultural representations inherent in the people who formed these structures. The importance of the new tasks assigned to historians was determined by the fact that the spiritual sphere, mentality, ideas and ideas embedded in the minds of people by their culture, are an important factor in the historical development.
Asserting the dependence of historical science, its categorical and methodological apparatus on philosophical concepts, one should remember the relative independence of historical cognition. Moreover, the literal adherence to one or another of the canons of any philosophical system is impossible for historical science. In addition, any serious philosophy as a complex spiritual phenomenon in the life of society is constantly in motion and transformation and synthesizes a variety of currents and directions. This fact was realized and caused even anti-philosophical orientation among historians of the 19th — first half of the 20th centuries. Thus, a group of German historians, followers of L. von Ranke, sought to create an objective, world-neutral history, although to justify this position, they again used philosophical teachings. The adoption of such a paradigm led professional historians away from metaphysical speculation in the study of the facts of the past and at the same time contributed to the formation of the image of historiography as an individualizing, descriptive discipline. The anti-philosophical position of historians, clearly manifested in the writing of history, did not negate the fact of ideological and socio-cultural conditionality of historical cognition.
The question of the interaction of philosophy and history is not limited to the field of cognitive means, research methods. The sphere of influence of philosophy
5 on historical science is much wider, it captures the process and results of concrete historical research. Through the conceptual apparatus and methodological princi-
J ples philosophy contributes not only to the formation of historical epistemology, but « also participates in the creation of the picture of the historical past. A characteristic jH feature of world historical science in recent decades is the desire to abandon the % universal monistic explanation of historical phenomena and to fill the interpretation J§ of the past pluralism of ideological and methodological ideas. Most historians begin
6 to solve research problems from different philosophical and theoretical positions, ^ and this fact is reflected in the requirement to take into account the correlation of £ historical cognition not only with the means, but also with the values, ideological, s target structures of research. The ideas and concepts obtained in historical science § become an integral part of the worldview orientations of the period.
^ The relationship between historical and philosophical ideas is diverse. It is carried out in the formulation of the problems of chance and regularity in historical h development, addressing issues such as historical progress, freedom in history. The c
philosophical solution of these problems depends on the understanding and interpretation of the results of historical experience, new facts of history, concretization and clarification of old, long-known facts. The history of historical science, its structure and functions have been studied so thoroughly and deeply that it would be absurd to present only theoretical ideas on this subject. It is necessary not just to compare the individual stages of the development of historical cognition and philosophy, but to establish an analogy of the style of thinking in history and philosophy. Philosophical methodology often served as a means of substantiating a particular historical epis-temology and, ultimately, historical cognition. Historical cognition has thus always been in one way or another dependent on the philosophical premises on which it was developed. The special role of philosophical theory is manifested in the solution of ontological and epistemological problems of historical cognition. Philosophical significance of philosophy is revealed in the discussion of such problems of historical epistemology as the problem of reliability of historical cognition, methods of research of the past, the nature and content of historical concepts, etc. Philosophy is an important means of setting and solving ontological problems of history: the place of man in history, the meaning and purpose of history, the sources and driving forces of the historical process, etc.
Thus, the key position of philosophy in the system of presupposed worldview cognition is explained by the fact that it itself as a theoretical worldview is such an understanding of the universal, which, unlike historical cognition, combines onto-logical ideas about history with the awareness of the value-worldview orientations of mankind. Its ideological principles and methodological ideas are a qualitative aspect and an important theoretical means of historical research. They help the historian to outline the proposed solutions, and at the end of the work to comprehend the results and give them a philosophical and philosophical interpretation.
1 Stepin V. S. Nauchnoe poznanie i tsennosti tekhnogennoi tsivilizatsii // Voprosy filosofii. 1989. Z; N 10. S. 11. 1
2 Stepin V. S. Filosofiia nauki. M.: Gardariki, 2006. g
3 Metodologicheskie problemy istorii / Pod obshch. red. V. N. Sidortsova. Minsk: TetraSistems, Ji 2005. S. 192. -g
4 RepinaL.P. Istoricheskaia nauka na rubezhe XX-XXI vv.: sotsial'nye teorii i istoriograficheskaia "G praktika M.: Krug, 2011. S. 61-62. |
5 Goff Zh. Istoriia i pamiat' / [per. s frants. K. Z. Akopiana]. M.: Rossiiskaia politicheskaia ffi entsiklopediia (ROSSPEN), 2013. S. 14. ^
6 Repina L. P. Istoricheskaia nauka na rubezhe XX-XXI vv. S. 62. Ja
7 Ibid. S. 63-64. g
8 Nechukhrin A. N. Teoretiko-metodologicheskie osnovy rossiiskoi pozitivistskoi istoriografii (80-e gg. XIX v. — 1917 g.)/ Grodno: GrGU, 2003. S. 9-81.
Oi
ca
9 Mogil'nitskii B. G. Istoriia istoricheskoi mysli XX veka. Kurs lektsii. Vyp.1: Krizis istorizma. Tomsk: Izd-vo Tom. un-ta, 2001. S. 52-60.
10 Nechukhrin A. N. Teoretiko-metodologicheskie osnovy rossiiskoi pozitivistskoi istoriografii. S. 119-175.
11 Ramazanov S. P. Krizis v rossiiskoi istoriografii nachala XX veka: V 2 ch. Ch. 1: Postanovka i popytka resheniia problemy. Volgograd: Izd-vo VolgGU, 1999. S. 94-112.
12 Nechukhrin A. N. Teoretiko-metodologicheskie osnovy rossiiskoi pozitivistskoi istoriografii. S. 77-79.
13 Mogil'nitskii B. G. Ob odnom opyte psikhologicheskoi interpretatsii istorii srednevekovoi Ger-manii (kul'turno-istoricheskii metod Karla Lamprekhta) // Metodologicheskie i istoriografi-cheskie voprosy istoricheskoi nauki. Tomsk: Izd-vo Tom. un-ta, 1969. Vyp. 6. S. 121-135.
14 Mogil'nitskii B. G. Revoliutsiia 1917 g.: novye podkhody // Problemy istorii i istoricheskogo poznaniia. Tomsk: Izd-vo Tom. un-ta, 2001. S. 21.
References
GOFF J. Istoriia i pamiat' [History and memory]. Moscow: Rossiiskaia politicheskaia entsiklopediia (ROSSPEN), 2013.
Metodologicheskie problemy istorii. Dopushcheno Ministerstvom obrazovaniia Respubliki Belarus' v kachestve uchebnogo posobiia dlia studentov, magistrantov i aspirantov, istoricheskikh i filosofskikh spetsial'nostei Uchrezhdenii, obespechivaiushchikh poluchenie vysshego obrazovaniia / Pod obshch. red. V. N. Sidortsova. [Methodological problems of history. Approved by the Ministry of education of the Republic of Belarus as a textbook for students, undergraduates and graduate students, historical and philosophical specialties of Institutions providing higher education / Under the general ed. Sidortsov]. Minsk: TetraSistems, 2005.
MOGILNITSKY B. Revoliutsiia 1917 g.: novye podkhody. [Revolution of 1917: new approaches] // Problemy istorii i istoricheskogo poznaniia. Tomsk: Izd-vo Tom. un-ta, 2001. P. 18-29.
MOGILNITSKY B. G. Ob odnom opyte psikhologicheskoi interpretatsii istorii srednevekovoi Germanii (kul'turno-istoricheskii metod Karla Lamprekhta) [About one experience of psychological interpretation of the history of medieval Germany (cultural and historical method of Karl Lamprecht)] // Metodologicheskie i istoriograficheskie voprosy istoricheskoi nauki. Tomsk: Izd-vo Tom. un-ta, 1969. Vyp. 6. P. 121-135. ^ MOGILNITSKY B. G. Istoriia istoricheskoi mysli XX veka. Kurs lektsii. Vyp.1: Krizis istorizma [History ^ of historical thought of the 20th century. Course of lectures. Iss.1: Crisis of historicism]. Tomsk: Izd-vo Tom. "■T un-ta, 2001.
s^ NECHUKHRIN A. N. Teoretiko-metodologicheskie osnovy rossiiskoi pozitivistskoi istoriografii (80-e gg. ch XIX v. — 1917 g.) [Theoretical and methodological foundations of Russian positivist historiography (80s. of g 19th century — 1917)]. Grodno: Grodno State University, 2003.
^ RAMAZANOV S. P. Krizis v rossiiskoi istoriografii nachala XX veka: V 2 ch. Ch. 1: Postanovka i popytka ^ resheniia problemy [The Crisis in the Russian historiography of the early 20th century: In 2 parts. Part 1: !§ Formulation and attempted solution of the problem]. Volgograd: Izd-vo VolgGU, 1999.
REPINA L. P. Istoricheskaia nauka na rubezhe XX — XXI vv.: sotsial'nye teorii i istoriograficheskaia praktika ^ [Historical science at the turn of 20th-21th centuries: social theories and historiographical practice]. Moscow: iH Krug, 2011.
° STEPIN V. S. Filosofiia nauki [Philosophy of science]. Moscow: Gardariki, 2006.
g STEPIN V. S. Nauchnoe poznanie i tsennosti tekhnogennoi tsivilizatsii [Scientific knowledge and values of
=g technogenic civilization] // Voprosy filosofii. 1989. N 10. P. 3-18. «
o \o
S. V. Sinyakov, A. N. Nechuhrin. Philosophical ideas and principles in historical cognition //
Petersburg historical journal, no. 3, 2020, pp. 164-176
The mechanisms of interrelation between ideological values and methodological means of historical perception are revealed in the article. The role of philosophy as a theoretical centre of the ideology is underlined in the article. The participation of philosophical ideas in the formation of historical conceptions and categorical mechanisms of historical science, in the evolution of historical concepts, in the development of the methods of the perception of the past and the subject field of the research is discussed in the article. The categorical apparatus of historical science is an instrument for the production of new knowledge, an instrument of the theoretical consciousness of а historian. Therefore, the development and change of historical knowledge systems causes a consequence of changes in categorical structures, each of which associates its semantic field of historical explanations with its composition and method of questioning. The categorical system of thinking in historical science is a synthesis of philosophical, sociological, psychological, culturological and historical concepts. Historical concepts, as the result of the development of both historical and socio-humanitarian knowledge, at the same time serve as the main tool of cognition of the past. The nature of historical concepts is determined, on the one hand, by the peculiarities of the subject area of historical cognition, on the other hand, by the system of categories of philosophy and other social sciences. The source of the content of historical concepts is the past itself as an object of knowledge, and the whole set of theoretical means of modern social cognition. Permeating all historical cognition, the concepts of philosophy and culture act as deep programs of research, which provide a connection of historical facts, their explanation with philosophical and ideological concepts of the modern era.
The methodology of historical cognition is always summarized in a certain set of concepts on the basis of philosophical premises. The history of historical science shows that no one new philosophical methodology has been left without the attention of historians. The role of philosophical ideas and principles, their impact on the methodology of history can be seen in the best way during changes of ideological foundations of historical knowledge. The article considers the revision of methods of historical research in Russian historiography at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, in the works of N. I. Kareev, M. M. Kovalevsky, R. Yu. Wipper, A. S. Lappo-Danilevsky, the transition from positivist philosophical principles and cognitive means to neo-Kantian methods in specific historical research, attempts of psychological interpretation of historical events. The philosophical significance of philosophy is revealed in the discussion on such problems of historical epistemology as the problem of reliability of historical knowledge, the issue of historical truth, the nature and content of historical concepts. Philosophy is an important means of stating and solving ontological problems of history: the place of the man in the historical process, his freedom, the meaning and purpose of history, the sources and driving forces of historical development. The authors underline the specific features of historical perception, the importance of micro-ideas which show the unique nature of social phenomena of the past for it. The change in the system of concepts of historical science in connection with the change of philosophical conceptions as well as historical approaches (social history, "Annals" school, new social history) is shown in the article.
Key words: philosophy, historical science, methodology, concept, positivism, social history, historical perception, ideology, value, conception, paradigm.
С. В. Синяков, А. Н. Нечухрин. Философские идеи и принципы исторического познания //
Петербургский исторический журнал. 2020. № 3 (27). С. 164-176
В статье раскрываются механизмы взаимодействия мировоззренческих ценностей с методологическими средствами исторического познания. Раскрывается роль философии как теоретического ядра мировоззрения. Показано участие философских идей в становлении исторических концепций, формировании категориального аппарата исторической науки, эволюции исторических понятий, развитии методов познания прошлого и предметного поля исследования. Категориальный аппарат исторической науки является инструментом производства новых знаний, орудием теоретического сознания историка. Поэтому развитие и смена систем исторического знания является следствием изменения категориальных структур, каждая из которых ассоциирует свое семантическое поле исторических объяснений, свой состав и способ постановки вопросов. Категориальный строй мышления в исторической науке представляет собой синтез философских, социологических, психологических, культурологических и собственно исторических понятий.
X
ыо ^
з
Л
Исторические понятия, будучи результатом развития как исторического, так и социогуманитарно-го знания, одновременно служат главным инструментом познания прошлого. Природа исторических понятий определяется, с одной стороны, особенностями предметной области исторического познания, с другой стороны, системой категорий философии и других общественных наук.
Источником содержания исторических понятий является как само прошлое в качестве объекта познания, так и вся совокупность теоретических средств современного социального познания. Пронизывая всё историческое познание, понятия философии и культуры выступают в качестве глубинных программ исследования, которые обеспечивают соединение исторических фактов, их толкование с позиций философско-мировоззренческих представлений современной эпохи.
Методология исторического познания всегда резюмируется в определенной совокупности понятий на основе философских предпосылок. История исторической науки свидетельствует о том, что никакая новая философская методология не оставалась без внимания историков. Роль философских идей и принципов, их воздействие на методологию истории лучше всего прослеживается в период смены мировоззренческих оснований исторического знания. В статье рассматривается пересмотр методов исторического исследования в отечественной историографии на рубеже XIX и ХХ вв., в работах Н. И. Кареева, М. М. Ковалевского, Р. Ю. Виппера, А. С. Лаппо-Данилевского, переход от позитивистских философских принципов и познавательных средств к неокантианским методам в конкретно-исторических исследованиях, попытки психологической интерпретации исторических событий. Мировоззренческое значение философии обнаруживается при обсуждении таких проблем исторической гносеологии, как проблема достоверности исторического знания, вопрос об исторической истине, природе и содержании исторических понятий. Философия является важным средством постановки и решения онтологических проблем истории: места человека в историческом процессе, его свободы, смысла и цели истории, источников и движущих сил исторического развития. Авторы подчеркивают специфику исторического познания, значение для него микропонятий, выражающих неповторимый характер социальных феноменов прошлого. Раскрыто изменение понятийного аппарата исторической науки в связи со сменой философских построений, а также исторических направлений (социальная история, школа «Анналов», новая социальная история).
Ключевые слова: философия, историческая наука, методология, понятие, позитивизм, социальная история, историческое познание, мировоззрение, ценность, концепция, парадигма.
Author: Sinyakov, Sergey Vasilievich — Doctor of philosophy, Professor, Professor of philosophy Department of National transport University (Kiev, Ukraine).
E-mail: ntufllosoflja@mail.ru
Author: Nechuhrin, Alexander Nikolayevich — Dr. of historical Sciences, Professor, Head of the Department of General and Slavic History of the faculty of history, communication and culture of GRSU Ya. Kupala (Grodno, Belarus).
E-mail: anech@grsu.by
и rt К
«
s «
о
v
s ¡^
о
H о
S «
S «
о \o
