What is the difference between philosophy of history and history. The concept of the philosophy of history: briefly. How did philosophers solve the question of the meaning and purpose of the historical process? How do you imagine solving these issues?

PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY

Branch of philosophy that gives philosophy. interpretation of the historical process. Philosophical elements. comprehension of history was contained in antich. philosophy and historiographic works. In the Middle Ages, philosophy history was not separated in any clear way from theological ideas about history. As a special section of the philosophy of F.i. formed only in the 18th century. Himself "F.i." was introduced by Voltaire in 1765. In the works of I.G. Herder F.i. constituted as autonomous. An important contribution to the subsequent it was made by G.V.F. Hegel, K. Marx, O. Comte, N.Ya. Danilevsky, O. Spengler, A. Toynbee, P.A. Sorokin, K. Jaspers and others.
Content and problems F.i. changed significantly over time. In the circle of the main tasks of modern F.i. includes:
study of the development of human history, into what epochs, civilizations, cultures it is divided, identification of its general scheme;
analysis of the general form of the historical process, indicating the relationship between the past, present and future (this topic includes theories according to which it has the shape of a straight line, due to which times cannot repeat each other, or the shape of a circle that does not carry with it any fundamental novelty , or the form of a spiral combining linear and circular, or the form of oscillations between some sufficiently stable poles, etc.);
the study of the main factors of historical evolution (the predetermination of history by the will of God, historical laws, its system of values, the interaction of material and spiritual culture, etc.);
the study of the meaning of history, its direction and its goals, if such direction and goals are supposed to exist;
study of the process of gradual formation of a single humanity and, accordingly, world history;
prediction of general lines or trends of future development;
analysis of the subject matter of the science of history and the identification of those factors that bind diverse historical disciplines (political history, economic history, cultural history, religious history, art history, etc.) into a definite one.
In solving these problems, F.i. and history should interact closely. The mutual misunderstanding that often arises between them cannot be put under the fact that it is difficult, if not impossible, for them to do without each other. Paraphrasing the well-known, we can say that F.i. without the science of history is empty, and the science of history without P.I. blind.
Science, history and F.i. differ fundamentally in their approaches to real history. The historian seeks to deal with the past and only the past. He does not make predictions and does not look into the future. He considers only the course of events that has taken place and disapproves of the thought experiment in history, of the analysis, along with the real, also of the possible course of events (“history has no subjunctive mood”). The historian looks into the past from the present, which determines the perspective of his vision. Although there is no history written from a "timeless" or "above-time" perspective, the historian seeks to limit as much as possible the impact on his judgments about the past not only of his future, but also of his present. T.sp. F.i. is wider. Revealing certain lines of development of events in the past, F.i. seeks to continue them into the future. Ideas not only about the present, but also about the future determine the general framework of philosophical and historical reasoning. F.i. also considers possible, but not realized, variants of historical development, although he treats such a “history of conceivable worlds” with a certain caution. Like history, F.i. comes from the present, but much wider than the present. In particular, the historian avoids verbalization of his ideas about the present, trying to distance himself from it as much as possible. F.i. openly speaks about the present as a moment between the past and the future. The science of history, as they say, does not teach anything, more precisely, it strives not to teach contemporaries, seeing in this - and not without reason - one of the guarantees of its objectivity. PHI, linking the past with the future through the present, teaches by the very fact of establishing such a connection.
Wider than history's outlook F.i. fraught with many dangers and explains why it often degenerates into a utopia, as was the case with Plato, or into a dystopia, as with J.J. Rousseau. At the same time, the breadth of outlook allows F.I., representing the main lines of development of human society, to outline that point of their vanishing on the horizon, which, without being visible itself, creates a broader perspective of the historical image than that of the science of history and to a greater extent streamlines real historical . Immersing historical events in a wide not only past, but also present and future culture, F.i. clears these events of historical accidents, separates the important from the secondary, and, emphasizing the main lines of historical development, gives real history what it lacks and schematic. Designs F.i. are always idealizations, or models, but samples, comparison with which real events and their sequences makes it possible to understand the essence of the latter more clearly.
Good things about modern P.I. give created in the 20th century. concepts F.i. Toynbee, Sorokin and Jaspers. Toynbee's theory of civilizations continues the line of Spengler and is, one might say, a classic version of the theory of local civilizations. According to Toynbee, history is made up of many independent, loosely connected civilizations, each of which, like a living organism, goes from birth to death. Among these civilizations are Egyptian, Andean, Chinese, Sumerian, Hellenic, Western, Orthodox Christian (in Russia), Arabic, Hindu, Babylonian, and others. “The number of known civilizations is small. We were able to identify only 21 civilizations, but it can be assumed that a more detailed one will reveal a much smaller number of completely independent civilizations - about ten ”(Toynbee). The growth of civilization consists in its progressive and accumulative internal self-determination or self-expression, in the transition from a coarser to a finer religion and culture. Toynbee's position can be characterized as cultural - that human history is a collection of discrete units of social organization. Each of them travels its own unique path and has a peculiar system of values around which all of it is formed.
Sorokin identifies three main types of culture, or worldview, in the history of mankind: ideational, idealistic and sensual. These types can also be called "religious", "intermediate" and "materialistic". The basis of religious culture is the idea of God as an all-pervading reality, to which the earthly man is subject (for example, the Western European Middle Ages). Materialistic culture is based on the opposite principle: only that which can be perceived by the senses really exists. Intermediate culture combines both religious and materialistic cultures. All human history is interpreted as a succession of these three types of cultures from each other. In antique Greece was initially dominated by religious culture, which was replaced by Greco-Roman materialistic culture. This was replaced by a Christian religious culture. Then, after a comparatively short intermediate culture, materialistic culture took hold. Now this culture is already in a deep crisis, heralding a new, more perfect form of religious culture. “The night of the transitional age is beginning to descend on us, with its nightmares, frightening shadows, heartbreaking horrors. Beyond its borders, however, we can distinguish the dawn of a new great ideational culture that welcomes the generation - the people of the future ”(Sorokin).
Main F.i. Jaspers - the theme of the unity of world history. Jaspers is skeptical about the popular in the 1920-1930s. theory of cultural cycles and emphasizes that human history has common origins and a common one. It is impossible to prove this scientifically, the unity of history can only be an object of faith, but not religious, but philosophy. faith. Jaspers divides the entire history of mankind into prehistory, history and world history. A special role in the phase of history is played by the period called by Jaspers the axial time. During this period between 800 and 200 B.C. BC. the most abrupt turn in history took place, a new type appeared, a kind of axis of world history was formed. The beginning of the third period, which continues even now, is associated with the emergence of science and technology, which revolutionized internally and externally. “The whole philosophy of history that we are trying to give is aimed at illuminating our own situation within the framework of world history. The task of the historical concept is to promote awareness of the modern era” (Jaspers).
In the last two decades, two old prejudices regarding P.I. The first of these, reanimated under the influence of postmodern fashion, comes down to that philosophy. the study of history is incapable of generating any general ideas about human history, let alone coherent conceptions of historical development. It should be limited to scattered details and trifles. Dr. prejudice that once formed in the depths of neo-Kantianism is that one of the main tasks of F.i. is the study of the originality of historical knowledge. F.i. interpreted as a result as a branch of the theory of knowledge. The first is connected with the destruction of the grandiose philosophical and historical constructions of the 19th century. and the hope that the replacement of philosophy. understanding of history is about to come some new, more scientific and more critical development of society. However, the creation of a theory of social evolution, which is not a philosophy. and not defiant, like all philosophies. concepts, fierce disputes, is illusory. The idea to include F.i. and the problem of the originality of historical knowledge, seems acceptable only at first glance. First, if we follow this path, we will have to create our own “theory of knowledge” (“the theory of economic knowledge”, “theory of psychological knowledge”, etc.) for each of the numerous social and human sciences. But there are no such theories, and obviously there never will be. There is only a general, albeit still very weak, social and human sciences. Secondly, the science of history is one of the humanities, and it is unproductive to discuss the problems of historical knowledge in isolation from the general context of humanitarian and social knowledge. A special "theory of historical knowledge" will inevitably turn out to be a set of superficial advice on how to write books on history, including recommendations on how to interpret antiquity. history, the history of the birth of capitalism, etc. Both of these ideas do not correspond to the real evolution of P.I. 20th century, which did not put forward any "critical scientific theories" and did not show any noticeable interest in the originality of historical knowledge.

Philosophy: Encyclopedic Dictionary. - M.: Gardariki. Edited by A.A. Ivina. 2004 .

PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY

branch of philosophy associated with the interpretation of the historical. process and historical knowledge. The content and problems of F. and. changed significantly in the course of history. development. Already in antique historiography contained def. ideas about the past and future of mankind, however, they have not yet formed into a complete system of views. IN Wed-century. Christ. F. i. (Augustine and others) the main driving force of history was considered non-historical. deities. providence (people are only actors in the drama, the author of which is, - cm. providentialism). In the fight against this concept, starting from the Renaissance, a secular F. and., means. contributed to by Bodin, English materialists 17 in. (F. Bacon, Hobbes and others) and especially Vico with his theory of historical. circulation. The term F. And." first used by Voltaire, referring to the universe. historical human review. culture. Herder for the first time considers F. and. how specialist. discipline that studies the general problems of history and is designed to answer the question: there is a positive. and immutable laws of human development. societies, and if so, what are these laws?

F. i. 18 - 1st floor. 19 centuries was predominantly a general theory of history. development. Philosophers have sought to formulate the purpose, driving forces and meaning of the historical. process. The force that controls history could be called differently (divine providence, universal), however, in all cases, this one remains extra-historical: it appears in history, but is not created in it.

Nevertheless classic. F. i. put forward and developed important ideas - the theory of progress (Condorcet), the problem of historical unity. process and the variety of its forms, historical. , freedom and necessity and T. e. Hegel's theory was its peculiar result and pinnacle. He tried to present history as a single regularity, in which each epoch, being uniquely original, is at the same time regular in the general development of mankind. However, the historical the process for Hegel is only the self-deployment of reason, ideas. Hence the abstract nature of Hegel's F. and. and its failure to explain the specific course of history.

2nd floor. 19 in. traditional metaphysical. and ontological. the problems that were in the center of attention of F. and., in means. least goes to others societies. sciences, so that the positivist theoreticians even proclaimed the end of all F. and. and its replacement by sociology. However, she could not absorb the entire philosophical and historical. problems. The crisis of positivist evolutionism in con. 19 - early 20 centuries brought to life new versions of the theory of history. circulation (Spengler, Toynbee, Sorokin). The problem of the meaning of history remains Centre. problem Christ. F. i. and partly existentialism (Jaspers). IN bourgeois F. i. twenty in. global problems of world history and modern Civilizations are often treated in a spirit of irrationality and pessimism, and sharpened against Marxism. The widespread con. 19 in. so-called. critical F. and., in which two can be distinguished main currents - epistemological and logical-methodological. Gnoseological theory and history. knowledge (the beginning of which was laid by Dil-tey) is not limited to the framework of historiography proper, but analyzes the historical. in the broad sense of the word. Thus, Croce's theory of historiography is only one of the manifestations of the "philosophy of the spirit." Neokantian F. and. (Windelband, Rickert) closely related to the doctrine of values. Main these concepts - in the approval of the subject and epistemological. the specificity of history, its difference from natural science and "naturalized" societies. sciences, especially sociology. The leading role in this flow of F. and. plays .

"Analytical" F. and., Associated with the positivist tradition, is engaged in preim. logical-methodological historical research. science, believing that the task of philosophy is not to prescribe the rules of the historical. method, but to describe and analyze research. procedure and explain. the methods of the historian, first of all - the features of the logic of the historical. knowledge (E. Nagel, K. Hempel, P. Gardiner, W. Dray and others) . The complication of tasks and methods istorich. science stimulates the growth of interest in F. and. and historians. Since 1960 it has been published in the USA intl. magazine according to F. and. History and Theory.

Genuinely scientific F. i. is a materialistic stitch. history, which eliminates from it everything supernatural, ahistorical. Marxism has shown that people themselves make history, being both actors and authors of world history. drama. However, people do not create their history arbitrarily, but on the basis of existing objective conditions. The results of the activities of previous people. generations, being objectified in certain. level of development produces. forces, in production. relations, appear before each new generation as given, from its own will not dependent, as the objective of its activities. In this sense, the development of society is natural-historical. natural process. But this process is not automatic. The overdue material life of society is refracted in the interests of its main classes and are realized in antagonistich. society through class struggle.

The emergence of materialistic understanding of history meant a radical overcoming of speculative F. and. Philosophy no longer claims to draw an a priori scheme of the world-historical. development. Although the study of the past, as well as the present, cannot do without definitions. theoretical prerequisites, “... these abstractions by no means provide a recipe or scheme to which historical epochs can be fitted. On the contrary, difficulties only begin when they begin to consider and organize the material - whether it belongs to the past or to the present - when they are taken for its actual image. (Marx K. and Engels F., Works, T. 3, from. 26) .

In system modern Marxist science F. and. does not form independently. industries. Corresponding issues are being developed preim. within the historical materialism (which, in fact, is the Marxist F. and.), as well as within the logic scientific research (logical specificity of the historical method, types and forms of historical description, structures of historical explanation and T. P.) and within the framework of the historical research (principles of periodization of world history, analysis of specific historical concepts and T. P.). In the spotlight owls. researchers are common patterns and historical. process, theory of society.-economic. formations, global problems of civilization and characteristics of societies. development in modern era, as well as history from others societies. and natures. sciences.

Marx K. and Engels F., German ideological. Op., T. 3; Marx K., Preface (“On the Critique of Political Economy”), ibid., T. 13; Lenin, V.I., What are "friends of the people" and how do they fight against the Social Democrats?, PSS, T. one; Asmus V. F., Marx and bourgeois historicism, M.-L., 1933; Kon I.S., Philos. and crisis bourgeois historical thoughts, M., 1959; Philos. historical problems. Nauki, M., 1969; Konrad N. I., West and East, M., 19722; Markaryan E.S., On the Genesis of Man. activities and culture, Er., 1973; Skvortsov L. V., Dialectics of objective and subjective in F. and., M., 1975; Erofeev? ?., What is history, M., 1976; Losev A. F., Antique F. and., M., 1977; Philosophy and history. Sat. Art., [transl. from English, German, French], M., 1977 ; Collingwood R. J., The Idea of History. Autobiography, M., 1980; Kelle V. Zh., Kovalzon M. Ya., Teoriya i istorich. M., 1981; Aron B., La philosophic critique de 1 "histoire, P., 19643; Dray W. H., Philosophy of history, Englewood Cliffs (N. J.), 1964; Danto A. S., Analytical philosophy of history, Camb., 1965; Barraclough G., Main trends in history, ;N. ?., 1979.

Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary. - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. Ch. editors: L. F. Ilyichev, P. N. Fedoseev, S. M. Kovalev, V. G. Panov. 1983 .

PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY

(The expression "history" was introduced by Voltaire, but in fact it goes back to antiquity)

philosophical interpretation and history, i.e. for the most part the results of historical research and presentation stories. The most important systems of the philosophy of history are the following: the theological philosophy of history considers God to be the driving force of history; metaphysical philosophy of history - transcendental regularity or destiny; idealistic philosophy of history - ideas, spiritual-scientific or spiritual-spiritual life of a person; naturalistic philosophy of history - the nature of man as possessing impulses, passions and his environment; materialistic-economic philosophy of history - economic relations. Depending on how the role of man in history is defined, there is an individualistic and collectivist philosophy of history. On the other hand, they are opposed by the fatalistic (deterministic) and activist (indeterministic) philosophy of history. Dr. important problems of the philosophy of history: the essence and boundaries of historical knowledge, the concepts of historical science, the so-called. historical, so-called. - all these problems boil down to the question of whether "" is necessarily connected with the course of history and what steps must be passed through in this case. Historically, the philosophy of history begins in antiquity with the studies of Herodotus and Thucydides on the strength of the historical movement, then goes through Polybius to a holistic understanding of Posidonius and a moral-political understanding of Plutarch. Augustine created the philosophy of the history of the divine state, which found its earthly expression in Christ. church, and his philosophy of history had a decisive influence on the following millennium. Only in the 18th century the philosophy of history fundamentally went beyond the limits of the Augustinian doctrine, on which it was based for centuries; True, it has become psychologizing, desiring to see in history the realization of the laws of individual psychic life. German idealism, with its predecessors, starting with Leibniz, considers metaphysical forces and ideas to be dominant in history, and considers man as woven into the empirical and transcendental events of history; Hegel downright considers everything to be history, in which world reason dominates. Philosophy of history 19 and early. 20th century adjoins the philosophy of history of the 18th century, mostly arguing with the natural scientific point of view and often developing a very abstract logic and theory of knowledge of history, often also tending to historicism, or, like Arthur Schopenhauer, Jacob Burckhardt and Oswald Spengler, to pessimism, or , like Arnold Toynbee, to moderate optimism, or, like, to principled optimism, based on the dialectic of world events. The theological philosophy of the history of believers is gaining more and more. The last one, which confronts the philosophy of history - whether human history makes sense - is generally answered negatively (with the exception of the Christian philosophy of history). see also Waiting for death. Outstanding representatives of the philosophy of history: Vico ("Foundations of a New Science", 1940), Montesquieu ("On the Spirit of Laws", 1809), Lessing ("Thoughts on the Education of the Human Race"), Herder ("Ideas on the Philosophy of the History of Humanity", 1959) , Kant ("Ideen zu einer allgemeinen Geschichte in weltbürgerlichen Absicht", 1784), Fichte ("Die Grundzüge des gegenwärtigen Zeitalters", 1800), Novalis ("Die Christenheit oder Europa", in "Fragmente", 1802), Hegel (" Lectures on the Philosophy of History", 1935), Marx and Engels ("Manifesto of the Communist Party", 1848), Burckhardt ("Weltgeschichtliche Betrachtung", 1905), Dilthey ("Einleitung in die Geisteswissenschaften", 1928), Spengler ("The Decline of Europe" , 1923), Theodor Lessing (Geschichtsphilosophie als Sinngebung des Sinnlosen, 1927; Europa und Asien, 1930).

Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary. 2010 .

PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY

branch of philosophy associated with the interpretation of the historical. process and historical knowledge.

The content and problems of F. and. changed significantly in the course of history. development. Already in antiquity historiography contains def. ideas about the past and future of mankind, but they have not yet formed into a complete system of views. Antich. thinking is alien to the direction of the historical. changes, so it cannot rise above the pragmatic. stories. Wed-century. (Augustine) sees in history primarily theological. problem. Ch. the driving force of history is extra-historical. deities. providence. People are only actors in a drama whose author is God. F. i. is only a dependent part of theology. Dep. elements of secular F. and. are formed in the Renaissance, as well as in Boden, Eng. materialists of the 17th century. and especially Vico. The very term "philosophy of history" was first used by Voltaire, referring to the universal historical. human review. culture. Herder F. and. is constituted into an autonomous discipline, answering the question: are there any posit. and immutable laws of human development. societies, and if so, what are these laws?

F. i. 18th - 1st third of the 19th centuries was primarily a theory of history. development. Philosophers have sought to formulate the purpose, driving forces and meaning of the historical. process. However, they deduced the laws of history. development from abstract philosophy. thinking. As a result, history acted as metaphysical. , as a sphere of manifestation of transcendent regularity or destiny. The force that governs history can be called. differently: abs. in Hegel, reason, nature. law, etc. But in all cases this force remains extra-historical; it appears in history, but is not created in it. In the classic F. i. a number of important ideas have been put forward. So, the enlighteners of the 18th century. developed the theory of progress (Condorcet), put forward the idea of the unity of history. process (Herder), laid the foundation for the history of culture, opposed to a purely political. history (Voltaire), etc. Romantic. historiography, in the simplifications inherent in rationalistic. F. and., emphasizes vnutr. and continuity of history. eras, the variety of forms of historical. development. German classical philosophy, especially Hegel, gives a deep formulation of the problem of freedom and necessity. However, even considering the immanent forces of historical process, philosophers could not get rid of metafieich. their interpretations. In the idealistic concepts of history. people turns out to be exclusively the embodiment of certain ideas. Naturalistic philosophy, eg. , on the contrary, fixes on natural conditions or natures. human needs. But in both cases, the real historical derived from some external, non-historical. forces.

As Engels wrote, the task of overcoming the idealistic F. i. "... ultimately came down to the discovery of those general laws of motion that, as dominant ones, make their way in the history of human society" (K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch., 2nd ed., vol. 21, p. 305 ). Materialistic understanding of history eliminates everything supernatural, extra-historical. According to Marx, people themselves create history, being both actors and authors of their own world-historical. drama, and for the historical no otherworldly forces in the form of deities stand by the process. providence, universal reason, etc. But people create their history not arbitrarily, but on the basis of existing objective conditions. The results of the activities of previous people. generations, being objectified in certain. level of development produces. forces, in production. relations, etc., appear before each new generation as something given, from its own. will not dependent, as objective conditions and the framework of its activities. Societies themselves. aspirations and ideals are defined. trends in the development of reality. Thus, societies. activity is both determined and free, since history is impossible without consciousness. efforts and struggle, in the course of which ideal incentives and goals turn into objective conditions. Materialistic understanding of history means a radical overcoming of speculative F. and. Philosophy no longer claims to draw an a priori scheme of the world-historical. development. Of course, neither the study of the past nor the study of the present can do without definitions. theoretical prerequisites. However, "... these abstractions by no means provide a recipe or scheme to which historical epochs can be fitted. On the contrary, difficulties only begin when they begin to consider and organize the material - whether it belongs to a past era or to the present - when they accept for his real image" (Marx K. and Engels F., ibid., vol. 3, p. 26).

Ontological problems that were at the center of attention of pre-Marxian F. and., in the 19th century. departs to other societies. sciences, in particular sociology. On this basis, the positivist theoreticians even proclaimed the end of all F. and. However, these predictions were not confirmed.

First, the traditional philosophical and historical the problem has not disappeared completely; the crisis of positivist evolutionism at the end of the 19th - beginning. 20th century contributed to the revival and popularization of new versions of the theory of historical. circulation (Spengler, Toynbee, Sorokin). Metaphysical the problem of the meaning of history remains the center, the problem of Christian F. and. (Berdyaev, Mariten, Dempf, Bultmann, Niebuhr). Secondly, the refusal of philosophers from ontological. problems, from the interpretation of the historical. process brought to the fore epistemological. and methodological. problems, analysis of the process and results of the historical. knowledge. It is these problems that are being studied by the emerging at the end of the 19th century. so-called critical F. i.

Critical F. i. is not a single philosophy. currents. The term itself has two meanings. First, it denotes epistemological. analysis of history, in contrast to ontological. problems of traditional F. and. Secondly, it denotes specific. antipositivist philosophy. course of the bourgeois philosophy of the late 19th - early. 20th century Within the framework of the critical F. i. two bases can be distinguished. currents - epistemological and logical-methodological. Gnoseological criticism of the historical knowledge, the beginning of which was laid by Dilthey, is not limited to academic. historiography and analyzes the historical consciousness in the broadest sense of the word. So, Dilthey's criticism of the historical reason is at the same time historical. a critique of reason in general. Gnoseological criticism of the historical knowledge presupposes and even includes the theory of historical. subject. For Croce, the theory of historiography is only one of the derivatives of the philosophy of the spirit; history as thought is considered inextricably linked with history as action. The individualizing of the Baden school of neo-Kantianism is organically connected with the definition. philosophy of values, etc. This is also characteristic of existentialism, in which F. and. acts as one of the aspects of human philosophy, philosophy. anthropology. Philosophers associated with the positivist tradition, like, do not pose such problems, limiting their tasks to the logical and methodological. study of existing historiography. In their opinion, should not prescribe the rules of history. method, but to describe and analyze the real research procedure of the historian. This in itself is analytical. direction is not necessarily associated with neopositivism. The works of Nagel, Hempel, Gardiner, Dray, and others really found out some characteristic features of the historical. research, especially the logic of historical. explanations. They made a determination. contribution to the criticism of the old metaphysical. and epistemological. concepts. However, such a narrowing of the philosophy. issues is wrong. Refusing to formulate theoretical and in this sense, the ideal logic istorich. research, the philosopher actually shifts this to the historian, limiting his task to describing the research activities of the latter. At the same time, he either does not say anything new at all, or, having chosen a historian, the methodology of which is most sympathetic to him, systematizes his views, presenting them as typical of the historical. research in general. The "prescription" is thus hidden behind the pseudo-objectivity of description, and the philosopher refuses not only to criticize history as a process, but also to criticize existing historiography.

In the system of modern Marxist philosophy F. and. does not form independently. industries. The relevant issues are developed mainly within the framework of the historical. materialism, which in a certain sense is the Marxist F. and. (the concept and structure of social reality, the general principle of the interpretation of history, the problem of the objectivity of socio-historical knowledge, in historical research, etc.), as well as within the framework of the logic of scientific. research (the logical specificity of the historical method, types and forms of historical descriptions, historical explanations, etc.) and, finally, within the framework of the historical. research (principles of periodization of world history, analysis of specific historical concepts, etc.). See also Art. History and Historical.

Lit.: Asmus V.F., Marx and bourgeois. historicism, M.–L., 1933; Gulyga A.V., On the nature of the historical. knowledge, "VF", 1962, No 9; his own, On the subject of historical. Science, "Questions of History", 1964, No 4; Danilov A.I., Marxist-Leninist and Historical. Science, in Sat: Middle Ages, no. 24, Moscow, 1963; Kon I.S., About modern. bourgeois F. and., "FN", 1965, No 2; his, The Problem of History in the History of Philosophy, in Sat.; Methodological and historiographic historical questions. science, vol. 4, Tomsk, 1966; Uvarov A. I., The structure of the theory in the historical. science, ibid., vol. 3–4, Tomsk, 1965–66; Konrad N. I., West and East, M., 1966; Barg M. A., On certain prerequisites for the formalization of the historical. research, web.: Problems of General History, vol. 1, Kaz., 1967; Vainshtein O. L., Teor. disciplines of history, in Sat: Criticism of the latest bourgeois. historiography, L., 1967; Questions of methodology istorich. Nauki, M., 1967 (Tr. Mosk. State Historical and Archival Institute, vol. 25); Problems of pre-capitalist history. societies. M., 1968; Philosophical problems of historical science, M., 1969; Meinecke F., Die Entstehung des Historismus, Münch., 1959 (Werke F. Meinecke, Bd 3); Callot E., Ambiguités et antinomies de l "histoire et de sa philosophie, P., 1962; Kon IS, Die Geschichtsphilosophie des 20. Jahrhunderts, Bd 1–2, V., 1964; Aron R., La philosophie critique de l "histoire, 3 ed., P., 1964; Dray W. H., Philosophy of history, Englewood Cliffs (N. Y.), 1964; Danto A.S., Analytical philosophy of history, Camb., 1965. See also lit. at Art. History .

I. Kon. Leningrad.

Philosophical Encyclopedia. In 5 volumes - M .: Soviet Encyclopedia. Edited by F. V. Konstantinov. 1960-1970 .

PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY

PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY - a section of philosophical knowledge associated with the comprehension of the meaning and patterns of the historical process. The corresponding consciousness is activated in transitional, unstable eras, when the usual way of life, institutions that seemed unshakable are crumbling and the human itself is problematized. The philosophy of history solves the question of the relationship between the past, present and future, the very formulation of which indicates dissatisfaction with the present. The latter is opposed either by the past “golden age”, which creates the nostalgic intention of the philosophy of history, or the longed-for future, which characterizes the prospective intention. With regard to the historical process, the philosophy of history solves two problems: ontological, associated with the comprehension of historical being, and epistemological, associated with the problems of historical knowledge.

Fundamental to the philosophy of history is the question of values. This type of consciousness is predominantly value-conscious, that is, it judges history by the name of a certain ideal. Here the connection between the philosophy of history and the traditions of Christian teleologism is revealed. The conquest of the latter can be considered the deliverance of public consciousness from the crushing blind historical fate characteristic of the ancient philosophy of history. Christian provided man with certain historical "guarantees" and introduced into history the presence of a powerful moral principle. Since then, history has been ruled by moral reason, and everything that subsequently received historical laws expresses, rather, a moral-religious pattern: the triumph of Dovd over world Evil. It is precisely this, which has become a classic, expression that the philosophy of history received from Augustine. He can be considered the founder of the philosophy of history, who for the first time formulated its three main principles: on the unity of the destinies of mankind in history (later found expression in the concept of the world-historical process); about unity - the integrity and continuity of the historical process in time, understood as the consistent implementation of a higher plan; about the historical responsibility of man, and whose actions affect the historical process. Despite all subsequent ideological and methodological upheavals associated with the audacity of the Renaissance, the revelations of the Reformation and the secular achievements of the New Age, these principles remained unshaken until the latest, postmodernist shift. All the new European theories of historical progress presented a secular version of these principles, not affected in essence. And only today the philosophy of history has received a challenge that calls into question all the foundations and achievements of the Christian historical consciousness in its opposition to pagan antiquity. First of all, this is a challenge from the latest cultural studies, which has discovered the pluralism of cultures and civilizations, and along with this, the revision of the principle of the unity of the historical destinies of mankind. The dubious theories of the “clash of civilizations”, the “golden billion”, the “North-South” and the “fourth world” would hardly have been able to declare themselves so frankly if the world order principles underlying them had not been legitimized by cultural studies that encroach on the spiritual the unity of humanity through the exploitation of such concepts as mentality, ethno-cultural barrier, etc.

Following the culturological revision of human universals, a corresponding revision of the universals of progress began already on the basis of environmentalism. Since the discovery of “limits to growth” (see Limits to Growth Theory) associated with scarcity of planetary resources and ecological constraints, the classical theory of progress has lost many of its ontological presuppositions. When ecological limitations were not yet realized, this theory inherited the maxims of Christian universalism: before Progress, as before God, everyone is equal. The prospect of a unified future of mankind was conceived, jointly, although not simultaneously, breaking through into a brighter future. But as soon as the “limits to growth” were exposed - the stinginess of progress, the gifts of which are clearly not enough for everyone, the tendency of a separate future for the minority began to manifest itself, proving its chosenness not according to the highest criteria of the spirit, but according to the criteria of market “natural selection” in the global “open society” ".

The concept of an open story in which the presence of purpose, meaning and ideal is no longer visible.

PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY - a branch of philosophy that explores the ultimate foundations and meaning of human history. The term "philosophy of history" was coined by Voltaire. Russian thinkers are characterized by an increased interest in the philosophical and historical problems of Russia, the desire to understand its fate, its place in European and world history. They set as their goal the comprehension of the "eternal" questions of Russian life, leaving somewhat aside the theory of knowledge of the historical process.

Philosophy of history in Russia

PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY IN RUSSIA. According to V.V. Zenkovsky, Russian philosophical thought is “entirely historiosophical”, constantly turned to questions about the beginnings and end of history, about its hidden meaning and ways of comprehending it, about its universal principles and the uniqueness of the historical path of individual peoples and civilizations, "given" and predetermined historical process, progress and return to the beginnings of historical existence, the finitude of historical times and eschatological eternity.

Philosophy of History (NFE, 2010)

PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY - a section of philosophical knowledge associated with the comprehension of the meaning and patterns of the historical process. The corresponding type of consciousness is activated in transitional, unstable eras, when the usual way of life, institutions that seemed unshakable are crumbling, and human existence itself is problematized. The philosophy of history solves the question of the relationship between the past, present and future, the very formulation of which indicates dissatisfaction with the present.

Philosophy of History (Gritsanov)

PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY - a concept as part of philosophical knowledge, aimed at comprehending the historical process as a whole and analyzing the methodological problems of historical knowledge. Building a model of the historical process, F.I. develops a certain interpretation of the specifics of historical reality, the meaning and purpose of history, the main driving forces of history and the mechanisms of their action, the relationship between historical necessity and human freedom, the unity and diversity of history, etc.

Philosophy of history (Kirilenko)

PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY - a branch of philosophy that deals with the problems of the direction of the historical process, its initial foundations, driving forces, the meaning and purpose of history, criteria for periodization. The FI also discusses a number of issues related to the peculiarity of history as a theoretical discipline. In the past, there have been several approaches to the study of human history. Voltaire viewed history as an arena given to "robbery and robbery", where arbitrariness and imagination rule. History is a chaos of human actions, impulsive actions. Among the enlighteners of the XVIII century. a naturalistic approach to understanding history was widespread. The unchanging nature of man (the desire for happiness, self-preservation, the ability to think, etc.) underlies all historical changes ...

Philosophy of History (Frolov)

PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY - a field of knowledge dealing with the problems of the meaning of history, its laws, the main directions of human development and historical knowledge. Historically, the philosophy of history dates back to antiquity. In modern times, it was developed by Vico and the enlighteners of the 18th century (Voltaire, Herder, Condorcet, Montesquieu). Opposing the theologization of history coming from Augustine of the Blessed, the enlighteners introduced the idea of causality into the philosophy of history, developed the theory of progress, expressed the idea of the unity of the historical process, and substantiated the influence of the geographical and social environment on a person. The highest stage in the development of the bourgeois philosophy of history was Hegel's philosophy of history, who considered history as a single, regular, internally necessary process of self-development of the spirit, idea...

The philosophy of history is one of the thematic sections of philosophical knowledge and a certain type of philosophical reasoning. At the same time, it cannot be attributed to the number of spheres of philosophical knowledge or philosophical disciplines that form the foundation of philosophy and exist for as long as philosophy itself, such as ontology, theory of knowledge or ethics. Rather, the philosophy of history is characterized by the relative short duration of existence as a field of philosophical knowledge, equal to the basic forms. Nevertheless, the philosophy of history has played a very significant role in the history of European philosophy, in the history of theoretical and artistic culture, and in some respects in social history in general. In this regard, we note only some of the most important facts.

The philosophy of history has always been in interdependent relations with historical consciousness. The very existence of a philosophy of history is inconceivable outside the context of historical consciousness. At the same time, the philosophical understanding of history had a largely formative effect on historical consciousness and, accordingly, on socio-historical life itself.

Further, it should be emphasized that in recent centuries the philosophy of history has invariably accumulated a variety of social ideologies. In addition, for many centuries the fate of the philosophy of history was closely intertwined with the fate of Christian theology, and without taking this circumstance into account, the history of Christian theology will inevitably be incomplete.

The philosophy of history, finally, had a significant impact on the process of formation of modern social and scientific knowledge, in particular on the process of formalizing sociological theory.

For the formation of a philosophy of history, several conditions must be met. First, social life must be mobile and changeable. Secondly, historical consciousness must take shape as a definite reflex of a mobile and qualitatively changeable social life. Thirdly, there must be a philosophy that has spiritual and intellectual resources for philosophical thematization and comprehension of history.

All these and a number of other very essential conditions, which will be discussed below, were fully fulfilled within the framework of European culture. Consequently, we can rightfully speak only of the European philosophy of the history of torii. In general, the philosophy of history cannot be considered a philosophical constant in the sense that where there is a more or less formed philosophical and theoretical activity, there will certainly be philosophical reflection on the historical process, the historicity of the present, the historicity of individual human existence, etc. Therefore, this anthology is devoted to European, more precisely Western European philosophy of history.

European civilization has developed three main forms of theoretical attitude to history - theology of history, philosophy of history and scientific historiography. They should not be arranged, as is sometimes done, in chronological order. These three forms of theoretical comprehension of history do not line up in a series of continuity, and none of them fully replaces the others. Rather, it makes sense to say that either the theology of history, or the philosophy of history, or scientific historiography in different eras determine the horizon of the theoretical understanding of history. At the same time, the form of the theoretical attitude to history that prevails in some epoch is in one way or another correlated with other forms, even if such a correlation does not take on a clearly expressed character or if these others are present only in a rudimentary form.

Theology of history, philosophy of history and scientific historiography as forms of theoretical attitude to history are connected in many ways with various ideological and worldview formations. Such formations, as a rule, include certain pictures of the historical process, appeals to one's own past, calls for the creation of the future, and so on. All this is intended to serve, first of all, as a means of historical legitimization of the activities of the corresponding collective social subject.

The subject matter of the philosophy of history is the historical dimension of human existence. The object of philosophical consideration is one or another segment of the historical life of mankind or world history as a whole. A special area is formed by the philosophical study of the boundaries, possibilities and methods of historical knowledge in its various forms, primarily the study of scientific historiographical and philosophical knowledge of history. In this case, philosophy assumes the functions of methodological reflection on historical knowledge in its theoretical forms. Hence the division of the philosophy of history into two varieties adopted in the last century. The first one carries out philosophical thematization, philosophical research and understanding of the historical process as a certain existential sphere, an objective given, as one of the most important, if not the most important, context of human existence. Such a philosophy of history, most vividly and fully embodied in classical examples, which had a clear predominance in the history of the existence of this philosophical discipline, is commonly called the material or substantial philosophy of history. This name is intended to separate the first kind of philosophy of history from the second, connected with reflection on the nature of historical knowledge, especially theoretical ways of comprehending history, and, accordingly, designated as formal or reflective.

This anthology presents works or excerpts from works where the development of problems of the material, or substantial, philosophy of history is carried out. In this regard, in this article we will briefly consider the philosophical and historical problems of this plan.

The material philosophy of history strives to solve several basic philosophical and theoretical problems. One of them is the establishment of the main causes and factors of history as such or of history as a whole. The indication of such structural moments allows, on the one hand, to present history as a special sphere endowed with its own specifics of being, and on the other hand, to show its structuredness, orderliness and, accordingly, depict it as something understandable or even rational.

The solution of this problem is associated, as a rule, with the assertion of the dominance in history of universals of one kind or another. The comprehension of such generalities as the laws of history as a whole or the laws of individual stages, stages, as fundamental factors (natural, biological, etc.) that determine sociogenesis and social dynamics, is understood as comprehension of the essential, i.e. main and determining the content of the story.

The main constitutive feature of such an approach to the goals of the philosophy of history is a focus on some kind of essential-ongological comprehension of historical life, this is always an ontological conceptualization of its primary sources, fundamental structures, last or highest driving forces. The singling out of such a task of the philosophy of history as the main one usually served as a justification for its claims to a theoretical status.

Another task of the philosophy of history is dictated by the desire to carry out some kind of chronological and procedural articulation of historical life. The division of history into epochs, stages, stages and other segments that are relatively closed in terms of content makes it possible to depict it as an ordered process, each period of time of which is conditioned to a large extent by the previous ones and, in turn, plays a certain, if not decisive, role in what the subsequent ones will be. times, what will be the future.

The next task is to identify some general form or “figure”, the flow of history. The statement that history takes the forms of a line, a circle, a spiral, and others, is intended, first of all, to offer some solution to the problem of the relationship between the general content of history and concrete and diverse historical phenomena. Such a statement also allows us to indicate the nature of the relationship between the past, present and future. This may be a linearly directed deployment, in which the times cannot repeat each other; it can be a historical movement in a circle or a cyclical movement that does not bring with it any fundamental novelty; it can be a spiral flow of historical life, meaning a certain combination of linear and circular movement, and so on.

As if the final task of the philosophical comprehension of history can be considered attempts to reveal the "meaning of history."

The semantic-theoretical attitude to history is always limited to two extreme positions. The first is the positing of an objective, all-encompassing historical meaning. Theorizing about such a meaning must be reconstructive or reflective. The historical life of an individual is a sojourn or activity in the semantic sphere encompassing him.

The meaning of history is seen in the realization of certain principles, ideas, essences or values. Such objectively existing generalities constitute the historical life of mankind into an organized, orderly whole, transparent to philosophical reflection. This reflection itself, seeing through and affirming the meaning of historical life, serves either the goals of a more adequate and complete understanding of the divine plan for man and his history, or the goals of the enlightened liberation of mankind, the full realization of the “essence of man”, the embodiment of the inexhaustible creative and constructive possibilities of mankind.

Philosophy of history and its problems.

The meaning of history.

Problems of determinism in the philosophy of history.

Periodization of the historical process.

“History is philosophy in examples.”

1) Philosophical and historical problems have worried many thinkers since antiquity. Lukretsky, Augustine the Blessed and others tried to comprehend the historical process, to find the driving forces of its development and change. But the very term "philosophy of history" was first used in the 18th century by the French educator Voltaire, who tried to create a secular concept of history as opposed to the religious-Christian one. He believed that the researcher of history should not just describe events, present them in chronological order, but philosophically interpret the historical process. A special contribution to the philosophy of history was made by Hegel, who believed that its task was to search for general principles inherent in all world history. The main ones are reason ("everything that is real is reasonable, everything that is reasonable is real" "") and freedom as the goal of history ("world history is progress in the consciousness of freedom"). The philosophy of history was further developed by K. Marx and F. Engels, who tried to give not an idealistic, but an objective-materialistic understanding of history, its general laws and driving forces.

In Russia, the problems of the history of philosophy were developed by such prominent philosophers as N.I. Kareev, V.M. Khvostov, L.P. Karsavin and others. history, the direction of the historical process), but also epistemological (the creation of a theory of historical knowledge, methods of studying the past).

In modern Western philosophy of history, two directions can be distinguished - anthological and epistemological. Supporters of the first direction (Spengler, Toynbee, etc.) pay the main attention to research being, the historical process as a complex complex of various elements that are in constant interaction (social progress, social determinism, historical time, the meaning of history). The epistemological direction brings to the fore the problems knowledge historical facts and events (Dilthey, Simmel, Aron, Croce, etc.). The "critical philosophy of history" belongs to the epistemological direction, its starting point is the category of "understanding". "The historian's work consists not only in understanding events, but also in understanding people, and also in the fact that people of the past are different from us" (R. Aron).

In modern domestic research literature, it is emphasized that anthological and epistemological problems of the philosophy of history cannot be separated from each other, and both of them are its subject.

Thus, the philosophy of history is a general theory and methodology of the historical process that studies the internal logic of the development of human society, its laws, the unity and diversity of the historical process, the problems of the meaning of history, social determinism and social progress, historical time and historical space, historical knowledge.

2) The first in time of appearance and one of the central among other problems of the philosophy of history is the problem of meaning torii. It has risen especially sharply now, when humanity has approached the boundary beyond which the threat of self-destruction has become more real than ever. It is also important for an individual, because. the meaning of history allows everyone to understand the meaning of their own lives.

The first, most striking attempt to reveal the meaning of world history refers to religious medieval philosophy. Augustine the Blessed proceeds from the fact that "providence" controls our historical destiny according to reasonable, although not always known and understandable laws to us. This view is called providentialism. In various concepts related to this direction, two main ideas can be extracted: 1) the development of human history - the implementation of the divine plan; 2) there is a certain special, perfect state of society towards which history is heading and which is the goal of social development. From the standpoint of this state, the whole history is evaluated. Providentialism, as it were, does not recognize the meaning in the present history, transferring it to the future. This is his weakness. As the Russian philosopher S.L. Frank wrote: “If history has a meaning at all, then it is possible only if each epoch and each generation has its own unique meaning in it, is the creator and accomplice of this meaning. This meaning should, therefore, lie not in the future, but supertemporally embrace world history as a whole (S.L. Frank. Spiritual Foundations of Society). with the human mind to comprehend the intentions of the highest infinite mind - God.

Another direction in solving this problem is idealistic. - considers history as the realization of some higher ideas or principles, and those that are not human, of earthly origin, but belong to a special world, independent of man, nature, etc. For Hegel, the history of mankind is the final link in the development of the "absolute spirit", the goal of this development is the knowledge of the spirit itself. It is in history and through it that the spirit comes to its peak - self-knowledge. This is, as it were, one semantic layer of history. Another layer lies in that self-knowledge of the spirit is at the same time the path to its freedom. Freedom is the essence of the spirit, and history, accordingly, is progress in the consciousness of freedom. The main drawback of this concept is the same as the previous one: both impose a priori judgments on history; , historical events are adjusted to fit general theories.

In the 20th century, the problem of the meaning of history worried primarily philosophers of religious orientation.

In the philosophical and historical concept of K. Jaspers, the central idea is the "axial time of history" "(USh-II centuries BC). This is, as it were, a decisive turn that determined the fate of mankind. The dawn at this time of ancient and Eastern cultures determined eternal times, universal values and norms - a person's awareness of his own "I", his unique individuality, dignity and self-worth of an individual, the responsibility associated with them. All these values exist in our days. At this stage, history is becoming world history, while before the axial time there were only the histories of individual peoples.

In modern domestic studies that continue the Marxist tradition of a materialistic understanding of history, the meaning of history is seen in the fact that "from epoch to epoch, from one social system to another, a higher person grows and develops" (V.S. Barulin, Social Philosophy. M ., 1993.), i.e. the meaning of history is the development of man, his essential forces. History cannot but develop in such a way as to serve man more and more, to turn him more and more into an end in itself in social life.

Closely connected with the problem of meaning is the problem of the direction of human history. In the history of philosophy, there are two options for solving this problem: pessimistic and optimistic.

Representatives of the first argue that human history is moving along the path of regression, i.e. degrades, passes from higher to lower (Hesiod, Nietzsche, Spengler, etc.). The modern Christian philosopher Y. Bohensky writes: "Some kind of progress is taking place - both at the level of an individual and at the level of an entire nation, and it is necessary to strive for it, but faith in the constant progress of humanity going to heaven on earth is one of the most harmful delusions."

Representatives of the optimistic variant proceed from the fact that progress dominates in history, i.e. a type of development that means a transition from higher to lower, from a less perfect to a more perfect state (Condorcet, Comte, Hegel, Marx). Proponents of this point of view point out that there are objective criteria that make it possible to assert that society is developing progressively. Different thinkers name different criteria of progress: I) development of productive forces; 2) the rise of social needs to meet them; 3) increasing mastery of forces nature; 4) the gradual transformation of humanity into a single whole; 5) expansion of human freedom.

There is a third point of view, which is held by many modern Western philosophers. Its essence is as follows: there is no single universal progress; there are many subjects of development - individual countries, peoples, specific individuals, various aspects of human activity (science, morality, technology, ecology, etc.). It is impossible to talk about the progress of even one state (Indians in the USA), just as it is impossible to unequivocally consider the development of, for example, technology (ecology, mass society), etc. to be progressive. In social life there can be a multitude - in accordance with a multitude of subjects - progresses and regressions, and even the obvious progress of one of the subjects can have a regressive effect on others.

3) History is a complex and multifaceted process in which geographical, material, spiritual and other factors are linked together. Therefore, it is very difficult to find among them such a factor that would play a decisive role in the development of society, with the help of which it would be possible to understand the internal logic of history, to explain the motives and actions of people in the course of their activities.

Thinkers of all times have tried to find social determinants. Since the Renaissance, and especially during the Enlightenment, rationalistic view of history. Thus, the French enlighteners of the 18th century argued that the course of history is determined by ideas. Condorcet believed that the development of the human mind, which has unlimited possibilities, determines the progress of the history of society, certain historical epochs correspond to the stages in the development of the human mind. Saint-Simon argued that the evolution of society is explained by the change in the philosophical, religious and scientific ideas that prevail in it, highlighting the stages of religious, metaphysical and scientific (positive) thinking in social development.

Supporters geographical determinism in in their explanation of the historical process they proceed from external nature. “Give me a map of a country, its outlines, climate, waters, winds, all its physical geography, flora, zoology, and I undertake to say in advance what kind of person this country is, what role this country will play in history, and not by chance, but by virtue of necessity and not in one era, but in all eras "(V. Kuzen). Montesquieu believed that it is nature that determines morality, psychological characteristics, and the character of a particular people. The hot climate relaxes people, causes the immobility of religious beliefs, it also activates their family life, stimulates laziness, on the basis of which slavery appears. L.I. Mechnikov saw the basis of historical development primarily in the hydrosphere. In accordance with what constitutes the basis of civilization - a river, sea or ocean - he divided the history of mankind into three periods:

1) River (Egypt on the Nile, Mesopotamia on the Tigris and Euphrates, etc.);

2) Mediterranean (from the founding of Carthage to Charlemagne);

3) Oceanic (since the discovery of America).

The principle of rationalism lies in Hegel's philosophy of history. According to him, the development of the World Spirit is realized in the history of society. The steps of this development are the deeds of individual peoples. The spirit not only hovers over history, as over the waters, but acts in it and constitutes its only engine. reasonableness of the world-historical process is manifested in the fact that unconsciously for people it turns out to be historically significant, grandiose, even if small forces participated in its generation. The proof of this rationality is that although the bulk of people are guided in their actions by purely personal interests and passions and, to a certain extent, carry them out, nevertheless, the result is something different from their intentions. According to Hegel, the World Spirit (Reason) allows people to act as they please, does not restrict the play of their passions and interests, but gets what it wants.

Unlike Hegel, Marx believed that one should proceed not from the spiritual factor, but from the material prerequisites of life. These are real individuals, their reality and the material conditions of their life. People in the process of joint activity produce the means of subsistence they need, but by doing so they produce their material life, which is the foundation of society. Material life, material social relations, which are formed in the process of production of material goods, determine all other forms of human activity - political, spiritual, social, etc. Morality, religion, philosophy and other forms of social consciousness reflect the material life of society. Analyzing the practical activities of the subjects of history, Parke notes that they must first of all eat, drink, dress, have a roof over their heads. That is why the production of material life itself must be considered the first historical act. In Marxism, it is characterized by the concept of "mode of production". It consists of two interrelated elements - productive forces and production relations. In their unity, the main side is the productive forces, with their change, production relations change. According to the law of the correspondence of production relations to the level and nature of the development of productive forces, if this does not happen, a conflict arises between them, which is resolved either by revolutionary means or by means of reforms, replacing the old relations of production with fundamentally new ones.

In contemporary Western social science, the most popular approach to the problem of historical determinism is the multifactorial approach ("factor theory"). Its essence lies in the fact that the historical process is declared the result of the parallel and equivalent influence of many factors: economic, political, ideological, psychological, biological, etc., none of which is decisive, although, depending on historical conditions, one of them may temporarily come to the fore, crowding out others. So, for example, in the formation of capitalist relations in Germany, the Protestant religion played a dominant role (M. Weber), many modern researchers emphasize the strengthening of the political factor in the functioning of modern Western societies; various concepts of the information society quite reasonably prove that science, technology, etc. are the determining factor in the next development of mankind. Another approach popular in Western consciousness is technological determinism. In accordance with it, any major change in the technical and technological order entails a change in social structures and relations. "History is the reaction of culture to technology." Ultimately, technology acts as a special world independent of man; it develops indefinitely according to its own laws and, most importantly, dominates man and society, dictating its will to them and determining their prospects.

4) One of the main problems in the philosophy of history is the problem of periods (stages, steps) of human history. In accordance with the criterion underlying periodization, a number of approaches to solving this problem are distinguished: economic and temporal, spiritual and cultural, religious, industrial and scientific, personal, etc.

The first known version was proposed as early as the 1st century BC. by the ancient Greek philosopher Dexarch of Messina: history includes primitive hunting-gathering, cattle-breeding and agricultural stages. In the XNUMXth-XNUMXth centuries. the concept of allocation (L. Biruni, N. Machiavelli, K. Keller) of ancient, medieval and modern history became widespread. Later, Saint-Simon associated each of these eras with a specific social system: with the slave, feudal serf and industrial. Condorcet divided history into ten eras, which succeed each other on the basis of the improvement of the mind. Most of the mentioned philosophers adhered to the idea of progressive development of society or the idea of progress. In modern philosophy of history, this approach is called linear, unitary or unitary-stage. But These ideas manifested themselves most clearly in the philosophy of Hegel and Marx.

As already noted, according to Hegel, world history is nothing more than a process of self-knowledge of the absolute spirit unfolded in social space and historical time and, at the same time, progress in the consciousness of freedom. Accordingly, Hegel distinguishes three epochs of world history: the Ancient East, where only one is free, and the rest are not aware of their freedom; the ancient world, where only a few are free; the Germanic peoples, who in Christianity came to the realization that man as man is free, that freedom is the essence of the spirit, i.e., where everyone is free.

The periodization of world history by K. Marx is based on the principle of a materialistic understanding of history, which has already been discussed when considering the problems of the meaning of history. The initial concept of the materialistic understanding of history is the socio-economic formation. This is a certain historical type of society, a special social organism that develops and functions according to the laws of production relations that prevail in society. In the structure of the formation, two main elements are distinguished - the economic basis - the relations of production prevailing in society, and the corresponding political, legal and ideological superstructure. The basis, figuratively speaking, forms the skeleton of the formation, the superstructure is what fills this skeleton with flesh and blood. Socio-economic formation is not only a type of society, but also, at the same time, a stage of world-historical development. Marx distinguishes five such stages, successively replacing each other according to the law of the correspondence of production relations, the level and nature of the development of productive forces: primitive, ancient (slave-owning), feudal, capitalist, communist.

The concept of socio-economic formations is far from ideal. We note only one of its inherent shortcomings: there is no clear distinction between intra-systemic (structural, functional) laws and laws that are not actually historical (which describe the process of development itself). Marx tried to describe historical sequences on the basis of functional dependencies. In addition, the East, which is the vast majority of humanity, does not fit into the scheme proposed by Marx at all.

The concepts discussed above are especially actively opposed by a different understanding of history, which is usually referred to as civilizational (pluralistic, cyclic). Its essence lies in the fact that humanity is divided into several completely independent formations (civilizations, cultures, ethnic groups, etc.), each of which has its own completely independent history. Each of these formations arises, develops playfully or late, inevitably perishes. Thus, the history of mankind is fragmented both in space and in time. Accordingly, for many civilizations there are many histories, and the history of mankind is an endless repetition of many of the same processes. Let's dwell on several concepts corresponding to the approach described above.

I. Danilevsky developed the theory of "cultural-historical types", according to which human civilization is an abstract illusion. Just as in nature there are different types of animals and plants, so history is a collection of different types of human communities, each of which has its own rhythm, age, path, ideals and purpose. Danilevsky singled out the following cultural and historical types: Egyptian, Chinese, ancient Semitic, Indian, Iranian, Jewish, Greek, Roman, Arabian, European and Slavic. Along with them, in history there are negative figures of mankind, "scourges of God", helping to give up the spirit of dying civilizations (Mongols, Huns). The originality of cultural and historical types is related to which of the four fundamental types of spiritual creativity prevails in them - religious, artistic, political, economic, and their various combinations. Each civilization is beautiful in its own way, each has its own cycle of life, its own meaning and purpose, which it is called upon to bring into the world.

O. Spengler believed that history is a collection of local cultures closed in itself. There are eight of them - Egyptian, Indian, Babylonian, Chinese, Greco-Roman, Arabic, Western and Mayan culture. Each culture is subject to a rigid process of evolution, the phases of which are birth and childhood, youth and maturity, old age and decline. On this basis, in each culture, two main stages are distinguished: the stage of the ascent of culture, the organic development of society in all spheres, and the stage of the descent of culture - a mechanical type of evolution. At the second stage, the creative beginnings of culture are ossified, its massification takes place - globalization, megacities, etc. The period of life of each culture is 1000 years.

The English historian A. Toynbee explains history on the basis of the recognition of closed discrete units, "civilizations" into which history breaks up, civilization according to Toynbee is a specific society localized in time and space. Each civilization includes the emergence, growth, breakdown, decline and decay. The dynamics of civilizations is determined by the law of "challenge and response". On the part of the societies surrounding civilization, there are "challenges" that threaten its existence, and it must mobilize resources to find adequate responses to the challenges. The merit of an adequate response belongs to the creative minority of the society that rules. Then this minority conserves power, loses its creative abilities for an adequate response, which will lead to a breakdown, and then - under certain conditions, to the death of civilization.

The relative correctness of each of these two approaches can hardly be disputed. Therefore, an urgent task is to combine them, if not a final synthesis, then at least a combination in the spirit of the principle of complementarity proposed by Niels Bohr for solving the problems of quantum mechanics.

In other eras, Augustine, Leibniz, Vico, Montesquieu, Condorcet, Hegel, Schopenhauer, Spengler, Toynbee and other thinkers were interested in the problem. All of them tried to find and substantiate some one main factor of historical development or a sum, a system of such factors.

The beginning of the philosophy of history in European culture was laid by Augustine (4th century) with his famous work “On the City of God”. His view is that the central event that initiated the historical process was the divine creation of man, and then the fall of the progenitors of mankind and the first people Adam and Eve. The very same history, which began its countdown from that moment, appears in the understanding of Augustine as a long and purposeful process of "saving" mankind, gaining their lost unity with God and achieving the "Kingdom of God".

The concept of the historical process, formulated by Augustine, retained its dominant position in European philosophy until the 18th century. The philosophy of history as a secular science was formed in the XVIII-XIX centuries. The very term "philosophy of history" in the XVIII century. introduces the French enlightener Voltaire. He believed that the historian should not just describe events, present them in chronological order, but philosophically interpret the historical process, reflect on its meaning. Subsequently, this term entered the scientific circulation.

The German philosopher Herder wrote an extensive work "Ideas for the Philosophy of the History of Humankind", in which he gave a broad panorama of the entire world history. Herder notes that he is interested in a science that would describe the entire history of mankind from the moment of its inception. Herder proposes the philosophy of history as such a science. The formation of the philosophy of history as a special field of scientific knowledge begins with his works.

The famous compatriot of Herder Hegel was engaged in the philosophy of history. He introduced the term "world philosophy of history", by which he meant reflections on the manifestation of the absolute spirit in time, as well as the connection of history with the geographical environment. Hegel believed that world history is directed from East to West. Asia is the beginning, and Europe is the end of world development. Its main periods - the Eastern, Greek, Roman and German worlds - exhaust, in his opinion, the historical process. Hegel's philosophy of history addresses the present and the past.

In Russia, such prominent philosophers and historians as N. Kareev, V. Khvostov, V. Guerrier and others actively and fruitfully worked in the field of philosophy of history. questions that, in his opinion, should be at the center of this science. “Philosophy of history is the knowledge of the meaning of history, how it has taken place hitherto, where and how it has led and is leading earthly humanity within earthly; The philosophy of history is a judgment on history: it is not enough to say that its course was such and such, that its constituent processes are governed by such and such laws, you still need to find the meaning of all changes, evaluate them, analyze the results of history and also evaluate them.

As you can see, N. Kareev pays the main attention to clarifying the meaning and direction of the historical process, to assessing historical events. In his opinion, the subject of the philosophy of history covers a wide range of issues relating to the entire historical process: the role of the geographical environment in social development; cultural and historical environment; the laws of society; necessity and chance in history; sources of historical change; progress and regression in history, etc.

Already in the modern period, the English historian A. Toynbee gives his understanding of the philosophy of history. It is a special approach to historical material, when the very content of the entire integrity of the historical process becomes the subject of a special, specifically philosophical outlook and interpretation.

For comparison, other approaches to the definition of the philosophy of history and its subject are also of interest: the philosophy of history is a branch of philosophy associated with the interpretation of the historical process and historical knowledge. The philosophy of history is a philosophical and historical analysis of society. It is a logical consideration of human society stripped of zigzags and twists.

In the twentieth century, many researchers were engaged in the problems of the philosophy of history. A Marxist understanding of the philosophy of history developed. Concepts of "technological" determinism, socio-ecological ideas were developed, religious explanations of the historical process continued to take place. It can be noted that culturological and civilizational approaches to historical social development have acquired special significance. Today they have the largest number of supporters.

The subject and specificity of the philosophy of history as a scientific discipline can be better revealed and understood through consideration of its functions.

Functions of the philosophy of history:

1. epistemological- is manifested in the fact that the philosophy of history explores and helps to understand the patterns and content of the development of human history.

2. Methodological- lies in the fact that the philosophy of history is a general doctrine of the principles and methods of philosophical and sociological analysis of the development of society in the context of world history.

3. worldview the function forms a holistic conceptual understanding of the essence and meaning of the history of mankind, the attitude of a particular subject towards it;

4. theoretical the function satisfies people's need for a conceptual understanding of the historical process and forms the conditions for the scientific status of any history.

5. Practical the function gives a scientific explanation of historical facts, contributes to their systematization and classification according to importance and significance; represents the process of introducing scientific and theoretical knowledge about the history of society into the practical life of people, decision-making and their implementation;

6. predictive function contributes to understanding the perspectives of humanity.

The functions of the philosophy of history strengthen its scientific status. At the same time, it is able to implement its other functions: axiological, system-integration, critical, etc.

The main problems of the philosophy of history.

The first who made a systematic attempt to determine the range of problems that the philosophy of history should deal with was Herder. He considered the search for an answer to the age-old questions: where are we from and where are we going? These questions themselves represent an extensive field for research, but they certainly do not exhaust the whole problematic of the philosophy of history. A significant contribution to the concretization of these problems was made by E. Bernheim.

He drew attention to the problems:

a) clarification of the principles (general rules) of the analysis of the history of society;

b) the study of the conditions and factors that determine the historical process;

c) the movement and connection of historical events;

d) the mechanism of historical development;

e) the results and meaning of the historical process.

Over time, the problems of the philosophy of history have been modified and concretized.

At present, in a generalized form, the problems of the philosophy of history can be reduced to the following:

The subject and problems of the history of philosophy as a science, its method;

Sources and logic of the development of human history, its essence and internal mechanisms;

The evolution of social forms, the unity and diversity of the historical process, the meaning of history;

The multidimensionality of social life and the operation of social laws;

Features of the development of social systems in the historical process;

Problems of social determinism and social progress;

Periodization and chronology of history;

Specificity of historical space and historical time;

Principles of reconstruction of the historical past;

Driving forces, objective and subjective in social development;

Perspectives on World History and Human Civilization;

Culture and social evolution;

The relationship between man and history, the role of personality in the historical process.