Dialogue between A. S. Khomyakov and I. V. Kireevsky on the Character of Russian and European Enlightenment
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15826/qr.2019.1.374Keywords:
Russian Enlightenment; European Enlightenment; mentality; rationality and reasonableness; right-mindedness and integrity; mutual influenceAbstract
This article focuses on the dialogue between A. S. Khomyakov and I. V. Kireevsky on the Russian and European Enlightenment. Comparative analysis of Kireevsky’s On the Character of European Enlightenment and Its Relation to Russian Enlightenment (1852) and Khomyakov’s On I. V. Kireevsky’s Article “On the Character of European Enlightenment and Its Relation to Russian Enlightenment” (1852) illustrates their understanding of an issue which motivated their further creative and intellectual communication. This not only helps us to see the unity of Slavophile opinion but also each authors’ individual attitude towards the matter at hand. According to them, the Russian and European Enlightenment differed in their origin and content. Both philosophers see the Enlightenment as a universal category which not only characterises intellectual activity connected with education and the peculiarity of scholarly knowledge, but also the moral, spiritual, and aesthetic values of society, people’s behaviour, and everyday life. While the two philosophers generally agree on the understanding of the issue, some of their conclusions are different. Thus, Khomyakov holds a more sympathetic position on the European question: he gives a detailed account of those achievements of European culture which became the common heritage of mankind and is more critical of the medieval period of Russian history, referring to historical facts. Kireevsky makes more general statements and is selective when it comes to illustrating his arguments with examples from European and Russian history. Ultimately, both philosophers recognise the advantages of the Russian Enlightenment, whose nature they both characterise as integrated, reasonable, and inspired by faith, unlike the bifurcated nature and deliberativeness of the European Enlightenment. Both Kireevsky and Khomyakov aim to avoid contrasting Russia and Europe, concluding that their inner connections are historically grounded and enrich both Russian and European cultures.
References
Berdyaev, N. A. (1989). A. S. Khomyakov kak filosof [A. S. Khomyakov as a Philosopher]. In Berdyaev, N. A. Tipy religioznoi mysli v Rossii. Paris, YMCA-Press, pp. 60–67.
Bol’shakova, A. I. (2004). Mentalitet [Mentality]. In Zapadnoe literaturovedenie XX veka. Moscow, Inrada, pp. 250–251.
Egorov, B. F. (2003). Ot Khomyakova do Lotmana [From Khomyakov to Lotman]. Moscow, Yazyki slavyanskoi kul’tury. 367 p.
Egorov, B. F. (2007). A. S. Khomyakov – russkii evropeets [A. S. Khomyakov – a Russian European]. In A. S. Khomyakov – myslitel’, poet, publitsist v 2 t. Moscow, Yazyki slavyanskoi kul’tury. Vol. 1, pp. 27–30.
Grekov, V. N. (2014). “Moskovskii sbornik” I. S. Aksakova v kontekste russkoi kul’tury [Moskovsky Sbornik by I. S. Aksakov in the Context of Russian Culture]. In Grekov, V. N. (Ed.). Moskovskii sbornik. Moscow, Nauka, pp. 837–910.
Gurevich, P. S. (2007). Mental’nost’ [Mentality]. In Psikhologicheskii slovar’. Moscow, Olma, pp. 365–366.
Kantor, V. K. (2001). Russkii evropeets kak yavlenie kul’tury [A Russian European as a Phenomenon of Culture]. Moscow, ROSSPEN. 697 p.
Khomyakov, A. S. (1861). Po povodu stat’i I. V. Kireevskogo “O kharaktere prosveshcheniya Evropy i ego otnoshenii k prosveshcheniyu Rossii” [On I. V. Kireevsky’s On the Character of European Enlightenment and Its Relation to Russian Enlightenment]. In Khomyakov, A. S. Polnoe sobranie sochinenii v 2 t. Moscow, Universitetskaya tipografiya, pp. 195–260.
Khomyakov, A. S. (2014). Neskol’ko slov po povodu stat’i g. Kireevskogo, pomeshchennoi v 1-m tome “Moskovskogo sbornika” (“O kharaktere prosveshcheniya Evropy i ego otnoshenii k prosveshcheniyu Rossii”) [A Few Words on Mr. Kireevsky’s Article Found in the First Volume of Moskovsky Sbornik (On the Character of European Enlightenment and Its Relation to Russian Enlightenment)]. In Grekov, V. N. (Ed.). Moskovskii sbornik. Moscow, Nauka, pp. 285–334.
Kireevsky, I. V. (1979). Kritika i estetika [Criticism and Aesthetics] / ed. by Yu. V. Mann. Moscow, Iskusstvo. 439 p.
Kireevsky, I. V. (1984). Izbrannye stat’i [Selected Articles] / ed. by V. A. Kotel’nikov. Moscow, Sovremennik. 371 р.
Kireevsky, I. V. (2014). O kharaktere prosveshcheniya Evropy i ego otnoshenii k prosveshcheniyu Rossii [On the Character of European Enlightenment and Its Relation to Russian Enlightenment]. In Grekov, V. N. (Ed.). Moskovskii sbornik. Moscow, Nauka, pp. 285–334.
Leont’ev, K. N. (2005). Vizantizm i slavyanstvo [Byzantinism and Slavdom]. Moscow, Dar. 491 p.
Losev, A. F. (1991). Filosofiya. Mifologiya. Kul’tura [Philosophy. Mythology. Culture]. Moscow, Izdatel’stvo politicheskoi literatury. 524 p.
Ryabii, M. (2007). Aleksei Stepanovich Khomyakov v krugu Kireevskikh – Elaginykh [Alexey S. Khomyakov in the Kireevsky – Elagin Circle]. In A. S. Khomyakov – myslitel’, poet, publitsist v 2 t. Moscow, Yazyki slavyanskoi kul’tury. Vol. 1, pp. 40–50.
Schmemann, A., Archiprb. (2007). Dnevniki 1973–1983 [Diaries. 1973–1983]. Moscow, Russkii put’. 718 p.
Solodkaya, E. A. (2007). Russkoe zapadnichestvo slavyanofila A. S. Khomyakova: diskursivnyi paradoks natsional’noi traditsii [The Russian Westernism of the Slavophile A. S. Khomyakov. Discursive Paradox of the National Tradition]. In A. S. Khomyakov – myslitel’, poet, publitsist v 2 t. Moscow, Yazyki slavyanskoi kul’tury. Vol. 1, pp. 35–39.
Tarasov, B. N. (2007). Khomyakov kak lichnost’ i kak myslitel’ [Khomyakov as a Person and as a Thinker]. In A. S. Khomyakov – myslitel’, poet, publitsist v 2 t. Moscow, Yazyki slavyanskoi kul’tury. Vol. 1, pp. 7–16.
