Discoursive polylogicality of N.I. Kareev’s works
Abstract
The article considers N.I. Kareev’s attempts to overcome the Eurocentric approach to the philosophy of history. According to Kareev, there are two skills necessary for getting over local discursiveness and turning it into intercultural thinking: the ability to speak as many languages as possible and the ability to carry on a constructive dialogue. Since Kareev was a polyglot, he was able in his research to avoid one-sided interpretations of sociocultural development as well as terminological misusage. The ability to conduct a constructive dialogue (direct or indirect) with his contemporaries helped Kareev to interpret texts and ideas above national barriers. It is shown that Kareev takes the position of polyvariant research reflection, which has two aspects: psychological and instrumental. Psychologically, the interlocutor must be able to tune in to the tone of the opponent’s position. Instrumentally, each participant in the dialogue should not only speak the language of the interlocutor, but also strive to master the intricacies of translation and interpretation of concepts. Examples of Kareyev’s constructive-critical assessments of the judgments of Ernst Bernheim, Charles-Victor Langlois, Charles Seignobos and Nikolay Ya. Danilevsky are given as arguments. It is noted that Kareev was able to feel the resonant themes of his time. Consequently, the polylogical nature of his works can be viewed as a communicative reaction to everything new in science. It is concluded that, while remaining committed to the European ideal of humanity, Kareev contextually, even unconsciously, laid the foundation for an intercultural methodology that recognizes the importance of studying the multipolar space of cultures.
