The problem of the originality of Russian philosophy in the early historiography of Russian philosophy

Abstract

The author analyzes the early historiography of Russian philosophy (works of Arch. Gavriil (Voskresensky), V.V. Chuiko, J.N. Kolubov­sky, A.I. Vvedensky, B.V. Yakovenko, E.L. Rad­lov, G.G. Shpet, V.F. Ern, A.F. Losev) and its historical-philosophical canon. It is pointed out that later this canon became basic for both Soviet and émigré historiography. The importance of the early historiography of Russian philosophy for V. V. Zenkovsky, N. O. Lossky, and S.A. Levitsky, authors of popular works on the history of Russian thought, are emphasized. Two directions in the early historiography of Russian philosophy are distinguished: Westernist (A.I. Vvedensky, E.L. Radlov, B.V. Yako­venko, G.G. Shpet, Y.N. Kolubovsky, V.V. V.F. Ern, A.F. Losev and N.A. Berdyaev). It is argued that the Western orientation, according to which Russian philosophy - this is part of Western philosophical culture, dominated the historiography and determines the scope of research on Russian philosophy: it is in this key is written most of the first generalizing works on the history of Russian philosophy. Representatives of the alternative trend saw the origins of Russian philosophy in the beginnings, which differ from the beginnings of Western philosophy, and considered Russian philosophy as an original phenomenon, which historically goes back to the Eastern patristics. In connection with this question in the article the special attention is given to the problem of illumination of creativity of G. Skovoroda in the early historiography of the Russian philosophy.