In the Russian philosophical and cultural tradition, in all known typologies, Russia is usually considered separately. At the same time, they proceed from the recognition of its exclusivity, the impossibility of reducing it to either the Western or the Eastern type, and from this they draw a conclusion about its special path of development and special mission in the history and culture of mankind. Basically, Russian philosophers wrote about this, starting with the Slavophiles. The topic of the "Russian idea" was very important for and. The result of these reflections on the fate of Russia was summed up in the philosophical and historical concepts of Eurasianism.

Prerequisites for the formation of the Russian national character

Usually Eurasians proceed from the middle position of Russia between Europe and Asia, which they consider to be the reason for the combination in Russian culture of the features of Eastern and Western civilizations. A similar idea was once expressed by V.O. Klyuchevsky. In The Course of Russian History, he argued that the character of the Russian people was shaped by the disposition of Russia on the border of the forest and the steppe - elements that are opposite in all respects. This split between the forest and the steppe was overcome by the love of the Russian people for the river, which was both a breadwinner, and a dear, and educator of a sense of order and social spirit among the people. The spirit of entrepreneurship, the habit of joint action was brought up on the river, the scattered parts of the population were drawn together, people were accustomed to feel like a part of society.

The opposite effect was exerted by the endless Russian plain, which was distinguished by its desolation and monotony. The man on the plain was seized by a feeling of imperturbable peace, loneliness and dull meditation. According to many researchers, this is the reason for such properties of Russian spirituality as spiritual softness and modesty, semantic uncertainty and shyness, imperturbable calmness and painful despondency, lack of clear thought and a predisposition to spiritual sleep, asceticism of wilderness and the pointlessness of creativity.

An indirect reflection of the Russian landscape was the household life of a Russian person. Klyuchevsky also noted that Russian peasant settlements, with their primitiveness and lack of the simplest amenities, give the impression of temporary, random nomadic camps. This is due both to the long period of nomadic life in antiquity and to the numerous fires that exterminated Russian villages and cities. The result was the unrootedness of the Russian people, manifested in indifference to home improvement, everyday amenities. It also led to a careless and careless attitude towards nature and its riches.

Developing the ideas of Klyuchevsky, Berdyaev wrote that the landscape of the Russian soul corresponds to the landscape of the Russian land. Therefore, for all the complexities of the relationship of a Russian person with Russian nature, its cult was so important that it found a very peculiar reflection in the ethnonym (self-name) of the Russian ethnos. Representatives of various countries and peoples in Russian are called nouns - French, German, Georgian, Mongol, etc., and only Russians call themselves an adjective. This can be interpreted as the embodiment of their belonging to something higher and more valuable than people (nation). This is the highest thing for a Russian person - Russia, the Russian land, and each person is a part of this whole. Russia (earth) is primary, people are secondary.

Great value for the formation Russian mentality and culture played in its eastern (Byzantine) version. The result of the baptism of Rus was not only its entry into the then civilized world, the growth of international authority, the strengthening of diplomatic, trade, political and cultural ties with other Christian countries, not only the creation artistic culture Kievan Rus. From that moment on, the geopolitical position of Russia between the West and the East, its enemies and allies, all orientation to the East, were determined, in connection with which the further expansion of the Russian state took place in an eastern direction.

However, this choice also had flip side: the adoption of Byzantine Christianity contributed to the alienation of Russia from Western Europe. The fall of Constantinople in 1453 consolidated in the Russian consciousness the idea of ​​its own specialness, the idea of ​​the Russian people as a God-bearer, the only carrier verily Orthodox faith, which predetermined the historical path of Russia. This is largely due to the ideal of Orthodoxy, combining unity and freedom, embodied in the conciliar unity of people. At the same time, each person is a personality, but not self-sufficient, but manifests itself only in a conciliar unity, whose interests are higher than the interests of an individual.

Such a combination of opposites gave rise to instability, could explode with a conflict at any moment. In particular, the basis of all Russian culture is a series of insoluble contradictions: collectivity and authoritarianism, universal consent and despotic arbitrariness, self-government of peasant communities and rigid centralization of power associated with the Asian mode of production.

The contradictory nature of Russian culture was also generated by the specific for Russia mobilization type of development when material and human resources are used by their over-concentration and over-tension, in conditions of a shortage of necessary resources (financial, intellectual, temporary, foreign policy, etc.), often with immaturity of internal factors of development. As a result, the idea of ​​priority was formed political factors development over all others and a contradiction arose between the tasks of the state and the capabilities of the population by their decision, when the security and development of the state was ensured by any means, at the expense of the interests and goals of individuals by means of non-economic, coercive coercion, as a result of which the state became authoritarian, even totalitarian, the repressive apparatus was immensely strengthened as an instrument of coercion and violence. This largely explains the dislike of the Russian people for and at the same time the awareness of the need to protect them and, accordingly, the endless patience of the people and their almost uncomplaining submission to the authorities.

Another consequence of the mobilization type of development in Russia is the primacy of the social, communal principle, which is expressed in the tradition of subordinating personal interest to the tasks of society. Slavery was dictated not by the whim of the rulers, but by a new national task - the creation of an empire on a meager economic basis.

All these features have formed such features of Russian culture, as the absence of a solid core, led to its ambiguity, binarity, duality, a constant desire to combine the incongruous - European and Asian, pagan and Christian, nomadic and sedentary, freedom and despotism. Therefore, the main form of the dynamics of Russian culture became inversion - a change in the type of pendulum swing - from one pole cultural significance to another.

Due to the constant desire to keep up with its neighbors, to jump overhead, old and new elements coexisted in Russian culture all the time, the future came when there were no conditions for it yet, and the past was in no hurry to leave, clinging to traditions and customs. Moreover, the new often appeared as a result of a jump, an explosion. This feature historical development explains the catastrophic type of development of Russia, which consists in the constant violent breaking of the old in order to give way to the new, and then to find out that this new is not at all as good as it seemed.

At the same time, the dichotomous, binary nature of Russian culture has become the reason for its exceptional flexibility, the ability to adapt to extremely difficult conditions of survival during periods of national catastrophes and socio-historical upheavals, comparable in scale to natural disasters and geological catastrophes.

The main features of the Russian national character

All these moments have formed a specific Russian national character, which cannot be assessed unambiguously.

Among positive qualities usually they call kindness and its manifestation in relation to people - benevolence, cordiality, sincerity, responsiveness, cordiality, mercy, generosity, compassion and empathy. They also note simplicity, openness, honesty, and tolerance. But this list does not include pride and self-confidence - qualities that reflect a person's attitude to himself, which testifies to the characteristic attitude of Russians towards “others,” about their collectivism.

Russian attitude to work very peculiar. A Russian person is hardworking, efficient and hardy, but much more often he is lazy, careless, careless and irresponsible, he is characterized by indifference and slovenliness. The diligence of Russians is manifested in the honest and responsible performance of their labor duties, but does not imply initiative, independence, or the desire to stand out from the team. Sloppiness and carelessness are associated with the vast expanses of the Russian land, the inexhaustibility of its riches, which will be enough not only for us, but also for our descendants. And since we have a lot of everything, then nothing is a pity.

"Faith in a good king" - mental feature Russians, reflecting the long-standing attitude of a Russian person who did not want to deal with officials or landowners, but preferred to write petitions to the tsar (general secretary, president), sincerely believing that evil officials are deceiving the good tsar, but one has only to tell him the truth, as weight immediately will be good. The excitement surrounding the presidential elections held over the past 20 years proves that the belief is still alive that if you choose a good president, Russia will immediately become a prosperous state.

Passion for political myths - another characteristic feature of the Russian person, inextricably linked with the Russian idea, the idea of ​​the special mission of Russia and the Russian people in history. Belief in what the Russian people are destined to show to the whole world the right way(no matter what this path should be - true Orthodoxy, communist or Eurasian idea), combined with the desire to make any sacrifices (up to their own death) in the name of achieving the goal. In search of an idea, people easily rushed to extremes: they went to the people, made a world revolution, built communism, socialism "with human face", Restored the temples destroyed before. Myths can change, but the painful addiction to them remains. Therefore, credulity is called among the typical national qualities.

Calculation for "chance" - a very Russian trait. It permeates the national character, the life of the Russian people, manifests itself in politics and economics. "Perhaps" is expressed in the fact that inaction, passivity and lack of will (also named among the characteristics of the Russian character) are replaced by reckless behavior. And it will come to this at the very last moment: "Until the thunder breaks out, the man will not cross himself."

The flip side of the Russian "maybe" is the breadth of the Russian soul. As noted by F.M. Dostoevsky, “the Russian soul is bruised by the breadth,” but behind its breadth, generated by the immense spaces of our country, both prowess, youth, merchant scope, and the absence of a deep rational miscalculation of the everyday or political situation are hidden.

Values ​​of Russian culture

The Russian peasant community has played an important role in the history of our country and in the formation of Russian culture, and the values ​​of Russian culture are to a large extent the values ​​of the Russian community.

Itself community, "peace" as the basis and prerequisite for the existence of any individual is the most ancient and most important value. For the sake of "peace" I must sacrifice everything, including my life. This is explained by the fact that Russia lived a significant part of its history in a besieged military camp, when only the subordination of the interests of an individual to the interests of the community allowed the Russian people to survive as an independent ethnic group.

Collective interests in Russian culture, it is always above the interests of the individual, which is why personal plans, goals and interests are so easily suppressed. But in response, the Russian person counts on the support of the "world" when he has to face the hardships of life (a kind of mutual guarantee). As a result, the Russian person, without displeasure, postpones his personal affairs for the sake of some common cause, from which he will not benefit, and this is his attractiveness. The Russian person is firmly convinced that it is necessary first to arrange the affairs of the social whole, more important than his own, and then this whole will begin to act in his favor at its own discretion. The Russian people are collectivists who can only exist together with society. He suits him, worries about him, for which he, in turn, surrounds him with warmth, attention and support. To become a Russian person must become a catholic personality.

Justice- another value of Russian culture, important for life in a team. It was originally understood as the social equality of people and was based on economic equality (of men) in relation to the land. This value is instrumental, but it has become a target in the Russian community. Community members had the right to their own, equal with everyone, share of the land and all its riches, which belonged to the "world". Such justice was the Truth for which the Russian people lived and aspired to. In the famous dispute between truth-truth and truth-justice, it was justice that prevailed. For a Russian person, it is not so important as it was or is in reality; much more important than what should be. The nominal positions of eternal truths (for Russia, these truths were truth-justice) were evaluated by the thoughts and actions of people. Only they are important, otherwise no result, no benefit can justify them. If nothing comes of the plan, it’s not scary, because the goal was good.

Lack of individual freedom was determined by the fact that in the Russian community with its equal allotments, periodically carried out redistribution of the land, it was simply impossible for individualism to manifest itself in a striped manner. Man was not the owner of the land, he had no right to sell it, he was not free even in terms of sowing, harvesting, in choosing what could be cultivated on the land. In such a situation, it was unrealistic to show individual skill. which in Russia was not at all appreciated. It is no coincidence that they were ready to accept Lefty in England, but he died in complete poverty in Russia.

The habit of emergency mass activity(suffering) brought up the same lack of individual freedom. It was a strange combination of hard work and a festive mood. Perhaps the festive atmosphere was a kind of compensatory means, which made it possible to more easily endure a heavy pile and give up excellent freedom in economic activity.

Wealth Couldn't Become Value in a situation where the idea of ​​equality and justice dominates. It is no coincidence that the proverb is so well known in Russia: "You cannot make stone chambers by righteous labor." The desire to increase wealth was considered a sin. Thus, in the Russian northern village, merchants were respected, who artificially slowed down trade.

Labor itself was also not a value in Russia (unlike, for example, Protestant countries). Of course, labor is not rejected, its usefulness is recognized everywhere, but it is not considered a means that automatically ensures the fulfillment of a person's earthly vocation and the correct arrangement of his soul. Therefore, in the system of Russian values, labor occupies a subordinate place: "Work is not a wolf, it will not run away into the forest."

A life not oriented towards work gave the Russian person freedom of spirit (partly illusory). This has always stimulated creativity in a person. It could not be expressed in constant, painstaking work aimed at the accumulation of wealth, but it was easily transformed into eccentricity or work to the surprise of others (the invention of wings, a wooden bicycle, a perpetual motion machine, etc.), i.e. actions were performed that did not make sense for the economy. On the contrary, the economy often turned out to be subordinate to this idea.

Community respect could not be earned simply by becoming rich. But only a feat, a sacrifice in the name of "peace" could bring glory.

Patience and Suffering in the Name of "Peace"(but not personal heroism) is another value of Russian culture, in other words, the goal of the accomplished feat could not be personal, it must always be outside of a person. There is a well-known Russian proverb: "God endured, and he told us to." It is no coincidence that the first canonized Russian saints were princes Boris and Gleb; they accepted a martyr's death, but did not resist their brother, Prince Svyatopolk, who wanted to kill them. Death for the Motherland, death “for his friends” brought immortal glory to the hero. It is no coincidence that in tsarist Russia on awards (medals) the words were minted: "Not for us, not for us, but for Your name."

Patience and suffering- the most important fundamental values ​​for a Russian person, along with consistent abstinence, self-restraint, constant sacrifice of oneself in favor of another. Without this, there is no personality, no status, no respect for others. Hence comes the eternal desire for a Russian person to suffer - this is the desire for self-actualization, conquest inner freedom, necessary to do good in the world, to win the freedom of spirit. In general, the world exists and moves only through sacrifice, patience, and self-restraint. This is the reason for the longsuffering inherent in the Russian people. He can endure a lot (especially material difficulties) if he knows why it is needed.

The values ​​of Russian culture constantly indicate its striving for some higher, transcendental meaning. For a Russian person, there is nothing more exciting than the search for this meaning. For this, you can leave your home, family, become a hermit or a holy fool (both were highly revered in Russia).

For the Day of Russian Culture as a whole, such a meaning becomes the Russian idea, the implementation of which the Russian person subordinates his entire way of life. Therefore, researchers talk about the features of religious fundamentalism inherent in the consciousness of a Russian person. The idea could change (Moscow is the third Rome, imperial idea, communist, Eurasian, etc.), but its place in the structure of values ​​remained unchanged. The crisis that Russia is going through today is largely due to the fact that the idea that united the Russian people has disappeared, it became unclear why we should suffer and humiliate ourselves. The key to Russia's overcoming the crisis is the acquisition of a new fundamental idea.

The listed values ​​are contradictory. Therefore, a Russian could simultaneously be a brave on the battlefield and a coward in civil life, could be personally loyal to the sovereign and at the same time rob the royal treasury (like Prince Menshikov in the Petrine era), leave his home and go to war to free the Balkan Slavs. High patriotism and mercy were manifested as sacrifice or a blessing (but it could well become a "disservice"). Obviously, this allowed all researchers to talk about the “mysterious Russian soul”, the breadth of the Russian character, that “ you can't understand Russia with your mind».

Philosophical and historical research always has a certain practical orientation. Comprehending the past, we strive to understand the present, to determine the development trends of modern society. In this sense, the solution of the question of the relationship between Western and Eastern cultures and civilizations, as well as the place of Russia in the dialogue of these cultures, is acquiring a particularly important, urgent significance for us. This problem has been raised quite often before in the works of philosophers and sociologists. Now it has begun to be discussed not only in the specialized press - monographs, articles, but also in weekly and daily magazine and newspaper articles, in political discussions, etc. journal "Questions of Philosophy" held a round table on "Russia and the West: Interaction of Cultures", at which the leading Russian scientists presented their positions: philosophers, historians, philologists, regional studies, etc. Using the materials of this discussion, as well as significant material preceding it from domestic and world thought, we will try to answer the questions posed.

West and East in this context are considered not as geographic, but as geosopio-cultural concepts. One of the participants " round table", V. S. Stepin, noted that by the term" West "he understands a special type of civilizational and cultural development that took shape in Europe around the 15th - 17th centuries. A civilization of this type could be called technogenic. Its characteristic features are a rapid change in technology and technology, thanks to its systematic application in the production of scientific knowledge. The consequence of this application is scientific, and then scientific and technological revolution that change the attitude of man to nature, and his place in the production system. As the technogenic civilization develops, there is an accelerating renewal of that artificially created by man subject environment, in which his vital activity directly proceeds. In turn, this is accompanied by an increasing dynamics of social ties, their relatively rapid transformation. Sometimes, during the life of one or two generations, there is a change in lifestyle and the formation of a new type of personality.

The preconditions for Western culture were laid back in antiquity and the Middle Ages. The main milestones in her prehistory were the following: experience of democracy antique polis, the formation within the framework of his culture of various philosophical systems and the first samples of theoretical science, and then - formed in the era European Middle Ages Christian tradition with its ideas about human individuality, the concept of morality and understanding of the human mind as created, "in the image and likeness of God," and therefore capable of rational comprehension of the meaning of life. The synthesis of these two traditions during the Renaissance was one of the origins of the values ​​of the technogenic civilization. In the Age of Enlightenment, the formation of ideological attitudes, which determined the subsequent development of technogenic civilization, was completed. In the system of these attitudes, the special value of the progress of science and technology was formed, as well as the conviction in the fundamental possibility of the rational organization of social relations. In social terms, Western civilization is identified with the era of the formation and development of capitalist production and economic relations and bourgeois-democratic forms of government, the formation of civil society and legal domination. Technologically, with an industrial and post-industrial society.

Philosophers and sociologists consider the worldview, social and technological aspects of culture as a whole, showing their inextricable unity and interaction. Thus, the German sociologist and philosopher M. Weber in his famous work "Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of Capitalism" convincingly showed the role of the Protestant Reformation and the religious teachings of Calvinism in the formation of the rationalist spirit of capitalism and other basic value orientations of this society. The result of this synthesis, according to Weber, was the following basic values ​​of Western culture: 1) dynamism, orientation towards novelty; 2) affirmation of dignity and respect for the human person; 3) individualism, an attitude towards the autonomy of the individual; 4) rationality; 5) ideals of freedom, equality, tolerance; 6) respect for private property.

In philosophy and sociology, the Western type of culture is opposed to the Eastern type, which has received the synthetic name of “traditional society”. Geopolitically, the East is associated with the cultures of Ancient India and China, Babylon, Ancient Egypt, and the national-state formations of the Muslim world. These cultures were distinctive and, at the same time, characterized by some common features: they were focused, first of all, on the reproduction of the existing social structures, the stabilization of the established way of life, which often prevailed for many centuries. Traditional patterns of behavior, accumulating the experience of ancestors, were seen as the highest value. The types of activity, their means and ends changed very slowly, for centuries they were reproduced as stable stereotypes. In the spiritual sphere, religious and mythological ideas and canonized styles of thinking prevailed, scientific rationality was contrasted with a moral and volitional attitude towards contemplation, serenity, intuitive and mystical merging with being.

In the worldview aspect in Eastern cultures, there is no division of the world into the world of nature and society, natural and supernatural. Therefore, the eastern perception of the world is not characterized by the division of the world into "one and the other", it is more inherent in the syncretic approach "one in the other" or "all in all." Hence the denial of the individualistic principle and the orientation towards collectivism. Autonomy, freedom and dignity of the human person are alien to the spirit oriental culture... In the eastern worldview systems, man is absolutely not free, he is predetermined either by cosmic law or by God.

This is where the political and economic models of the organization of the life of the "Eastern man" follow. The spirit of democracy and civil society is alien to Eastern people. It has historically been dominated by despots. The desire to inculcate the norms of Western democracy on Eastern soil gives very peculiar hybrids, and the realization of these aspirations is associated with deep social cataclysms.

Of course, all of these, in a certain sense, are speculative models, reality has never given such pure “ideal types”. Moreover, in modern world when such close interaction of all spheres is carried out public life in different countries and continents, which leaves a huge imprint on the interaction and transformation of cultures.

Now that we have given the most general characteristics Western and Eastern type of culture, it is necessary to understand, and to which culture does Russia most of all gravitate?

Philosophers and sociologists have long faced the question:

How do Western and Eastern cultural heritage compare in Russian culture? Is it possible and necessary to have an original way of development for Russia? The answers to these questions were often given in the opposite direction. On this basis, there was an ideological dispute between various philosophical and ideological trends, the concentrated theoretical design of which took place in the middle of the 19th century. in the form of the ideology of Westernism and Slavophilism. Westerners, as mentioned above, did not seek to emphasize the peculiarities of the Russian cultural experience and believed that Russia should adopt all the best achievements of Western culture and way of life. Slavophiles defended the idea of ​​the originality of the Russian path of development, linking this originality with the adherence of the Russian people to Orthodoxy. In their opinion, Orthodoxy was the source of a number of the most important features of the "Russian soul", Russian culture, the most important of which are deep religiosity, heightened emotionality and associated collectivist values, the priority of the collective over the individual, commitment to autocracy, etc. (For more details, see the topic "Russian Religious Philosophy of the Mid-19th-20th Centuries").

The question of the path of development of Russia, of the originality of Russian culture acquired even greater importance for the philosophers of Russia who found themselves in emigration after the October Revolution. During this period this topic in various foreign publications were published several major works leading Russian thinkers: Berdyaeva N.A., Vysheslavtseva B.P., Zenkovsky V.V., Fedotov G.P., Florovsky G.V., Sorokina P.A. This topic was analyzed in the work of Ya.A. Berdyaeva “The Russian Idea. The main problems of the Russian thoughts XIX and the beginning of the XX century ”.

NA Berdyaev believes that it is impossible to give a strictly scientific definition to define the national type, national individuality. The secret of any individuality is recognized only by love and there is always something incomprehensible to the end, to the last depth in it. AND main question it consists, according to Berdyaev, not in what the Creator intended about Russia, but in what is the intelligible image of the Russian people, its idea. The famous Russian poet F. I. Tyutchev said: “You cannot understand with the mind of Russia, you cannot measure with a common yardstick. She has a special become, you can only believe in Russia. " Therefore, Berdyaev believes, in order to comprehend Russia, it is necessary to apply the theological virtues of faith, hope and love.

One of the most important characteristics of the Russian national individuality, according to Berdyaev, is its deep polarization and contradictoriness. “The contradiction and complexity of the Russian soul,” he notes, “may be due to the fact that in Russia two streams of world history collide and come into interaction - the East and the West. The Russian people are not purely European and not purely asian people... Russia is a whole part of the world, a huge East-West, it connects two worlds. And always in the Russian soul, two principles fought, eastern and western "(N. A. Berdyaev. Russian idea. The main problems of Russian thought in the 19th and early 20th centuries / On Russia and Russian philosophical culture: Philosophers of the Russian post-October emigration.- M., 1990.- P. 44).

N. A. Berdyaev believes that there is a correspondence between the immensity, the boundlessness of the Russian land and the Russian soul. In the soul of the Russian people there is the same immensity, boundlessness, striving towards infinity, as in the Russian plain. The Russian people, Berdyaev argues, were not a people of a culture based on ordered rational principles. He was a people of revelation and inspiration. Two opposite principles formed the basis of the Russian soul: the pagan Dionistic element and the ascetic-monastic Orthodoxy. This duality permeates all the main characteristics of the Russian people: despotism, state hypertrophy and anarchism, liberty, cruelty, inclination to violence and kindness, humanity, gentleness, ritualism and the search for truth, individualism, heightened consciousness of personality and impersonality, collectivism, nationalism, self-praise and universalism , all-humanity, eschatological-missionary religiosity and outward piety, the search for God and militant atheism, humility and arrogance, slavery and rebellion. These conflicting features Russian national character and predetermined, according to Berdyaev, the complexity and cataclysms Russian history.

The solution to the theme of the original foundations of Russian history and culture in the works of representatives of the so-called Eurasian movement (P. A. Karsavin, N. S. Trubetskoy, G. V. Norovsky, P. P. Stuchinsky, etc.) ... Eurasianism existed as a socio-political and ideological trend of the Russian émigré intelligentsia from the early 1920s to the late 1930s. Eurasianism, as a historical and cultural concept, considers Russia as Eurasia - a special ethnographic world that occupies the middle space of Asia and Europe, roughly outlined by three plains - East European, West Siberian and Turkestan. This world also has its own original culture, “equally different from European and Asian”. At the same time, the Eurasians emphasized the Asian bias of Russian culture, including the Turanian peoples in this culture, linking Russia with the empire of Genghis Khan by succession and declaring that "the Russian revolution opened a window to Asia." Of particular interest are the views of the Eurasians on the prospects of Russia in the development of world civilization. The Eurasians believed that after the October Revolution, old Russia with all its statehood and way of life collapsed and sank into eternity. World War and the Russian revolution ushered in a new era. And this era is characterized not only by the disappearance of the past Russia, but also by the disintegration of Europe, the all-embracing crisis of the West. And the West, according to the Eurasians, has completely exhausted its spiritual and historical potential and must descend to a secondary and peripheral role in world history. The future in this new era belongs to the renewed Russia, and with it to everything the Orthodox world... Here, as we can see, the Eurasians are largely following the Slavophiles.

The topics raised in the discussions of Westerners and Slavophiles by N. A. Berdyaev and the Eurasians continue to be discussed in modern Russian philosophy. For many modern Russian philosophers, it is clear that the development of Western technogenic culture and civilization has led mankind to global issues and crises. In this regard, they pose the question: can we perceive samples of Western experience as some kind of ideal, or should these samples themselves be criticized? Perhaps humanity, in order to survive, must embark on a new path of civilized development. And this may mean that the deep crisis in all spheres of social life that has come in Russia is a necessary moment that can serve as an impetus for the creation of this new type of civilized development. In Russian culture, in the national Russian tradition, there are serious grounds for working out such a path of development, the main values ​​of which would be an orientation not towards ever-increasing material production and consumerism, but towards ascetic moderation based on the priority of spiritual values. Cold calculation, calculation, rationalism must be opposed by the warmth of human relations and Christian self-sacrifice, and individualism - fraternal mutual assistance and collectivism. Along with these deep "metaphysical" questions, there are more specific ones related to the social specifics of the current situation in the former USSR... What are the paths, what are the destinies of that integrity, that community that was previously called Russia, will it come together again or is the process of its disintegration irreversible? This and other issues will have to be resolved both theoretically and practically not only for us, but also for future generations of peoples of the once great Russian Empire.

Russian civilization: West or East? Types of civilizations

1. Ed. Balabanova A.I. - ed. with rev. Banks and banking. Textbook, Peter: Unity, 2005;

2. Ed. Lavrushin O.I. Banking. - M .: Banking and Exchange Information Center, 1999

3. Ed. L. P. Krolivetskaya, E. V. Tikhomirova Banking. Lending activities of commercial banks. Textbook: "KnoRus", 2009;

4. Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On banks and banking activities in the Republic of Kazakhstan".

Geographic, climatic and mental factors of Russian history

As V.O. Klyuchevsky, "nature is the cradle of the people." Indeed, it is the climate, soil properties, humidity and similar factors that largely shape work standards, work culture (especially in agricultural regions), and hence the mentality of the people.

The climate on the territory of the East European Plain is sharply continental: severe, with very long cold winters and short cool summers. The agricultural work season starts at the end of April and ends in the middle of September, i.e. very short. The yield is low, most of the soil is generally unsuitable for cultivation. Therefore, the peasant was forced to work at the limit of his capabilities. In addition, once every 12 - 15 years, nature brought some "surprises" like crop failure ... Thus, the Russian work ethic was formed: it is necessary to work a lot, hard, to be able to do everything, but at the same time irresponsibility is revealed, as well as an amazing inability to work systematically , evenly.

The natural conditions required a collective effort. Therefore, the Russians have a high collective mentality.

Due to the large territories, national pride was formed.

Since Russia is not surrounded on all sides by sea, mountains, or other obstacles, it was very open to invasions. In addition, there were almost no loyal states nearby. Consequence - most of Russian history - military history.

The country's long distance from the centers of European civilization led to a lag in cultural development. Russia did not have a base of European culture - antiquity. The country was isolated, there was stagnation.

Also, due to the vastness of the territory and as a result of colonization, the country is multinational, multi-confessional, which created certain problems in mutual understanding, but at the same time fostered tolerance in people and worldly wisdom. Christian religion was brought to Russia from Byzantium, so its eastern version, Orthodoxy, was adopted. And when in 1054 Christianity disintegrated into Orthodoxy and Catholicism, Russia remained true to the traditions of the “big brother”. And in general Orthodoxy is "fidelity", "orthodox". The culture of Russia is mainly religious, built on traditions and its own, unlike anything else, mentality.

Russian Civilization: West or East? Types of civilizations

Civilization is a human community that, for a certain period of time, has stable special features in the socio-political organization, economy and culture (science, technology, art, etc.), common spiritual values ​​and ideals, mentality.

Among the so-called Western countries currently include the countries of Western Europe, USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and sometimes also South Africa, Israel, Japan, etc.

Currently to countries of Eastern Europe include: Belarus, Hungary, Bulgaria, Moldova, Russia (up to 22% of the territory), Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Czech Republic and Ukraine

As for Russia's attitude to Western or Eastern civilizational types, we can say that Russia does not fully fit into either the Western or the Eastern type of development. Russia has a huge territory and therefore Russia is a historically formed conglomerate of peoples belonging to different types development, united by a powerful, centralized state with a Great Russian core. Russia, geopolitically located between two powerful centers of civilizational influence - the East and the West, includes peoples developing both in the Western and Eastern versions.

As a result, since its inception, Russia has absorbed a huge religious and cultural diversity of the peoples living on its territory and adjacent to it. For a long time, the development of Russia was influenced by the states of both eastern (Mongolia, China) and western (during the reforms of Peter I, a lot was borrowed from the western type of development) civilizational types. Some scholars distinguish a separate Russian type of civilization. So it is impossible to say exactly what civilizational type Russia belongs to.

Even the ancient Greeks thought about the fact that in addition to their culture there is one more - the eastern one. Those who were in the East understood that the eastern type of culture differs significantly from the western one. This world was perceived as the opposite, different, where everything is organized differently, not always friendly and open.
Subsequently, it became customary that European culture is represented by the countries of Europe, America, and the eastern - by Asian countries.
However, the principle of territorial division is not essential here in distinguishing between the two types of cultures. The characteristics of cultures also have and different methods knowledge of the world. The social and political order also differs.
A whole science - culturology - has taken up the study of the existence of Eastern culture, and it pays no less attention to the disclosure of this concept than western type culture.
Literature as a form of artistic creation especially clearly reflects all facets of Eastern culture. It is literature that has always shown both cultures in their direct opposition and dissimilarity to each other. For example, the famous english writer, the poet R. Kipling wrote that the east and west "will never meet."
Scientists of the XIX century discovered new territories of Eastern culture - India, Indonesia. It was found that eastern civilizations are older than European ones.
The initial idea of ​​Eastern culture was subsequently rethought, an introduction to the scientific foundations of life took place.
The famous philosopher M. Weber came to the conclusion that the civilizations of India, China, the Middle East are the basic civilizations of the East. Eastern countries live according to principles that are perceived in the rest of the world as "normal" - not going beyond the ordinary, not creating anything brilliant. In this connection, the East seems to be a traditional, long-formed world, incapable of competing with the West.
However, Oriental scholars are not so categorical in their statements. They respect the culture of the East and say that the originality and antiquity of Eastern culture bring fruit to the world order.
It was from the East that the ancestral home of man arose, thanks to which he began his gradual resettlement throughout the world. In this sense, Eastern culture is recognized as the main one.
In this type of culture, the two main components - religion and culture - almost coincide. This kind of complex combines in itself its unique secret ideas, as well as beliefs, sacred actions, as well as a set of ethical norms, morality, law and order. These constants regulate the relationship of believers.
Thus, the typical peculiarity of the oriental type of culture is the main one when characterizing this type.
The oriental type of culture also has various types of subcultures. They also have a long history of origin and development, as a result of which they are subjected to careful study.
The first type of oriental culture is the Confucian-Taoist culture. It originated in China, in its main Chinese ethnic community.
In the first place, the highest virtue is revered, as well as the power hierarchy and ethics. Religion in Eastern culture is canonized - everyone worships Allah, his authority is unshakable. Taoists treat the problem of life and death philosophically and with the understanding that there is no escape from fate, each person is prepared by fate - how he will live and how he will leave the mortal world.
The second type of Eastern culture is the Indo-Buddhist type.
This religion, unlike the previous one, merges religion and philosophy into one whole. The teaching of Buddha is based on the concept of moral norms of human behavior. Only by contemplating the world measuredly, living peacefully and without fuss, a person is able to live up to the truth. Reflecting on his actions, a person is able to approach the Almighty.
It is common for Buddhism to go to a monastery often or at least lead an ascetic lifestyle. In this case, it is necessary to renounce the world and choose metaphysics as a way of knowing this world.
The next type of oriental culture is the Islamic type. This type has arisen relatively recently. It is characterized by a less ramified theistic structure - the Islamists believe in only one God, Allah. In this culture, the cult of human actions, predetermined from above, stands at the height. All life in Islam is subject to the laws of religion, specially authorized people make sure that these laws are followed. According to the Islamists, only a believer deserves bliss in paradise.
So, the following parameters correspond to all types of Eastern culture:
- stability, so it develops more evenly, without jerking.
- close connection with nature, a sense of the universe.
- Oriental people are adherents of traditions.
- reverent attitude towards religion.
All these reasons make the oriental type of culture unique.

Russian culture in the "East - West" system

Features of Russian culture were largely determined by her geopolitical position: the middle position between West and East; spatial characteristics of "distance" and "space" as attributes of the Russian mentality; the problem of the "cultural lag" of Russia in the Middle Ages.

The famous Russian philosopher N.A. Berdyaev noted that two streams of world history collide in Russia - the West and the East. Russian culture cannot be considered purely European or purely Asian: two principles have always fought in it - Eastern and Western. V different periods its development, Russian culture borrowed the customs and traditions of different peoples: the pagan deities of the Scandinavian peoples; Byzantine Christianity (Orthodoxy); French language and ideas of enlightenment; language and customs of the English nobility.

One of the significant historical and cultural problems of Russia is the problem of cultural lagging behind in the Middle Ages. By the beginning of the 18th century. in Russia there was no secular literature, architecture, music, philosophy and science, while Europe by this time had already created a huge array of scientific and philosophical knowledge, had experience in all areas of culture and a more progressive state structure. Young Peter I, while traveling across Europe, was struck by the difference in the way Europeans and Russians lived.

The culture of Russia is the culture of the Russian people, which developed at first on an East Slavic basis in the form of the culture of the Old Russian people (approximately in the VIII-XIII centuries), and since the XIV century. and to the present time it is represented by Ukrainian, Belarusian and Russian cultures proper. In this initial and most characteristic of the Russian cultural self-awareness of understanding, the decisive one is the idea of ​​the temporary, local and essential unity of Russian culture and its certain uniqueness among the cultures of other European peoples.

There are two approaches to defining the very concept of "Russian culture". The first insists on a sharp contrast between "Rus-Ukraine" and the much later mixed cultural education that took shape in Russia itself. The second, which is especially gaining strength at the present time, represents the culture of Russia as a set of many different national cultures, one way or another connected with the Russian culture itself. Both of these aspirations are explained to a certain extent by the specifics of Russian culture itself and the paths of its historical development; the originality of natural conditions and socio-cultural environment, as well as the general flavor of the historical era.

In the Christian world, Russian culture is one of the three (along with Byzantine and Western Christian) the most significant cultures.

Considering the issue about the place of Russia in world history , the specifics of her own history and culture, about the originality of her statehood, trying to understand and explain fancy patterns the political history of the country and the people, very often refer to the old philosophical and historical scheme "East-West". No matter how the initial concepts are understood, the elements of this classical scheme... Russia is considered to belong either to the West or the East, or to have its own specifics, and therefore does not coincide with either the West or the East.

In the latter case, several independent positions are possible. For example, it can be considered that Russia, as it were, oscillates between West and East (G.V. Plekhanov); it can be declared the great East-West or West-East (N. A. Berdyaev); one can predict her great role in the unification of the West and the East on the basis of true Christianity(young V.S.Soloviev); one can consider it as such a "third force" (VS Solovyov's term), which does not directly depend on either the East or the West, forming a special world, quite comparable to the first two, although peculiar and inimitable (Eurasians).

The East-West-Russia problem was first announced in "Philosophical letters " P. Ya. Chaadaeva, which gave rise to a discussion between the "Westerners" and "Slavophiles". Considering the history of Russia, P. Ya. Chaadaev believes that it has turned out to be torn out of the world historical process. Russia relies on both Europe and the East, but must combine these two principles. This "isolation" is a consequence of the adoption of Orthodoxy by Russia. The philosopher thinks. That if Catholicism in its essence is a deeply social phenomenon, then Orthodoxy educates in a person such qualities as obedience, humility and asceticism. Having expressed the idea that Russia could become a bridge between the West and the East, since it has the ability to combine in its culture both great principles of spiritual nature - reason and imagination, P. Ya. Chaadaev thereby raises the question of the "third force" in the world stories.

Like P. Ya.Chaadaev, they saw their ideal of sociocultural development in Western Europe Westerners, who were absolutely convinced that Russia should learn from the West and follow the same path of development. They wanted Russia to assimilate European science, culture and the fruits of age-old enlightenment. Westerners had little interest in religion, and if there were religious people among them, they did not see the merits of Orthodoxy and tended to exaggerate the shortcomings of the Russian Church. Westerners' optimism was the belief that Russia will pass the path of Europe, since it is already on its threshold and all movements of European life find a response in it.

Contrary to Westerners, efforts Slavophiles were aimed at developing a Christian worldview based on the teachings of the Eastern Church Fathers and Orthodoxy in the original form that the Russian people gave it. They idealize the historical and cultural past of Russia and the Russian national character. Slavophiles highly appreciated the distinctive features of Russian culture and argued that the history and culture of Russia developed and will develop along their own path, completely different from the path Western nations... In their opinion, Russia is called upon to heal Western Europe with the spirit of Orthodoxy and Russian social ideals, to help Europe in resolving its internal and external problems in accordance with general Christian principles.

Throughout almost the entire 19th century. v research literature dominated by the idea of ​​a deep and fundamental difference Russian history from the history of Western European peoples. Reliance on the Hegelian triad - China, India, the Middle East - and a simultaneous introduction to world history Russia as its new necessary link was allowed two, purely theoretical possibilities: preserving three elements, but placing Russia as an additional link in one of them (most likely in the third, Christian - according to its main characteristic); or the reduction of the old scheme to two elements and the introduction of a new element into the triad - Russia.

Of the presented theoretical possibilities, the second has a clear theoretical priority. However, the idea of ​​Russian originality, which dominated Russian socio-philosophical thought in the 19th century, used the former, since for Russian thinkers Russia was, first of all, a country of Christianity and Christian culture.

Thus, the question of Russia, its culture and place in history in the East-West relationship is resolved as follows. Firstly, an indication of the Christian character of its spiritual and cultural tradition and the European identity of the ethnos, society and statehood (this is how it differs from the civilizations of the East). Secondly, an indication of Orthodoxy and the coincidence of statehood and civilization due to geopolitical specifics, which distinguishes Russia from the countries of Western Europe. Purely historically Russia(together with Byzantium and Western Europe) -it is the secondary and youngest Christian civilization in the western world.

Comparative consideration of Russian culture with others, as a rule, has the goal of establishing a fundamental interaction between them, as well as overcoming, in the words of O. Spengler, the "mutual impermeability" of closed cultures-civilizations. Such a comparison is possible at three levels: 1) national(Russian and French, Russian and Japanese culture, etc.); 2) civilizational(comparison of Russia with the civilizations of the East and the Western European "Faustian" or Western European civilization); 3) typological(Russia in the context of the West and the East in general).

Nationally Russian culture is one of the national European cultures, which has its own special "face", along with everyone else, starting with the ancient Hellenes, from whom comes the European civilizational and historical tradition. This specificity - its vast territory and a single state of the Russian people, and hence - the coincidence of nation and civilization.

Christianity and its connection with the Hellenic all-European basis (through Greek Byzantium) distinguish the Russian one from the Eastern civilizations; from the civilization of Western European peoples - the Orthodox character of Russian culture and the moments indicated above.

Finally, in the broadest cultural context Russia together with Western Europe is the West as opposed to the East... This determines the place of Russia in the dialogue of cultures. As a geopolitical force, it has already saved twice European civilization: from the Tatar-Mongols in the Middle Ages and from their own European "plague" (fascism) - in the twentieth century.

But whether Russia, as a spiritual force, can become a "bridge" between Europe and Asia, or, even more so, between original Christianity and future spirituality on our planet, is a big and difficult question. When considering the place and role of Russia in modern culture, two options of reasoning are admissible: from world culture to Russian, and vice versa.

For modern culture two essential features: cultural expansion of the West- in a situation of extreme secularism and at the same time the universalization of one's own culture; and struggle for cultural autonomy and identity in non-Western civilizations in the face of "modernization" and "westernization".

Russian culture in modern times and especially in the Soviet and post-Soviet eras has experienced a similar impact. Having discovered a significant desire to adopt the standards of "Westernism" and "modernism", which has twice led to the collapse of the established statehood and to the historical gap between Orthodoxy and culture.

To what extent a culture oriented towards the scientist-materialistic ideal of universality, internally contradictory at its core, has a perspective and a future is a question that is increasingly worrying the most serious Western thinkers. Their search - in the direction of the revival of the basic values ​​of Christian culture - coincides with the efforts of those Orthodox thinkers and scientists, people of art, public figures and politicians who defend not the “originality” of Russia for its own sake, but the idea of ​​its fundamental spirituality, traditional for Russian culture.