Марксистська історіографія в наукових студіях Г. Плеханова та К. Каутського

Abstract

Introduction. Despite the all-out crisis of the Marxist understanding of history, and the obvious discreditation of the idea of sustained progress, nevertheless, Marxist historiosophy has left a deep trace in worldly science as a methodological antithesis to the other paradigms of historical writing. To this, we epistemologically add the development of the direct development of the theory and practice of historical science to the beginning stages, which is enough for the scientific studios to fully represent the current adherents of Marxism G. Plekhanov and K. Kautsky. Purpose. I use this article to analyze the achievements of Marxist historiography on the basis of scientific studies on the basis of historiographical texts on the basis of scientific studios of prominent representatives of G. Plekhanov and K. Kautsky, who saw a prominent personality in their work. Results. On the basis of the analysis of the dzherel, it was established that both of them did not immediately adopt the Marxist doctrines of history writing. After the singing of methodological speculations, the stench shifted to the position of the roaming of history, characteristic of Marxism, as a formation-stage, vertically directed, economically determined suspіlny process, accompanied by an unceasing class struggle. Recognizing historical materialism as a methodological non-alternative, G. Plekhanov and K. Kautsky demonstrated that the creative people were very close to the Marxist doctrines, zocrema, in the nutritional role of supple determinants (infusing the geographic social and spiritual community) and the significance of psychological social life There were few concrete-historical studios devoted to the political history, to the subsidiaries and the genesis of spirituality among the creative communities of Marxist scholars. While methodologically biased and practiced, they have become a major contribution to the development of light historiography. Originality. On a comparative basis, the author analyzes the historical and philosophical views of the scientific achievements of the past and the representatives of the Marxist historiography of G. Plekhanov and K. Kautsky. Conclusion. In the historical works of G. Plekhanov and K. Kautsky, there are several characteristics that are based on the Marxist paradigm of understanding the historical process. Despite the creative comprehension of the theoretical decay of the founders of Marxism and the introduction of the same innovations into the understanding of the historical process, both of them still did not improve their pretentiousness to orthodox Marxism. In a row z tsim vbachayutsya peevnі osoblinosti scientific studios tsikh scientists. The problem is christened in the article, it will require a further study of the relevant segments on the basis of diversification and the study of additional historiographical roots.