N.V. Ustryalov's philosophical dispute with Slavophiles in the light of modern events.

Abstract

The object of the research is the actual problems of Russian philosophical thought related to the issues of power and society, the spiritual and historical basis of national existence, in the context of modernity. The article attempts to reveal the meaning of the philosophical polemics of N.V. Ustryalov, the leader of the smenovekhovstvo, and Slavophiles, in which, according to the author of the article, these topics are most acutely raised. The main triad in Ustryalov's political ontology is distinguished (power, nationality, religion, which should be based on a creative idea) and compared with the well-known triad of Slavophiles (Orthodoxy-nationality-autocracy). It is shown that Ustryalov, in the "power-people" bundle, gives priority to power, mystifying and psychologizing it, whereas, according to Slavophiles, state power is a manifestation of the people's will, whose mind is in churches and universities. It is argued that the main disagreement between Ustryalov and the Slavophiles was how they treated Orthodoxy. Ustryalov believed that not only religion, but also philosophy can become the spiritual basis of society's life, but only if it carries a creative beginning. He was close to the principle of religious tolerance. The Slavophiles believed that power should be based on the spiritual foundation that develops historically: without relying on it, it is impossible to resist the new-fangled ideas that are masterfully introduced into people's consciousness. The article concludes that Ustryalov, seeing Romanticism in the political doctrine of the Slavophiles, was not free from it himself. He did not fully think through the idea of national policy, which is especially relevant in modern times.