Open AccessSandor Varjas and debate about historical materialism
Author(s) -
Dmitrii Petrovich Mochalov,
Мочалов Дмитрий Петрович
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
samarskij naučnyj vestnik
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2782-3016
pISSN - 2309-4370
DOI - 10.17816/snv2021101215
Subject(s) - epistemology , historiography , historical materialism , interpretation (philosophy) , dialectic , dialectical materialism , appeal , context (archaeology) , meaning (existential) , relation (database) , period (music) , subject (documents) , social science , comparative historical research , sociology , philosophy of history , philosophy , marxist philosophy , history , political science , law , linguistics , archaeology , database , library science , computer science , aesthetics , politics
The purpose of the paper is to study the relationship between historical methodology and philosophy on the basis of early Soviet discussions about historical materialism. The appeal to this topic is considered as a generalization of the experience passed by the Russian methodology of history and at the same time as an attempt to rehabilitate the idea of the relationship between philosophy and private sciences after the historiographical situation of perestroika and the post-Soviet period. Interaction with philosophy is considered as a solution to the methodological crisis in historical science. In this study, based on the discussion between the mechanist philosopher A.I. Varjas and the dialectical philosophers N.A. Karev and V.F. Asmus, various approaches to the implementation of Marxs methodological propositions in relation to historical and philosophical research are considered. The discussion is considered using a number of materials that provide an understanding of the context of intellectual thought of those years. The conclusion is made about the dependence of the meaning of specific methodological provisions on one or another interpretation of general philosophical questions by the researcher. The relationship between ontology and the subject area of science is illustrated, and the significance of this area for the correct application of the method is shown. Special emphasis is placed on the interpenetration of the positions of the debating parties and their evolution in the time perspective. The conducted research allowed us to outline further prospects for generalizing the experience of the national methodology of history and confirm a number of previously put forward provisions.