Status of a Historian of Philosophy and the Historico-Philosophical Practice in the Soviet Philosophy of the 1930s: Mikh. Lifshitz

Abstract

The аrticle is devoted to the study of the status of a Historian of Philosophy and the historico-philosophical practice in the Soviet philosophy of the 1930s on the basis of works by Mikhail Lifshitz devoted to Hegel’s philosophy. Due to comparison of the historico-philosophical practice of the so-called “Techeniye” (Mich. Lifshitz, G. Lukacs, etc.) with the earlier Soviet philosophical tradition of interpretation of Hegel’s philosophy (A. Deborin and his school) core changes in understanding of the work of a Historian of Philosophy of the beginning of the 1930s can be traced. Analysis of the methodological aspects of these changes and transformation of the way of work with the established Soviet historico-philosophical concepts play an important role in this study. Attention to the articles by Mikhail Lifshitz of the beginning of the 1930s devoted to Hegel’s philosophy allows the reader to acquire a new idea of the role of the system of values and personal qualities in the course of historico-philosophical work at the turn of the 1920-1930s and also a new idea of the role of a Historian of Philosophy in the society in which he lives. Special attention is given to the consideration of fundamentally new interpretation of socio-cultural foundations of Hegelian philosophy in Lifshitz’s articles of the 1930s. There is a change of the methodological approach to the history of philosophy in the Soviet philosophical tradition which led to several changes in the status of philosophy historian as an ideologist. Thereby, the problem of the political relevance of historical and philosophical work in the 1930s is considered.