Samarin through the lens of western-liberal ideologues

Introduction. The paper analyzes the way representatives of the liberal camp evaluated the views of Y. F. Samarin, a leading figure in the Slavophile movement. Emphasis is placed on examining the positions of prominent Western-liberal ideologues: K. D. Kavelin, B. N. Chicherin, and A. D. Gradovsky. This approach reveals the distinctiveness of the perspectives held by both Slavophiles and Westernizers, as well as individual nuances of each thinker's views.
Materials and methods. The study scrutinizes the philosophical works of outstanding nineteenth-century Russian thinkers: Y. F. Samarin, K. D. Kavelin, B. N. Chicherin, A. D. Gradovsky, and others, who belonged to opposing ideological camps. It also considers subsequent scholarly literature devoted to the analysis of these thinkers' works. The research employs a historical-logical method to place the scholars’ views within a broad social context, alongside a comparative methodology that juxtaposes their positions to identify shared attitudes and individual distinctiveness.
Results. The paper emphasizes Samarin's well-substantiated critique of Kavelin's claim that Russia lacked a genuine history prior to Peter I. Samarin also demonstrated the untenability of Chicherin's rejection of "subjective principles" in humanitarian knowledge. As a supportive argument, the paper cites prominent Russian scholars who endorse Samarin's position regarding the presence of value orientations in humanitarian research, and consequently, their inevitable subjectivity. However, such personal assessment does not imply a "distortion of scientific facts." The study also examines A. D. Gradovsky’s publications dedicated to Samarin. Despite his liberal orientation, Gradovsky provided an objective assessment of the Russian thinker's views, demonstrating his significance in both intellectual and social spheres.
Discussion and conclusions. The study concludes that Y. F. Samarin was one of the most educated figures of his time. His publications were the focus of attention for both Slavophiles and Westernizers. He successfully demonstrated the importance of national traditions and Russia’s unique culture to the country’s development. Samarin's polemic with K. D. Kavelin and B. N. Chicherin, along with A. D. Gradovsky's assessment of his views, remains relevant today, particularly concerning the preservation and development of national values and historical memory. Importantly, even Samarin’s ideological opponents highly valued his personal qualities: his honesty, patriotism, and integrity.

1. Gradovskij A. D. The Significance of the Ideal in Public Life. Gradovskij A. D. Trudnye gody (1876-1880). St. Petersburg, Tipografiya M. M. Stasyulevicha Publ., 1880. Pp. 1-34. (In Russ.)

2. Gradovskij A. D. Yuri Fedorovich Samarin. Gradovskij A. D. Trudnye gody (1876-1880). St. Petersburg, Tipografiya M. M. Stasyulevicha Publ., 1880. Pp. 35-45. (In Russ.)

3. Granovskij T. N. Public Readings. Articles. Letters. Moscow, ROSSPEN Publ., 2010. 672 p. (In Russ.)

4. Kavelin K. D. A View of the Russian Rural Community. Kavelin K. D. Sochineniya v 4-h chastyah. CH. 4. Moscow, V tipografii V. Gracheva i komp. Publ., 1859. Pp. 249-286. (In Russ.)

5. Kavelin K. D. Fundamental Principles of the Russian Judicial System and Civil Procedure, from the Code to the Statute on the Provinces. Kavelin K. D. Sochineniya v 4-h chastyah. CH. 1. Moscow, V tipografii V. Gracheva i komp. Publ., 1859. Pp. 39-304. (In Russ.)

6. Kavelin K. D. Reply to the "Moskvityanin". Kavelin K. D. Sochineniya v 4-h chastyah. CH. 1. Moscow, V tipografii V. Gracheva i komp. Publ., 1859. Pp. 380-413. (In Russ.)

7. Koyalovich M. O. History of Russian Self-Consciousness. Minsk, Luchi Sofii Publ., 1997. 688 p. (In Russ.)

8. Samarin D. F. Biography of Yu. F. Samarin. Samarin YU. F. Sochineniya v 10 t. T. 9. Moscow, Tovarishchestvo tipografii A.I. Mamontova Publ., 1898. Pp. I-XXX. (In Russ.)

9. Samarin YU. F. Two Words about Nationality in Science. Samarin YU. F. Sochineniya v 10 t. T. 1. Moscow, Tipografiya A. I. Mamontova i Ko Publ., 1877. Pp. 109-121. (In Russ.)

10. Samarin YU. F. Regarding the opinion of the "Russian Messenger" on the study of philosophy, on popular principles and their relationship to civilization. Samarin YU. F. Sochineniya v 10 t. T. 1. Moscow, Tipografiya A. I. Mamontova i Ko Publ., 1877. Pp. 266-292. (In Russ.)

11. Samarin YU. F. Analysis of the work of K. D. Kavelin "Problems of Psychology". Samarin YU. F. Sochineniya v 10 t. T. 6. Moscow, Tipografiya A. I. Mamontova i Ko Publ., 1887. Pp. 371-478. (In Russ.)

12. Samarin YU. F. On the Opinions of "Sovremennik" Historical and Literary. Samarin YU. F. Sochineniya v 10 t. T. 1. Moscow, Tipografiya A. I. Mamontova i Ko Publ., 1877. Pp. 28-108. (In Russ.)

13. T. N. Granovsky and His Correspondence. Volume 2. Moscow, Tovarishchestvo tipografii A.I. Mamontova Publ., 1897. 496 p. (In Russ.)

14. Florenskij P. A. The Pillar and Statement of Truth. Volume 1. Part II. Moscow, Pravda Publ., 1990. 839 p. (In Russ.)

15. Florovskij G. V. The Position of the Christian Historian. Florovskij G. V. Dogmat i istoriya. Moscow, Izdatel'stvo Svyato-Vladimirskogo Bratstva Publ., 1998. Pp. 39-79. (In Russ.)

16. CHaadaev P. YA. Articles and Letters. Moscow, Sovremennik Publ., 1989. 621 p. (In Russ.)

17. CHicherin B. N. Memories. Russkie memuary. Izbrannye stranicy (1826-1856). Moscow, Pravda Publ., 1990. Pp. 166-306. (In Russ.)

18. CHicherin B. N. On Nationality in Science. CHicherin B. N. Filosofiya prava. St. Petersburg, Nauka Publ., 1998. Pp. 261-271. (In Russ.)

19. CHicherin B. N. Russia on the Eve of the Twentieth Century. CHicherin B. N. Filosofiya prava. St. Petersburg, Nauka Publ., 1998. Pp. 542-615. (In Russ.)

20. SHaposhnikov L. E. Philosophical and pedagogical views of B. N. Chicherin. Vestnik SPbU. Filosofiya i konfliktologiya, 2023, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 696-711. (In Russ.)