Mythology IF RAS

From the editorial office. Despite the fact that the Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences has signed a contract for renting premises until 2018, interested forces are trying to force the institute to free the building. The other day, the directorate of the institute introduced all the employees to the current situation, voicing an official position and telling about their intentions. According to the results of the meeting, the famous philosopher Alexei Alekseevich Kara-Murza agreed to answer the questions of the “Russian magazine”.

* * *

RG: Dear Alexei Alekseevich, what is your position on the transfer of the building of the Institute of Philosophy of the Pushkin Museum?

Alexey Kara-Murza: I devoted my life to the study of philosophy, in particular to such its section as Russian public thought. And for me, as a historian of philosophy, it is obvious that the “House on the Volkhonka” is a unique place not only for Moscow or Russia, but for the whole world. Indeed, the accident that it was here, in the Holitsyn estate, that the leader of the Russian Westernism was shot at the same time Boris Nikolaevich Chicherin and the leader of the domestic Slavophilism Ivan Sergeyevich Aksakov. Both, from my point of view, were emancipor thinkers. They were distinguished only by an understanding of what mechanisms must be used to liberate our country. Chicherin believed that the new Russia should be created with the help of state, but essentially Westernic instruments. Aksakov, on the other hand, saw the future of our country in the original Slavophil foundations, which are in no way state. And it was in the building where the Institute of Philosophy is now located, they lived for some time. It was here that Chicherin gave baptism to the Trubetskiy brothers, and Aksakov instructed the great Russian philosopher Vladimir Solovyov. This is the uniqueness of this place. It was here that two wings of Russian social thought, Westernism and Slavophilism were constituted, constituted.

It seems to me, when in the 1920s they thought about where to place the institution of philosophy, they might not know about this part of the story of the “house on the Volkhonka”. But, nevertheless, the institution of philosophy was placed in it. Accordingly, we can state that this house has its own mythology, which cannot be neglected. This mythology constitutes philosophical science and wisdom. Thus, turning the house of the Institute of Philosophy into the fifth or sixth building of the Pushkin Museum would not be a state. In addition, there are not many characters left in Moscow, regarding which we can say that they embody the culture of the people. Many at the meeting of the IF RAS team said that this house needs to leave this house, since it is filled with negative memories and emotions. They said that it was here that Ilyenkov poisoned, stigmatized geneticists and so on. But this is an integral part of the history of Russian philosophy. If you reason so, then Socrates must be forgotten, because he was forced to suicide. But Socrates are still remembered. In Greece they know where the Plato Academy was, where Aristotle's Liker was. People live and cultivate this point of growth. Why should we refuse exactly the same growth point? So that I hardly understand that they can offer us in return. There are no places like this and cannot be.

In addition, it’s a shame that all this is done not in the name of culture, but in the name of some kind of commercial interest. Here, obviously, four underground floors will not be able to make, because they stumble upon the Kropotkinskaya metro. They will not be able to store paintings, since the building is not intended for this. We are simply deceived, they are not saying something to us. Well, philosophers are ready to fight to the end.

RG: However, as it seems, the philosophers of the Institute of Philosophy occupy a variety of positions on the continuation of the struggle.

A.K.: Some say that Russia cannot be dealt more. The paradox is that people worried and more difficult times, but fought. Now for some reason it is believed that the struggle is a meaningless activity. Nekrasov was not in vain in due time: "There were worse times, but there were no more and more."

In addition, I personally would not want the attitude to the culture that manifested itself in this conflict to become another slap of public opinion and the mass consciousness of Russians . People doubted that the eviction of the Institute of Philosophy has other grounds besides commercial. And they, from my point of view, are right. Therefore, my civil position is not different from the position of professional. The “House on the Volkhonka” should remain in the property of those new generations of people who enter our workshop.

Therefore, the decision of the team developed during the meeting is correct. It is necessary to study the situation and unveil the results of the investigation. After all, now we play at all. In addition, we will be in all possible legal, that is, legitimate ways to try to reason all participants in this venture, in the sense that it is impossible in sight of the whole country to actually engage in the raider seizure of one of the key buildings of the Moscow Center.

RJ: What will be your contribution to the fight?

A.K.: Once I wrote an article on how Boris Nikolayevich Chicherin, who was a professor at Moscow University, behaved in similar situations. As you know, when in 1911 the new Minister of Education introduced troops into the territory of Moscow University, Chicherin’s students, remembering his act, acted the same way as Chicherin half a century before. They resigned. Students and teachers are a whole. And in this sense, the fact that the university is located in the building of the Institute of Philosophy adds energy, adds a sense of rightness to our team. We understand that the students are with us. Therefore, I hope that the government will put the interests of people at the forefront, and not some money bags. In this case, the interests of people are connected with the preservation of our institute and the university.

If the government puts the priorities of people and the new generation of Russian humanities at the forefront, I think it will agree with our requirements. We are ready to make the face of people making decisions. Therefore, it is necessary not to demand a “Down with the wrong decision”, but to make people think again what Russia needs and that it does not need it today.

Talked by Alexander Pavlov