to ecclesiastical theology has transformed modern philosophy into the philosophy of religion (§§ 41 and 41a).
Thus the general course of evolution (alike in Russia and in Europe) justifies our choice of these associated developments of the philosophy of history and the philosophy of religion to throw light upon the study of Russia. But it is necessary for me to anticipate the objections, that I have failed to give a complete account of the philosophy of history and the philosophy of religion, and that for the proper understanding of Russia we must draw upon a knowledge of philosophy in its widest ramifications.
It is true that I have ignored many of the representatives of professorial philosophy, many exponents of philosophy at the seminaries, and other philosophical writers. But those who take the trouble to examine sketches of the history of Russian philosophy will find that, while many noted Russian names are not to be found in the present work, on the whole my choice of representative thinkers will appear justified. And that is the real question—whether the thinkers I have selected do truly characterise Russia.[1] My own opinion is that the substance of their doctrines and the historical succession of the writers I have selected as representative, combine to justify my choice.
It is not fortuitous that not one of these men ever secured a professorial position at a state university, and the fact is extremely characteristic of Russia. (Solov'ev fruitlessly endeavoured to obtain a professorship, as Kirěevskii had done before him.) Moreover, in all lands where freedom is unknown, the official representatives of science, and above all of philosophy, are on the whole conservatives and supporters of the government, especially in those domains which are closely connected with politics by direct or indirect ties. Science and philosophy are not identical with official science and philosophy, with the teachers appointed by government, or with the teaching caste to which these belong. It suffices, in this connection, to become acquainted with the ideas of Pobědonoscev (who was a professor) and with
- ↑ For those who do not read Russian, practically the only survey of Russian philosophy hitherto available has been the section on Russia contributed by Kolubovskii to Ueberweg-Heinze, Grundriss der Geschichte der Philosophie des XIX Jahrhunderts, and this is merely bibliographical. Of Russian works I have alluded in § 38 to Radlov's sketch. I may also mention Grusenberg, Skizzen der gegenwärtigen russischen Philosophie, 1911.
