Izvestiya of Saratov University.

Philosophy. Psychology. Pedagogy

ISSN 1819-7671 (Print)
ISSN 2542-1948 (Online)


For citation:

Tonkovidova A. V., Orlov M. O. On the issue of establishing the parameters for defining a philosophical school. Izvestiya of Saratov University. Philosophy. Psychology. Pedagogy, 2025, vol. 25, iss. 3, pp. 176-180. DOI: 10.18500/1819-7671-2025-25-3-176-180, EDN: BSTNRV

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0).
Full text:
(downloads: 80)
Language: 
Russian
Heading: 
Article type: 
Article
UDC: 
001:1
EDN: 
BSTNRV

On the issue of establishing the parameters for defining a philosophical school

Autors: 
Tonkovidova Anna Viktorovna, Kuban State University of Physical Culture, Sports and Tourism
Orlov Mikhail Olegovych, Saratov State University
Abstract: 

Introduction. At present, the issue of defining the parameters of attribution to a philosophical school in the historical and philosophical aspect continues to be debatable. This issue can be presented both in a broad sense - defining the parameters of attribution to a philosophical school common to philosophical schools, and in a narrow sense – the possibility of identifying the “Moscow Metaphysical School”. Theoretical analysis. A weighty argument that confirms the existence and development of the “Moscow Metaphysical School” is the possibility of identifying in the works of the authors a conceptual model of sobornost, including the socio-ontological aspect, starting with the works of Vladimir Solovyov, and the socio-practical aspect, actualized in the form of a philosophical community in Nikolai Grot, and a university community in Sergei Trubetskoy. The conceptual model of sobornost formed the basis for identifying the parameters of a philosophical school. Conclusion. The “Moscow Metaphysical School” corresponds to the designated parameters of civilizational identity, inclusion in the historical-cultural and civilizational field, connection with previous philosophical schools and communities, influence on subsequent philosophical schools and communities, presence of a valuable object of philosophical research, community without external coercion to unity, intersection not only along the line of science, but also along the line of destinies of philosophers, the presence of a value scale shared by all members of the philosophical school, mutual citation, external and internal communications, innovation in philosophy.

Reference: 
  1. Ermichev A. A. Critical remarks on the question of a “Moscow school of metaphysics”. Solovyov Studies, 2021, iss. 2 (70), pp. 37–46 (in Russian). https://doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2021.2.037-046, EDN: CQTCFQ
  2. Frank S. L. Russkoe mirovozzrenie [Russian worldview]. St. Petersburg, Nauka, 1996. 736 р. (in Russian).
  3. Frank S. L. Iz istorii russkoy fi losofskoy mysli kontsa XIX – nachala XX veka [From the history of Russian philosophical thought of the late 19th – early 20th centuries]. Washington, D.C., New York, Inter-Language Literary Associates, 1965. 299 p. (in Russian).
  4. Antonov K. M. The idea of an association of intellectuals and its meaning for religion in the context of Russian thought of the end of the nineteenth century: The question of the communicative nature of knowledge and the concept of universality. St. Tikhon’s University Review. Series 1: Theology. Philosophy. Religious Studies, 2012, iss. 6 (44), pp. 54 – 68 (in Russian).
  5. Danilov S. A. Russian post-Soviet philosophy: An experience of self-analysis. Voprosy filosofii, 2011, no. 12, pp. 181–182 (in Russian). EDN: OPLAYF
  6. Orlov M. O., Tonkovidova A. V. Conceptual model of sobornost in Russian religious philosophy of the late 19th – first half of the 20th century. Bulletin of Chelyabinsk State University, 2024, no. 9 (491), pp. 108–115 (in Rus sian). https://doi.org/10.47475/1994-2796-2024-491-9-108-115, EDN: UMADQB
  7. Trubetsk oy S. N. Sobranie sochineniy Kn. Sergeya Nikolaevicha Trubetskogo: v 6 t. T. 2. Filosofskie stat′i [Collected works of Prince Sergei Nikolaevich Trubetskoy: in 6 vols. Vol. 2. Philosophical articles]. Moscow, Tipografi ya G. Lissnera i D. Sobko, 1908. 736 p. (in Russian).
  8. Solov’ev V. S. Kritika otvlechennykh nachal [Criticism of abstract principles]. Moscow, Direct-Media, 2012. 474 p. (in Russian).
  9. Solov’ev V. S. Sochineniya: v 2 t. [Works: in 2 vols.]. Moscow, Pravda, 1989. Vol. 2. 736 p. (in Russian).
  10. Maslin M. A., comp. Russkaya ideya [Russian Idea]. Moscow, Respublika, 1992. 496 p. (in Russian).
  11. Trubetskoy S. N. Sobranie sochineniy Kn. Sergeya Nikolaevicha Trubetskogo: v 6 t. T. 1. Publitsisticheskie stat′i, napechatannye s 1896 po 1905 god vkliuchitel′no [Collected works of Prince Sergei Nikolaevich Trubetskoy: in 6 vols. Vol. 1. Publicist articles published between 1896 and 1905, inclusive]. Moscow, Tipografi ya G. Lissnera i D. Sobko, 1907. 515 p. (in Russian).
  12. Grot N. Ya. More about the tasks of the magazine. Vop rosy filosofii i psikhologii [Questions of Philosophy and Psychology], 1891, vol. II, no. 6, pp. I–VI (in Russian).
  13. Listvina E. V. Modern socio-cultural communications: transformations in the digital age. Izvestiya of Saratov University. Philosophy. Psychology. Pedagogy, 2021, vol. 21, iss. 4, pp. 386–389 (in Russian). https://doi.org/10.18500/1819-7671-2021-21-4-386-389
Received: 
13.07.2025
Accepted: 
21.07.2025
Published: 
30.09.2025