Article/Publication Details

ON THE PHENOMENOLOGICAL HORIZONS OF THE METHODOLOGY OF HISTORY OF A. S. LAPPO-DANILEVSKY

Abstract
The article problematizes the relatively recent tradition (initiated by O.M. Medushevskaya and picked up by a number of researchers) of a phenomenological interpretation of A. S. Lappo-Danilevskii’s historical and methodological work. The article aims to find out whether, and if so, in what sense (senses) it is possible to talk about the phenomenology of Lappo-Danilevskii. It shows the grounds on which this interpretation can, within certain limits, be accepted, and the moments of principal divergence between classical phenomenology and Lappo-Danilevskii’s methodology of history. The key point of these discrepancies is the phenomenological reduction, which is the essence of the phenomenological method, and, in the author’s opinion and contrary to the opinion of some researchers, is absent in the methodology of history of Lappo-Danilevskii. The theoretical positions that provoke the comparison of the views of Lappo-Danilevskii and Husserl are reduced to two main points: the problem of the psychological impenetrability of someone else’s Self and the understanding of the historical source as a construction of the historian. The article suggests that the “phenomenological motives” of Lappo-Danilevskii’s work are determined by the general philosophical and epistemological search of his time, perceived by Lappo-Danilevskii through the works of I. G. Droysen, Russian Neo-Kantianism and W. Dilthey, but hardly directly from Husserl’s philosophy, with which he could not be thoroughly familiar. The author suggests qualifying Lappo-Danilevskii’s methodological work as an original version of historical phenomenology, which was formed outside the direct influence of the classical phenomenology of Husserl. The article outlines the directions of further development of the problems laid down in Lappo-Danilevskii’s methodology of history, in particular, O. M. Medushevskaya’s “cognitive history,” A. L. Yurganov’s “historical phenomenology” and the sociological turn in the methodology of historical knowledge (turn from a subject to an actor) fixed by M. F. Rumyantseva. The latter, according to the author of the article, actualizes the key problem of the phenomenological tradition—that of intersubjectivity.

Keywords
A. S. Lappo-Danilevskii, methodology of history, someone else’s Self, historical source, methodology of cognition in the Russian pre-revolutionary thought, classical phenomenology, sociological phenomenology, historical phenomenology.

References

• Husserl, E. (1991). Phenomenology (The Article in the Encyclopedia Britannica). Logos, 1, 12—21.
• Husserl, E. (2010). Cartesian Meditations. Rus. Ed. Moscow: Akademicheskii Proekt Publ. (In Russian)
• Ionov, I. N. (2015). The Project of “Cognitive History”: Archeology and Ecology of Ideas (Reflections on the Next Publication of O. Medushevskaya’s Works). Obshchestvennye nauki i sovremennost’, 2, 84–95. (In Russian)
• Kareev, N. (1887). Basic Questions of the Philosophy of History. Part 1. The Essence and Task of the Philosophy of History. St Petersburg: Izdanie L. F. Panteleeva Publ. (In Russian)
• Korzun, V. P. (2013). A. S. Lappo-Danilevskii: The First Experiments of Intellectual History in Russian Humanities. Klio, 12 (84), 77–82. (In Russian)
• Kozlova, N. (2005). Soviet People. Scenes from History. Moscow: Izdatel’stvo “Evropa” Publ. (In Russian)
• Kruglov, A. N. (2006). On the Concept of Phenomenology. In Istoriko-filosofskii ezhegodnik — 2006 (2–4). Moscow: Nauka Publ. (In Russian)
• Lambert, I. G. (2006). Phenomenology, or the Doctrine of Visibility. In Istoriko-filosofskii ezhegodnik — 2006 (105–113). Moscow: Nauka Publ. (In Russian)
• Lappo-Danilevskii, A. S. (2010a). Methodology of History in 2 Volumes, vol. 1. Moscow: ROSSPEN Publ. (In Russian)
• Lappo-Danilevskii, A. S. (2010b). Methodology of History in 2 Volumes, vol. 2. Moscow: ROSSPEN Publ. (In Russian)
• Lappo-Danilevskii, A. S. (2017a). The Foundation of Sociology (Fragments of the Course “Scientific Foundations of Sociology in their Historical Development”). In A. V. Malinov, Sotsiologicheskoe nasledie A. S. Lappo-Danilevskogo: issledovaniia i materialy (260–277). St Petersburg: Izdatel’stvo Russkoi khristianskoi gumanitarnoi akademii Publ. (In Russian)
• Lappo-Danilevskii, A. S. (2017b). Exposition and Criticism of the Theory of D. S. Mill (Fragments of the Manuscript “On Sociology”). In A. V. Malinov, Sotsiologicheskoe nasledie A. S. Lappo-Danilevskogo: issledovaniia i materialy (278–318). St Petersburg: Izdatel’stvo Russkoi khristianskoi gumanitarnoi akademii Publ. (In Russian)
• Malinov, A. V. (2014). From Methodology of History to the Theory of Social Science (From the Lectures of Academician A. S. Lappo-Danilevskii). Epistemologiia i Filosofiia Nauki, XLI (3), 157–171. (In Russian)
• Malinov, A. V. (2017). The Sociological Heritage of A. S. Lappo-Danilevsky: Research and Materials. St Petersburg: Izdatel’stvo Russkoi khristianskoi gumanitarnoi akademii Publ. (In Russian)
• Medushevskaya, O. M. (2008). Theory and Methodology of Cognitive History. Moscow: Izd-vo RGGU Publ. (In Russian)
• Medushevskaya, O. M. (2010). Methodology of History as a Strict Science. In A. S. Lappo-Danilevskii, Metodologiia istorii: v 2-kh t. Tom 1 (23–84). Moscow: ROSSPEN Publ. (In Russian)
• Molchanov, V. I. (2010). Transcendental Experience and Transcendental Naivety in the Cartesian Meditations of Edmund Husserl. In E. Husserl, Kartezianskie meditatsii (200–224). Moscow: Akademicheskii Proekt Publ. (In Russian)
• Ol’khov, P. A. (2019). Positing History: The Methodological Ethos of A. S. Lappo-Danilevsky’s Thinking. In T. G. Shchedrina & B. I. Pruzhinin (Eds.), Metodologiia istorii: N. I. Kareev, A. S. Lappo-Danilevskii, D. M. Petrushevskii, V. M. Khvostov (195–208). Moscow: Politicheskaia entsiklopediia Publ. (In Russian)
• Orlova, Y. O. (2004). Kantian Strategies for Interpreting Husserl’s Phenomenology (On the Example of Modern Research in Germany). Proceedings of the Conference “The Relevance of Kant”. Retrieved from http://anthropology.ru/ru/text/orlova-yuo/kantianskie-strategii-interpretacii-fenomenologii-gusserlya-na-primere-sovremennyh (In Russian)
• Rumyantseva, M. F. (2010). Aleksandr Sergeevich Lappo-Danilevskii. In A. S. Lappo-Danilevskii, Metodologiia istorii: v 2-kh t. Tom 1 (5–22). Moscow: ROSSPEN Publ. (In Russian)
• Rumyantseva, M. F. (2012). The Russian Version of Neo-Kantianism: Towards the Formulation of the Problem. Uchenye zapiski Kazanskogo universiteta. Gumanitarnye nauki, 154 (1), 130–141. (In Russian)
• Rumyantseva, M. F. (2013). Perception of A.S. Lappo-Danilevsky’s Methodological Concept by Scholarly and Pedagogical School of Source Studies — http://ivid.ucoz.ru. Klio, 12 (84), 28–31. (In Russian)
• Rumyantseva, M. F. (2014). Phenomenology vs Neo-Kantianism in the Concept of A. S. Lappo-Danilevsky. Dialog so vremenem, 46, 7–16. (In Russian)
• Rumyantseva, M. F. (2017). The Principle of Recognizing Alien Animation in the Humanities of the XX Beginning of the XXI Century: The Limits of Applicability. In G. G. Ershova (Ed.), “Steny i mosty” V: mezhdistsiplinarnoe vzaimodeistvie istoricheskogo znaniia s estestvennymi i sotsial’no-gumanitarnymi naukami (78–90). Moscow: Akademicheskii proekt Publ. (In Russian)
• Rusina, Y. A. (2015). Methodology of Source Studies. Ekaterinburg: Izd-vo Ural. un-ta Publ. (In Russian)
• Savel’eva, I. M., & Poletaev, A. V. (2008). Raising History to the Rank of Science. Dialog so vremenem, 25 (1), 26–54. (In Russian)
• Serkova, V. A. (2019). Philosophical Origins of the Methodology of the History of A. S. Lappo-Danilevskii. In V. V. Kozlovskii & A. V. Malinov (Eds.), Akademik A. S. Lappo-Danilevskii v pamiati nauchnogo soobshchestva (320–331). St Petersburg: Intersotsis Publ. (In Russian)
• Shmerlina, I. A. (2021). Lappo-Danilevskii and Methodological Issues of Studying the History of Russian Social Thought. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniia, 9, 94–104. (In Russian)
• Shyutts, A. (2003a). The Problem of Transcendental Intersubjectivity in Husserl. In Smyslovaia struktura povsednevnogo mira: ocherki po fenomenologicheskoi sotsiologii (46–84). Moscow: Institut Fonda “Obshchestvennoe mnenie” Publ. (In Russian)
• Shyutts, A. (2003b). The Social World and the Theory of Social Action. In Smyslovaia struktura povsednevnogo mira: ocherki po fenomenologicheskoi sotsiologii (96–113). Moscow: Institut Fonda “Obshchestvennoe mnenie” Publ. (In Russian)
• Vasil’ev, Y. A. (2016). German Schools of Historians of the XVIII–XIX Centuries. Article 3. Prussian (Small German) Scientific School. Informatsionnyi gumanitarnyi portal “Znanie. Ponimanie. Umenie”, 4, 5–19. Retrieved from http://zpu-journal.ru/e-zpu/2016/4/Vasiliev_Ger-man-Schools-3 (In Russian)
• Vasil’ev, Y. A. (2017). Was A. S. Lappo-Danilevsky a Neo-Kantian in History? Vlast’, 3, 186–191. (In Russian)
• Vvedenskii, A. (1892). On the Limits and Signs of Animation. A New Psycho–physiological Law in Connection with the Question of the Possibility of Metaphysics. St Petersburg: Tipografiia V. S. Balasheva Publ. (In Russian)
• Yakoboni, M. (2011). Reflecting in People: Why do We Understand Each Other. Moscow: OOO “Yunaited Press” Publ. (In Russian)
• Yurganov, A. L. (1998). Categories of Russian Medieval Culture. Moscow: MIROS Publ. (In Russian)
• Yurganov, A. L. (2001).The Experience of Historical Phenomenology. Voprosy istorii, 9, 36–52. (In Russian)
• Yurganov, A. L. (2003). Source Studies of Culture in the Context of the Development of Historical Science (the End). Rossiia XXI, 4, 64–85. Retrieved from http://www.avorhist.ru/publish/yurganov_istved2.html (In Russian)