DOI: 10.17072/2078-7898/2017-1-43-50

Charles Darwin’s theory IN THE critical reflection
OF Nikolay Danilevskiy and Nikolay sTrakhov
(FROM THE HISTORY OF DARWINISM IN RUSSIA)

Snetova Nina Vasil’evna
Ph.D. in Philosophy, Docent, Associate Professor
of the Department of the History of Philosophy

Perm State University,
15, Bukirev str., Perm, 614990, Russia;
e-mail: snetova@mail.ru
ORCID: 0000-0001-5935-7168

The article examines the nature of criticism of Darwin’s theory of the origin by the Russian philosophers neoslavophiles Nikolay Danilevskiy and Nikolay Strakhov. The first Social Darwinism criticism in the history of Russian philosophical thought is analyzed. Strakhov correctly estimates that using biological principles in the analysis of social relations points on the crisis of humanism. It is shown that social, political and philosophical views of the Russian critics have an impact on their analysis of the causes of the evolutionary theory spread among scientists and in public consciousness.

There is shown Strakhov’s attempt to find non-scientific, socio-cultural determinants of development, dissemination of scientific knowledge. Trying to find them, he explains quick spread of Darwin’s theory by the fact that scientists guided by faith in authorities, but not by scientific foundations. Author criticizes Strakhov’s idea that science is made by changes in the sphere of morality.

The author focuses on criticism of philosophical reasons of Darwin’s theory by Danilevskiy and Strakhov. In most cases Strakhov develops the argument proposed by Danilevsky. Danilevsky distinguishes idealism and materialism as two types of the worldview. Materialism is understood in its mechanistic form, which can be characterized as the mechanistic determinism. It is noted that Danilevsky and Strakhov do not agree with the interpretation of Darwin’s theory as the mechanistic worldview. They argued that Darwin replaced the principle of the absolute necessity by the mechanistic principle of an accident. It is underlined that Russian critics groped real weaknesses in Darwinian doctrine. However, they incorrectly interpreted the relationship of necessity and chance.

Keywords: Nikolay Danilevskiy, Nikolay Strakhov, Darwinism, Darwin, social Darwinism, the development of science, sociocultural factors, accident.

References

1. Snetova N.V. Filosofiya N.N. Strakhova (opyt intellektualnoi biografii) [The philosophy of N.N. Strakhov (the experience of intellectual biography)]. Perm, Perm State University Publ., 2010, 352 p. (In Russian).
2. Strakhov N.N. [Bad symptoms]. Vremya [Time]. 1862, no. 11, pp. 158–172. (In Russian).
3. Strakhov N.N. Kriticheskie stati ob I.S. Turgeneve i L.N. Tolstom [Critical articles about Ivan Turgenev and Leo Tolstoy]. Kiev, I.P. Matchenko Publ., 1902, vol. 2, 434 p. (In Russian).
4. Timiryazev K.A. Sochineniya [Works]. Moscow, Selhogiz Publ., vol. 5, 508 p. (In Russian).
5. Strakhov N.N. Iz istorii literaturnogo nigilizma [From the history of literary nihilism]. Saint Petersburg, Tipografiya bratev Panteleevykh Publ., 1890, 596 p. (In Russian).
6. Strakhov N.N. Bor’ba s Zapadom [Fight with the West]. Saint Petersburg, Tipografiya bratev Panteleevykh Publ., 1890, book 2, 567 p. (In Russian).
7. Ogurtsov A.P. Ot naturfilosofii k filosofii nauki [From Natural Philosophy to Philosophy of Nature]. Moscow, IPhRAS Publ., 1995, 315 p. (In Russian).
8. Danilevsky N.Ya. Darvinizm. Kriticheskoe issledovanie [Darwinism. A Critical Study]. Saint Petersburg, M.Ya. Elizarova Publ., 1885, vol. 1, 697 p. (In Russian).

The date of the manuscript receipt 14.11.2016

Please cite this article in English as:

Snetova N.V. Charles Darwin’s theory in the critical reflection of Nikolay Danilevskiy and Nikolay Strakhov (from the history of darwinism in Russia) // Perm University Herald. Series «Philosophy. Psychology. Sociology». 2017. Iss.1. P.43–50. DOI: 10.17072/2078-7898/2017-1-43-50