论文部分内容阅读
在学术著作中对“西方派”一词没有统一的解释。在我们看来,波兰社会思想史家A.瓦利茨基的观点最符合真实情况,第一,他认为西方派一词属于1840年那股十分确定的思想潮流,从而反对扩展对该词的解释;第二,他认为不仅必须把T.H.格拉诺夫斯基、K.д.卡维林、B.п.包特金和其他“不大不小的”人物列入西方派,而且也应算上别林斯基和赫尔岑,即必须包括从黑格尔哲学和乌托邦信仰中找到共同语言的各种见解不同的人。而且这位研究家还强调指出,离西方派理想模式最切近的是别林斯基,尽管在他和他的战友的世界观中,不仅仅只有西方主义一个方面。与斯拉夫派的争论在很大程度上加强了西方派队伍的团结。
There is no uniform explanation of the term “western school” in academic works. In our opinion, the opinion of the historian A. Warlitz, the social historian of Poland, is most in line with the real situation. First, he believes that the term western school belongs to the very well-established ideological trend of 1840, and opposed the expansion of the interpretation of the term ; Secondly, he did not think it was necessary not only to include TH Granovsky, K. Davivin, B. P. Bagkin and other “modest” characters in the Western faction, but also to count On Belinsky and Herzen, one must include those who differ from the various opinions that find common language in Hegelian philosophy and Utopian faith. And the researcher emphasizes that Belinsky, the closest thing to the idealist model of the Western school, is not only one aspect of Westernism in the worldview of him and his comrades-in-arms. The debate with the Slavic faction has greatly strengthened the unity of the Western faction.