In philosophical and anthropological teachings, a person is considered, as a rule, abstracted from any type of national culture. Meanwhile, the nature of a person allows for unique features that distinguish him as a representative of a particular national culture. The qualities common to all people manifest themselves in different ways, when one of them acquires not just a supreme, sovereign meaning, but even in this meaning it looks specific, reflecting the essence of the nature of a person belonging to a well-known cultural education.
What method can be resorted to in order to try to comprehend the phenomenon of the Russian person, the essence of his nature, the features of the moral and psychological structure?
One can try to get an idea of the most important properties of the Russian mentality from the experience of Russian history and culture. I will make a reservation right away that the very concept of culture in relation to Russia is used by me rather conditionally. We should not talk about culture as such, but about a special type of spirituality, which, both in its ideal content and in its manifestations, is deeply antinomic to any cultural ideas. By the word «culture» I mean the amount of universal knowledge and skills accumulated in a given society that can be used for a variety of purposes, but all this knowledge is organically soldered into one system with peculiar moral values. Such solidarity is not something taken for granted. It may be very weak or absent altogether. Even the Slavophiles noticed that in Russia there is a deep antithesis between the Russian type of spirituality and culture. This circumstance, in my opinion, has not only a negative, but also a positive meaning.
Social processes make it possible to quite well reveal what is «truly human», and in our case, «truly Russian». A kind of guidebook directing our attention when referring to our national history and culture will be the dispute between the Slavophiles and the Westernizers, which, as is known, began in Russia in the 40s of the XNUMXth century. and continuing to this day.
Let us first recall that, according to the Slavophiles, Russia must develop historically in its own way, following its spiritual traditions. Trying to Europeanize the country is not only pointless for her, but also fatal. What kind of original traditions that form the abyss between the West and Russia can we talk about?
First of all, it should be said about the decisive elevation of mercy over justice. If in the West a person will defend his rights out of principle, then the named feature of the Russian type of morality makes the Russian very inert and indulgent, forgiving even when active action is required by an urgent need, just the instinct of self-preservation. The next quality that distinguishes the moral and psychological type of a Russian person can be called his dislike for formalism, including the legal one. Russians tend to improvise the law. In Russia, merchants did not like formal agreements, who, when concluding a deal, often, as they say, slapped hands, trusting the word given by their partner, did not like peasants, who never recognized the legal rules of behavior, but were guided in their lives by customs and traditions.
Russians’ dislike for formalism can be seen even in the way we communicate. In Russia, it is customary to communicate «heart to heart», i.e. simplicity and truthfulness in a conversation with an interlocutor. Sharing personal experiences, sometimes with the first person you meet, is the norm for us. Noting this peculiarity of our behavior, the Europeans say that their people fundamentally try to keep distance from each other. Formalism is observed by them as a safety net in their personal lives.
Legal culture is an issue worth dwelling on in a little more detail. In the legal consciousness of the Western individual live beliefs related to his moral world. But this does not mean that a developed legal consciousness is in itself a criterion of high morality. Moral ethical principles that contribute to the effective functioning of law include the priority of justice over mercy and selfish self-coercion. Moral content is present in people to varying degrees. Justice is above mercy, but not always above all. When we talk about legal ethics, we should talk about what kind of moral qualities prevails in a person. Thus, the priority of justice over mercy, and not vice versa, will correspond to such a legal principle as equal retribution for deeds. The legal norms called for, as B.N. Chicherin (Chicherin B.N. The Moral World // Russian Philosophy of Law: Philosophy of Faith and Morality. (Anthology). St. Petersburg: Aleteyya, 1997. P. 81-110.), to protect, first of all, personal interest, subject to a certain limitation , coincide with such an ethical norm as selfish self-coercion. It was not the progress of morality that brought people in the West to the legal system, but the latter keeps them from moral regression.
A Western person can break the law, but in any case, his mentality makes him more immunized from such a desire than a Russian. The Russian, on the other hand, acts according to legal requirements only to avoid trouble, since his moral motives, as a rule, go beyond formal law. However, there is one danger. If legal skepticism flourishes in a society in the absence of an ethical equivalent, then society degrades morally. In Japan, the so-called weights are such an equivalent, i.e. traditions and customs. In Korea, this is Buddhist ethics. In China — Confucian culture with its principle of external expediency. There is no such replacement in Russia. Orthodox ethics resolutely affirms mercy and love, forgiveness as principles of interpersonal and social relations. But any civil society presupposes social justice, and not love and compassion, as its basis. The legal system of developed legal states has its foundation in the minds of the people living there. These are people who evaluate everything based on their own interests. Egoism in this world is the norm of life, but egoism is ennobled or, in Marx’s words, restrained. He finds support in legal law, designed primarily to protect the range of personal interests of citizens. In Russia, the primacy of the general over the personal has always existed as one of the criteria for the Russian type of morality, Russian spirituality. The ugly forms that individualism is taking in Russia today show that it does not exist in the traditions of Russian culture.
The triumph of the principle of external expediency in Western culture has had an extremely fruitful effect on the practical side of life. The achievement of any result should be ennobled as much as possible, as well as the result itself. So, for example, even a medieval master spent time and effort to make a skillful brand on the inside of the castle, which, as he knew, no one would see. The German settlements that exist today in Russia are supplied with water supply by the efforts of the settlers themselves. It is important not only to get water, but to do it as conveniently as possible. Russians in neighboring villages, despising such convenience, will carry water on their hands with the help of buckets. They understand, of course, what and how can be done to make their work easier, but it is unusual for Russians to make special additional efforts in order to rid themselves of external inconveniences, which, in their view, are generally tolerable. External domestic inconveniences, encountered all the time in Russia, are not the result of random circumstances, but the result of the specifics of Russian culture.
It can be argued that favorable conditions for any activity are not its attributes for Russians. Therefore, a Russian will work effectively in conditions in which a European will not be able to work with the same result. Half-starved Russian workers during the Great Patriotic War worked at the machines in the winter in the open air, exceeding the norm. And today, in peaceful conditions, the Russian people work for a pay that barely allows them not to starve. The significance of such a feature of the Russian mentality for extreme situations cannot be overestimated.
When we talk about the spiritual traditions of some people, we mean those beliefs of people that are sanctified in their minds, rooted in their moral and psychological way. Something here, according to A.S. Khomyakov (Khomyakov A.S. “Semiramide” // Khomyakov A.S. Works in 2 volumes. T.1. Works on historiosophy. M., 1994. P.15 — 446.), is the highest point of all his (the people) thoughts and desires. This is a kind of ideal, which in relation to the Russian people can be formulated something like this: if you live well, then everyone should live well. For an American, his ideal aspiration can be expressed as follows: to live the way I want. The American selfish idea gets a limitation in such a world order as a democratic rule of law, which ensures the preservation of the primacy of the personal interest of any of the citizens over the public interest, but does not allow personal egoism to spill over into violation of the rights of others. This is actually a cultural approach, when the natural and ugly is limited, ennobled. The Russian idea, which is beautiful in itself, has led to despotism. The ethics of love and mercy cannot rise above the ethics of law in human society. If political power sets itself the goal of realizing absolute, unlimited values, then coercion becomes unlimited, since it is not the law, but such values that are above all. Of course, under despotism, love and mercy become completely abstract concepts. Perhaps the first of the Russian philosophers to realize this was Vl. Solovyov (Soloviev V.S. Three conversations about war, progress and the end of world history // Solovyov V.S. Works in 2 vols. 2nd ed. T.2. M .: Thought, 1990. P. 635- 762.).
The forcible Europeanization of the country by Peter I did not make Russia Europe, did not eradicate from Russia the spiritual content that ensured the victory of the Bolsheviks in the future. Some modern patriotic researchers explain the phenomenon of Bolshevism in Russia by an infectious infection, and the West is called the source of the infection. But in order for the body to start to get sick, the interaction of infectious bacteria and the body is necessary. If in the West communism with its teachings did not have grave consequences, then in Russia communism fell like fire to brushwood.
Today we have freed ourselves from external violence, rejecting, it would seem, the idea that helped such violence to be carried out, but another worthy content is not born in us. We continue to dream of a state that in itself will take care of people, which can be loved and respected. In ordinary Russian people there is no understanding that the state cannot be just without control by the citizens themselves, without the presence of a civil society capable of putting its will before the state as a law. In general, it is difficult for a Russian to base his well-being on justice. Russians need, first of all, not social justice, but an amicable ideal agreement. If a Russian is placed in a situation that will give him the opportunity to feel like a judge, and he will be free to punish fairly or forgive, then most likely he will forgive.
At the end of the XVII century. Russia came to the edge of the abyss and in order to save itself, it had to begin to develop in spite of its spiritual way of life. The reforms of Peter I cannot be assessed unambiguously, just because, being necessary for the external world order, they were alien and superfluous for the traditions of the Russian spirit. According to the apt remark of A. Tolstoy (Tolstoy A. One day in the life of Peter // Tolstoy Alexei. Selected. M., 1984. P. 25-42.), Peter did not bring Russia to the European court as an equal among equals, but pulled it out there by the hair, izluliv to the blood. Russia stood among European ladies in an outfit that was ridiculous for herself, wiping the blood with her sleeve and looking around wildly, causing fear and hostility. But Russia survived and forced others to reckon with itself. The phenomenally patient Russian people have built a state that is extremely strong on the outside, but lacks a strong internal connection. The country grew and became stronger as a state, but the design of public life that Russian society began to receive did not correspond in any way to its inner world, its soul.
Such a contradiction between external and internal is inherent in Russian people. The dream of an earthly paradise lives in him, which does not require a strict formative beginning, which is necessary for any historical development. The Slavophiles justifiably tried to express such a dream. It is a mistake to think that they spoke of some special form of government as the most cherished. In their desires, they went much further. The Slavophils generally denied any form, any state as an end. They saw the state only as a means that should be preserved for the time being and which would help to come to an ideal social world order. And these were not plans for the heavenly, but for the earthly.
The Russian man, as nature has created him, for the ghost of happiness, for the pie in the sky, is ready to indulge in all serious things and doom himself to years of suffering and great misfortunes. And this is a reality that must be accepted. For some reason, when discussing the fate of Russia and trying to see a way out of an unsuccessfully developing history, they take it for granted that there is such a way out and it only needs to be found. Much more reason to believe that Russia is unlikely to cease to be a country of «humiliated and offended.» Ordinary Russian people, who have not forgotten how to trust their immediate experiences, are pessimistic about their future, unlike scientists who draw their judgments from books.
Many Russian thinkers, showing the negative features of the Russian mentality, spoke about the need to correct them. Any nation is characterized by a certain type of spirituality, which largely determines its type of culture. To a certain extent, any culture must be conservative, which allows the nation to save its face. At the same time, any culture must historically develop in all its aspects. The factor of such development is the content of existing spiritual traditions. Otherwise, the people are doomed to historical vegetation, no matter how outwardly spectacular phenomena its history periodically makes itself felt. In such a country, something will always begin, but what has been started will never receive a certain completion …