Abstract: This article is dedicated to examination of the interpretation of socialism suggested by A. D. Gradovsky – prominent representative of the Russian conservative liberalism. The goal of this research lies in identification of peculiarities of the criticism of socialism in Gradovsly’s writings and specificity of his liberal doctrine on the state and society in the context of the Russian anti-nihilistic literature of the XIX century. A more general research task is to explore the specificity of the Russian classical liberalism in its polemic with the socialist and conservative political doctrines. The author’s main contribution consists in the proof that A. D. Gradovsky understood socialism and classical liberalism, associated with the tradition of metaphysical rationalism, as the two identically destructive political doctrines with the shared philosophical origins. The author demonstrated that according to Gradovsky, the classical liberalism prioritizes the idea of individuality, while socialism underlines the idea of community against individuality. As a counterbalance to these two extremes, Gradovsky puts forth his theory of progressive nation, which suggests an organic synthesis of the principle of unity (community) alongside individuality that combines unity and plurality. The novelty of this research lies in determination of correlation between the concept of A. D. Gradovsky and the philosophy of romanticism, which leans on perception of the historicity of existence and focuses on the significance of national element within the structure of the state.

Abstract: The subject of this article is the comparison of the philosophy of freedom in its relation to the philosophy of state and society in the Russian and Western European classical liberalism. This comparative analysis in aimed ad identification of specificity of the Russian liberalism as a peculiar tradition within the framework of pan-European liberal movement. Based on interpretation of the concept of freedom within the framework of European liberalism, the author highlights the three traditions of European liberalism: Anglo-French that reduces freedom to its external manifestations; German that focuses on the dialectics of external and internal freedom; and Russian tradition of the liberal philosophy of freedom. The main conclusion lies in the proof of succession between the liberal philosophy of John Locke, Enlighteners and John Stuart Mill, which leads to the author’s assumption that the pinnacle of educational understanding of freedom is the liberalism of J. S. Mill. The author’s contribution to the study of problematic of the history of liberal philosophy is the determination in the philosophy – the chief theoretician of the Russian liberalism of the XIX century – B. N. Chicherin of the two new meanings of the concept of freedom, which are absent in the German philosophy of tradition that Chicherin leans upon: the social freedom and the freedom reproved in the absolute personal nature that may be referred to as spiritual. The article concretizes the interrelation between the philosophy of freedom and the philosophy of state: the Western liberal philosophy of state is interpreted as a mechanicalism, while the Russian interpretation of state is understood as teleological.

Abstract: The subject of this research is the analysis and interpretation of the concept of teleology, proposed by the Baden School of Neo-Kantianism, particularly the works of Wilhelm Windelband and Heinrich Rickert, which is viewed in the context of polemic of the Neo-Kantians with positivism and realism, as well as idealistic metaphysics. The author conducts a detailed reconstruction of the comprehension of teleology the theory of cognition and methodology of the science of W. Windelband and H. Rickert. The suggested approach can be applied for the theoretical substantiation of assessment of the efficiency of humanitarian sciences. The author’s main contribution into the research of this topic lies in determination of the specificity of Neo-Kantian understanding of teleology. It is proven that Neo-Kantian teleology is based on the interpretation of goal as an unreachable ideal, thus the accent within the framework of teleology is made not on the development goals themselves, but rather the process of their achievement. Such comprehension of teleology is presented in the normativism of W. Windelband and doctrine of H. Rickert about the subject of cognition, in the context of which the values are viewed as an oughtness constituting the very act of assertion, but never developing into the status of existence, and therefore, remaining an infinite task for the consciousness. The author suggests calling such understanding of teleology the procedural. It is substantiated that the methodological doctrine of H. Rickert leans of the perception of the fundamental nature of teleology as the method of cognizing the world, due to which Rickert developed the new understanding of the method of historical sciences that he names teleological.