Is “worldwide responsiveness” inherent in the Russian people? Are misconceptions, deception, mistakes, myths and illusions common to the Russian people?
Detailed solution to paragraphs §17 in social studies for 9th grade students, authors A.I. Kravchenko, E.A. Pevtsova 2015
Questions and tasks
1. In what meanings is the word “culture” used? What do you think are such phenomena as everyday culture and personal culture?
The word “culture” is used in the following meanings:
1. translated from Latin “culture” (cultura) means “cultivation”, “development”, “education”, “upbringing”, “veneration”. In ancient Rome, culture meant the cultivation of the land.
2. culture as the improvement of human qualities (in the 18th century in Europe), a person who was well-read and refined in his behavior was called cultured. This understanding of “culture” has survived to this day and is associated with fine literature, an art gallery, a conservatory, an opera house and good education.
3. as a synonym for “culturedness” - “cultured person”, “behave culturally”.
4. as a system of norms and values, expressed through appropriate language, songs, dances, customs, traditions and manners of behavior, with the help of which life experience is ordered and the interaction of people is regulated.
Personal culture - in this case, the concept of culture captures the qualities of a person, his way of behavior, his relationship to other people, to his activities.
The culture of everyday life represents the peculiarities of the way of life and the conduct of activities in different periods of history.
2. What are the elements of culture? Do they include making fire, the custom of giving gifts, language, hairstyles, and mourning? Or are these cultural complexes?
Elements, or traits, of cultures are the starting points of culture, what culture has been created from over thousands of years. They are divided into material and intangible culture.
Making fire, the custom of giving gifts, language, hairstyles, mourning - all these are elements of culture. However, mourning and the art of hairstyles can be classified as cultural complexes, since they include several cultural elements. If we consider the custom of giving gifts in modern society, then it can also be classified as a cultural complex, since we use several elements (gift wrapping, a postcard and the gift itself, i.e. there are minimal conditions for this custom). If the making of fire dates back to the time of primitive people, then this is an element of culture, since man used what nature gave him (wood, stone). Language can also be considered as a cultural complex. It served for the accumulation, storage and transmission of knowledge. Over time, graphic signs are invented for the sounds in the language. In this case, several separate elements of culture are used to record the language (what is written and what is written).
3. Explain cultural universals and their purpose.
Cultural universals are norms, values, rules, traditions, and properties inherent in all cultures, regardless of geographical location, historical time and social structure.
Cultural universals include sports, body jewelry, calendar, cooking, courtship, dancing, decorative arts, fortune telling, dream interpretation, education, ethics, etiquette, belief in miraculous healings, festivals, folklore, funeral rituals, games, gesturing, greetings , hospitality, housekeeping, hygiene, jokes, superstitions, magic, marriage, meal times (breakfast, lunch, dinner), medicine, decency in the exercise of natural needs, music, mythology, personal name, postpartum care, treatment of pregnant women, religious rituals , the doctrine of the soul, making tools, trading, visiting, observing the weather, etc.
The family exists among all nations, but in different forms. A traditional family in our understanding is a husband, wife and children. In some nations, a man can have several wives, and in others, a woman can be married to several men.
Cultural universals arise because all people, regardless of where they live, are physically built the same, have the same biological needs and face common problems that the environment poses to humanity. People are born and die, so all nations have customs associated with birth and death. Since they live a life together, they have a division of labor, dancing, games, greetings, etc.
4. * Are such universals as gesturing, body jewelry, mythology, and cooking characteristic of the Russian people? What do they mean?
Yes, the Russian people are characterized by such universals as gesturing, body jewelry, mythology, and cooking. They are expressed as follows:
Gestures - for example, in order to answer in class, we raise our hand, thereby drawing attention to ourselves.
Body jewelry - for example, wedding rings, which newlyweds wear as a sign that they are married; a cross as a sign of belonging to the Orthodox faith.
Mythology - in modern times, mythology includes astrological forecasts, belief in human supernatural abilities (clairvoyance, telekinesis), the use of unconventional methods of treatment, the use of various amulets, etc.
Cooking - for example, we still use fermentation and pickling as ways to prepare food for the winter.
5. What is a cultural complex? Give examples from everyday life. Can software piracy, science, and schooling be classified as a cultural complex?
A cultural complex is a set of cultural traits or elements that arose on the basis of the original element and are functionally related to it.
1. Education, which includes kindergarten, school, university, tables, chairs, blackboard, chalk, books, educator, teacher, student, etc.
2. Sports: stadium, fans, referee, sportswear, ball, penalty, forward, etc.
3. Cooking: cook, kitchen, dishes, stove, food, spices, cookbooks, etc.
Yes, computer piracy, science and schooling can be classified as a cultural complex, because these concepts include several cultural elements that are interconnected.
6. * What is cultural heritage? How do the state and ordinary citizens protect it? Give specific examples.
Cultural heritage is a part of the material and spiritual culture created by past generations, which has stood the test of time and is passed on to future generations as something valuable and revered.
The protection of cultural heritage is enshrined in the legal acts of different states. In the Russian Federation this is the Constitution of the Russian Federation, Art. 44, which states that “everyone has the right to participate in cultural life and use cultural institutions, to have access to cultural values; everyone is obliged to take care of the preservation of historical and cultural heritage, to protect historical and cultural monuments.” There are also various Federal laws and acts that help in protecting the cultural heritage of the Russian Federation. For example, “Fundamentals of legislation on culture of the Russian Federation” (1992), “Federal Law “On objects of cultural heritage (historical and cultural monuments) of the peoples of the Russian Federation”” (2002), “Regulations and state historical and cultural expertise” (2009), “Regulations on protection zones of cultural heritage sites (historical and cultural monuments) of the peoples of the Russian Federation” (2008), etc.
Ordinary citizens can participate in the protection of cultural heritage in the following ways:
1. Introducing people to creativity and cultural development, amateur arts (folk dances, folk songs), crafts (pottery, blacksmithing).
2. Charity, patronage and sponsorship in the field of culture, i.e. purchasing paintings for museums, supporting artists, organizing theater tours.
Customs and cultural monuments are also passed down from generation to generation.
As examples of the participation of citizens in protecting the dissemination of the country's cultural heritage, one can cite folk choirs that exist on the territory of the Russian Federation - the Kuban Cossack Choir, the Siberian Folk Choir, the Russian Folk Choir, etc. As well as various Russian folk dance ensembles that are engaged in the dissemination and promotion of folk folklore
7. What is the difference between material and intangible culture? What type are: theater, fountain pen, book, greeting, smile, gift exchange?
Material culture is something that was created by human hands (book, house, clothing, jewelry, car, etc.).
Intangible culture, or spiritual culture, is the result of the activity of the human mind. Intangible objects exist in our minds and are supported by human communication (norms, rules, patterns, standards, models and norms of behavior, laws, values, ceremonies, rituals, symbols, myths, knowledge, ideas, customs, traditions, language).
The theater as a building belongs to material culture, and the theater as an art form belongs to intangible culture.
Greeting, smiling, exchanging gifts are elements of intangible culture.
8. Tell us about the etiquette standards that you have to observe in everyday life.
In the morning we say “good morning” to our family, greet neighbors, teachers, and friends. When eating, we use a plate, fork, spoon, knife, and do not eat with our hands. We all remember how our parents told us not to slurp or put our elbows on the table. We keep our rooms and the apartment in general tidy. At school during lessons, we should not make noise or shout from our seats, but raise our hand to answer, not talk, treat classmates and teachers with respect, and not damage school property. And we must come to school prepared for lessons and in school uniform.
When we make a request to someone, we say “please”, and after fulfilling our request we say “thank you”.
9. * Do you consider etiquette to be important in life? Give reasons for your point of view.
Yes, I think maintaining etiquette is important in life. Rules of good behavior help people feel more confident in any situation. Good manners help win people over. Polite and friendly people are the most popular. Good manners help you enjoy communicating with relatives, friends and just strangers.
Problem. Does cultural heritage contribute to the further development of society or, on the contrary, slow it down?
Cultural heritage contributes to the development of society. Humanity has vast experience in various fields, such as construction, cooking, art, raising children, etc. Modern people add something new to existing knowledge, thereby improving and developing. For example, building houses. Already accumulated knowledge is used, but something new is also introduced, which helps improve the qualities of modern houses compared to houses of previous eras. It's the same with raising children. People use what they inherited from previous generations, adjusting their education methods based on modern realities.
Workshop
1. Scientists often define culture as the form and result of adaptation to the environment. Does such simplicity in handling concepts cause you confusion? What do we ask the scientists, what is common between the folk epic, Prokofiev’s sonatas and Raphael’s Sistine Madonna, on the one hand, and the harsh, but very mundane need to get food, keep warm, build housing, dig in the ground? Give a reasoned answer.
In the modern understanding, the environment is not only the natural conditions in which a person lives, but also the environment of human activity, which includes interaction with other people or groups of people. And if initially the word “culture” was associated only with the cultivation of the land, then over time it acquires other meanings. Initially, people had a goal to survive. But over time, society developed, and in addition to building housing, people began to decorate it; clothing began to perform a different function - it no longer only warmed a person, but also decorated him, and fashion appeared accordingly. And this is also a unique way of adapting to the environment, a way to fit into society, to adapt to new conditions. The same goes for painting. The rock paintings were of a ritual nature and were supposed to contribute to a successful hunt. Over time, people domesticated animals, learned to breed them, and mastered the cultivation of crops. And over time, painting acquires an aesthetic character, but at the same time does not depart from its basics (painting temples with biblical scenes). The same applies to music. Initially it is used in rituals (religious, during weddings, funerals, lullabies for children) and over time it also acquires an aesthetic character.
Thus, what these examples have in common is that they are all cultural phenomena, but phenomena of different periods of history that developed throughout the history of mankind.
2. Determine whether material or spiritual culture includes: duel, medal, carriage, theory, glass, magic, amulet, dispute, revolver, hospitality, baptism, globe, wedding, law, jeans, telegraph, Christmastide, carnival, school, bag , doll, wheel, fire.
Material culture includes: medal, carriage, glass, amulet, revolver, globe, jeans, telegraph, school, bag, doll, wheel, fire.
Intangible culture includes: duel, theory, magic, debate, hospitality, baptism, wedding, law, Christmas time, carnival.
The thesis about “worldwide responsiveness” as a characteristic feature of the Russian people was expressed by F. M. Dostoevsky in his famous speech about Pushkin (1880). According to Dostoevsky, one of the fundamental distinctive properties of the Russian people is their ability to deeply penetrate into the spirit of other peoples, to have an understanding and sympathetic attitude towards other cultures, towards other peoples: “an extraordinary ability to assimilate the spirit and ideas of foreign peoples, to transform into the spiritual essence of all nations - a trait that was especially expressed in Pushkin’s poetry.” This property was called by the writer “worldwide responsiveness.”
The recognition of F. M. Dostoevsky (1821 - 1881) as the greatest writer and philosopher took place in the 20th century. His philosophy was ahead of its time, so his contemporaries were unable to fully appreciate the significance of Dostoevsky the thinker. Only the 20th century, which, as it seemed, promised to become the era of the triumph of reason and progress, but in reality turned out to be overflowing with historical catastrophes, wars on a global scale, unprecedented suffering of huge masses of people, turned the eyes of thinking humanity to the work of Dostoevsky, made it possible to appreciate the full depth and insight of his prophecies .
Today the name of Dostoevsky is widely known throughout the world. His works have been published in most countries. The literature about Dostoevsky is enormous. It would not be an exaggeration to say that not a single major thinker of the 20th century ignored the work of Dostoevsky. It was studied and commented on by N. Berdyaev and N. Lossky, K. Jaspers and Z. Freud, L. Shestov and Vyach. Ivanov, R. Laut and R. Guardini, D. Merezhkovsky and M. Bakhtin, etc.
Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky was born into the family of a military doctor in Moscow. After graduating from the preparatory school, Dostoevsky and his brother entered the St. Petersburg Military Engineering School. During these years, a difficult drama occurred in his family - in retaliation for the cruel treatment of serfs, his father was killed. This shock left an indelible mark on the soul of the future writer. During his years at the engineering school, he became interested in literature, and was especially attracted to the romantic writers F. Schiller and V. Hugo. After graduating from college and a short stay in the service, Dostoevsky resigned and devoted himself to literary creativity. In 1845, his first work was published - the story “Poor People”, which immediately received recognition from both critics and readers.
Soon there is a rapprochement between Dostoevsky and M.I.’s circle. Petrashevsky, where the writer is interested in socialist ideas. For participation in the Petrashevites circle, he was arrested and convicted. Initially F.M. Dostoevsky, like some other people convicted in the case, was informed that they had been sentenced to death. The convicts were brought to the site of the alleged execution, all preparations were made, but when shots were about to ring out, it was announced that they had been pardoned and the death penalty was replaced by four years of hard labor. The proximity of death could not help but shake Dostoevsky.
After his release from hard labor, Dostoevsky spent several more years in Siberia, where he got married and resumed his literary pursuits. In 1861, in St. Petersburg, together with his brother, he began publishing the magazine “Time”, and then “Epoch”. This is the most fruitful period in Dostoevsky's work. His works are published one after another: “Crime and Punishment”, “Idiot”, “Teenager”, “Demons”, “The Brothers Karamazov”.
Dostoevsky's works contain a holistic, deeply developed system of philosophical views. It covers all the main topics of philosophy: philosophy of spirit, nature, social philosophy, ethical teaching, aesthetics, philosophy of history, etc. However, the central place in Dostoevsky's philosophy is occupied by the study and understanding of man. It is man who is placed in the center of attention; it is through the comprehension of man that the writer comprehends all other forms and spheres of existence. This approach makes Dostoevsky similar to a number of trends in the philosophy of the next, 20th century. Dostoevsky searches for the “immediately given” in the human soul, in the philosophy of the 20th century. called "existence".
Dostoevsky's novels represent a unique exploration of the deep foundations of the human spirit. In this regard, apparently, the words of N. Berdyaev are true that “Dostoevsky is not a realist artist, but an experimenter, the creator of an experimental metaphysics of human nature. All of Dostoevsky’s art is only a method of anthropological research and discovery.” (Berdyaev. Worldview of Dostoevsky M. 1993, p. 55.) There is nothing epic in Dostoevsky’s novels, there is no depiction of everyday life, there is no objective depiction of human and natural life. All Dostoevsky's heroes do nothing but visit each other, talk to each other, and get involved in the whirlpool of human passions and destinies. The author deliberately puts them in situations in which the most secret and hidden sides of human nature come to the surface and find expression.
Dostoevsky is attracted to people, first of all, in all the inexhaustible depth of manifestations of his mental life. “In his analysis, Dostoevsky constantly sought to focus his gaze on the “human in man, - notes the famous researcher of the thinker’s work Reinhard Lauth. - He tried in isolated impulses to identify and understand spiritual unity. He continually showed that he was dealing with a living human soul, and not with a bundle of nerves of drive. And finally, he opened up inaccessible areas of someone else’s existence through compassion and love, which only one can clarify.” (Lauth Reinhard. The philosophy of Dostoevsky in a systematic presentation. M. 1996, p. 31.)
In Dostoevsky’s works one should see faith in man, in his creative and cognitive capabilities, in his capacity for love, compassion, and mercy. However, this belief in man is very far removed from romantic and other ideas based on the idea of “radical goodness” in human nature. On the contrary, Dostoevsky focuses his attention on the inconsistency of man, on the combination and struggle of light and dark in him. He is also far from moralizing, from sanctimoniously condemning the manifestations of the dark sides in a person. He sees his task not only in exploring human psychology, but also in developing a metaphysics of the soul, i.e. reveal the universal characteristics of human mental life.
According to Dostoevsky, love and knowledge are the two main purposes of man. Dostoevsky attached greater importance to love than to knowledge, although he saw not only in love, but also in knowledge the highest expression of human existence. He spoke about the relationship between love and knowledge not in a formal sense, but in a genuine sense - about knowing love and loving knowledge. Only in this connectedness do both of these properties ultimately become fruitful: “You will love every thing and you will comprehend the mystery of God in things. Once you comprehend it, you will tirelessly begin to understand it more and more, every day.” (Dostoevsky F.M. The Brothers Karamazov. Collected works. in 30 volumes, vol. 14. L., 1972-1990, p. 289.) At the same time, Dostoevsky clearly expressed concerns about the complexity of both love and and knowledge. A person faces a life task - to overcome the temptations of an incorrect understanding of love and knowledge. Love for a person is not guardianship over him, it is not control and dominion over a person, it is not pity for him. Love is incompatible with contempt and disbelief in a person. Love is a union and merging with one who is kindred in spirit, with one who is unequal, but equal in dignity and recognition. The ability to love is not always given to a person right away; it should be carefully cultivated and developed.
Cognition can also be constructed and directed incorrectly. It can be destructive to a person’s life and personality. The criticism of rational knowledge occupies a special place in Dostoevsky’s work. In the era of the triumph of science and the spread of positivist ideas about man, there is a danger of completely trusting the rational path. According to Dostoevsky, the mistake is that a person equates knowledge with a limited and unnatural form of rational thought, where reason and understanding are opposed to life and are valued higher than life. “Theory” is placed above life, life is adjusted to “theory”.
Raskolnikov, while thinking about and committing a crime, experiences an internal split, a split between reason (“theory”) and immediate feeling. Only later does he awaken from his “theoretical blindness” and return to feeling: “that evening he could not think about anything for a long time and constantly, he only felt. Instead of dialectics, life came, and something completely different had to be developed in consciousness” (ibid., T. 6, p. 422).
Real knowledge, according to Dostoevsky’s thought, is carried out not by the mind, taken in isolation, but by the integral being of man. Not only in cognition, but in all his manifestations, a person behaves as an integrity that can only be destroyed artificially. The destruction of integrity never remains without negative consequences for a person, for his personality, for his life. Human integrity, however, has a complex structure. Along with consciousness, Dostoevsky distinguished in it the unconscious and superconscious. According to his conviction, consciousness, and even more so the mind, occupy a very small place in the composition of the human spiritual world. This does not mean to diminish reason as a higher faculty. But the truth, according to Dostoevsky, is to decide to admit: the lion's share of the life of the human soul consists of manifestations not controlled by reason. According to a number of researchers, it is Dostoevsky who deserves credit not only for the discovery of the unconscious, but also for the description of its various types and the study of their functions.
According to Dostoevsky, everything “human in man” is rooted exclusively in the human soul. Both virtues and human vices are associated not with the body, but with the soul. Since the times of Socrates and Plato, a tradition has developed in European thought of connecting vices (“passions”) with impulses coming from the body. In connection with the development of natural science, the study of human physiology and anatomy, more and more attention began to be paid to the biological nature of man, endowing it with either positive (in the moral sense) or negative qualities. Dostoevsky consciously goes against these trends. From his point of view, neither human virtues nor vicious inclinations can be explained by the properties of the body, human biology. Everything is rooted in the human soul, first of all, in its unconscious part.
The human soul contains a variety of tendencies, both positive and negative. They vary from person to person. However, even those people who come to us in purity often harbor immoral inclinations. When in the novel “The Idiot” Prince Myshkin is asked whether he thinks that “there are many more thieves in the world than non-thieves, and there is not even the most honest person who has not stolen something at least once in his life,” “ “It seems to me,” the prince replies, “that you are telling the truth, but you are only greatly exaggerating.” Dostoevsky put this phrase into the mouth of his purest hero to show the seriousness of this thought. The task of a person, according to Dostoevsky, is not to hide his vices even from himself, and not to hope to achieve absolute integrity, but to prevent immoral inclinations from growing, to prevent them from subjugating the personality. a person was entirely determined by his thoughts and behavior.
The discovery of the significant role of the unconscious allows Dostoevsky to reveal the inconsistency, and even paradox, of human nature. In man there lives not only a desire for creation, for creativity (which was paid special attention to by the philosophy of the writer’s time), but also a thirst for destruction. Of course, not every person is capable, like M. Bakunin, of openly declaring that “the passion for destruction is a creative passion.” However, in the soul of every normal person there is a deep hidden potential for destruction, which breaks through at certain moments in life. The desire to destroy everything, even what is dear and close, secretly lives in the unconscious, in order to rush to a new, unknown life. Finally, according to Dostoevsky, in man, in addition to the desire for happiness, there is a need for suffering, which he is afraid to admit, but which powerfully commands him. How does Dostoevsky explain such an amazing paradox of human nature?
The root cause is that man is a being who passionately desires freedom and fears unfreedom. The fundamental features of the “human in man” are determined by the attitude towards freedom.
Man has an inherent desire for freedom. As soon as a person notices that he is limited in a certain way, he immediately rushes against such limitation. People put up with the laws of nature because at the same time they still have a large field of freedom. However, a person immediately tries to reject what he should do solely by virtue of the law or external coercion. Of course, he can pretend to obey, but his whole being rebels against what is prescribed to him. If he sees that he cannot act in accordance with his desires, then he is ready to do anything to insist on his freedom or destroy unfreedom. He curses the culprit who interferes with his goal, be it God, the world soul or the blind laws of nature. A person is even ready to reject the dictates of his own mind if he feels that they constrain his freedom. A person does not want to agree with the role of a “pin” - “and what is a person without desires, without will and without desires, if not a pin in an organ shaft?” (Dostoevsky F. M. Co6p. op. B 30 volumes, T. 5, p. 114.)
Man rebels against this state of will. The will wants to be its own master, man wants self-will. “Man, always and everywhere, no matter who he was, loved to act as he wanted, and not at all as reason and benefit commanded him,” a person only needs his own “free and voluntary will” (ibid., p. 113). He cannot obey only the dictates of reason, even if this would make him extremely happy. He must add to the most reasonable considerations a moment of his own fantasy in order to prove that he always remains a free person and not a “pin.” Self-will protects the most precious and most important thing - our personality and our individuality. Life is something living, free, and not functioning according to laws and formulas; it is not something numb, dead. Every formula, scientific law is built on the artificial mortification of life, on the conditional exclusion from it of the moment of unpredictability and arbitrariness.
So, Dostoevsky opposes one-sided, rationalistic ideas about man (the theory of “reasonable egoism”, etc.). However, the thinker’s reflections are not limited to emphasizing the desire for freedom. Dostoevsky pays close attention to the ethical side of the problem.
“Is everything permissible”, what are the boundaries of human moral behavior - a question that constantly interested the writer, he repeatedly returned to it. This theme is revealed to them, first of all, through the images of Raskolnikov and Ivan Karamazov. Neither Raskolnikov nor Ivan Karamazov can actually cross the border. They have to pay for trying to “transgress” the tragedy of their lives. It's not a matter of fear of punishment or admiration for a moral norm. The point, first of all, is that Dostoevsky proceeds from the unconditional moral value of every human soul, every human personality, even the most fallen one. Not everything is permitted, Dostoevsky believes, because it is not permitted to trample upon the human personality, to turn it into a means. The limitation of the scope of possibilities follows, according to Dostoevsky, from the attitude towards the individual as an unconditional value. He views an attack on the life and dignity of an individual as a violation of the very foundations of human existence.
The monument to A. S. Pushkin by A. M. Opekushin in Moscow, on the occasion of the consecration of which (1880) Dostoevsky delivered his memorable speech, in which he put forward the thesis about the “worldwide responsiveness” of the Russian people.
Without questioning the authority of the great writer and philosopher, it must, however, be emphasized that in his sublime desire for the triumph of peaceful relations between peoples, for “reconciliation,” he went too far, wrongfully singling out one single characteristic from the huge variety of national properties and reducing it to He has all the traits of the people's character. Dostoevsky's Pushkin speech essentially reduced the uniqueness of the Russian national character to the highest degree of a noble, but, so to speak, service-intermediary function that does not reveal the original, qualitative certainty of the soul of the people. A number of Russian thinkers drew attention to the one-sidedness of Dostoevsky’s approach, which we will specifically discuss below.
Dostoevsky is probably right that the Russian people do, in general, have such traits as an even attitude towards the national characteristics of other peoples, the absence of arrogance, the habit of not sticking out their national “I”, not emphasizing national differences, but, on the contrary, looking for common points of contact. In any case, a whole series of evidence cannot but evoke associations with Dostoevsky’s well-known thesis. Let us recall one such evidence.
"The Russian fraternizes in the full sense of the word. He is completely free from that deliberate air of superiority and gloomy arrogance, which resembles malice more than cruelty itself. He does not shy away from social and family intercourse with alien and inferior races. His invincible carelessness makes for He has an easy attitude of non-interference in the affairs of others; and the tolerance with which he views the religious rites, social customs and local prejudices of his Asiatic brethren is less the result of diplomatic calculation than the fruit of carelessness." In these words, Lord D. N. Curzon, who served in 1919 - 1924. post of British Foreign Secretary, recalled his trip to pre-revolutionary Russia. [Cit. according to the book Nesterov F. F. Connection of times. M. 1987. P. 108.]
“They saw off the Russians from France not without goodwill,” recalled an officer who served in the Russian occupation corps. - A Russian in foreign lands soon ingratiates himself with the inhabitants, trying to live their life and quickly getting used to their way of life. Other Allied troops could not boast of this; maybe they weren’t looking for it.” [Cit. by: Oleg Airapetov. Congress of Vienna and the post-war structure of Europe // Russian Strategy. October 2015. no. 10. URL http://sr.fondedin.ru/new/fullnews.php?subaction=showfull&am... ]
Obviously, it is precisely “worldwide responsiveness” that helps Russian people to easily come into contact with representatives of a wide variety of peoples, including those who inhabit Russia. It is this property of the Russian soul that was expressed, for example, in the easy, “problem-free” marriage with representatives of different nations, which was reflected in the large number of mixed marriages characteristic of both the pre-revolutionary and Soviet periods. (This was discussed above). Other examples can be given.
However, we should not forget that the thesis of “global responsiveness” is also fraught with dangers. One of them is connected with the possibility of using it to justify the imperial structure and to reproach the imperial claims of modern Russia. The other is with the absolutization of borrowing and imitation of other peoples, which is tantamount to a renunciation of one’s own identity and independence, a renunciation of one’s own creativity. Let's start with the second of the noted dangers.
“To become a real Russian,” wrote Dostoevsky, “perhaps, means only (in the end...) to become the brother of all people; an all-man...” “For a true Russian, Europe and the destiny of the entire great Aryan tribe are as dear as Russia itself, as well as the destiny of our native land, because our destiny is universality, and not acquired by the sword, but by the power of brotherhood.” “To strive to bring reconciliation to European contradictions is already final, to indicate the outcome of European melancholy in the Russian soul, all-human and all-uniting...” [Dostoevsky F.M. “A Writer’s Diary” for 1880].
The danger of absolutization of borrowing and imitation, leading to national self-denial, arising from the above sayings of Dostoevsky, was noted by Ivan Ilyin. Therefore, Ilyin directly objected to the writer. “And what a deplorable fate would have been for that people,” wrote Ilyin, “whose main calling would have been not in independent contemplation and creativity, but in eternal reincarnation into someone else’s nationality, in healing someone else’s melancholy, in reconciling other people’s contradictions, in creating someone else’s unity!? What fate will befall the Russian people if Europe and the “Aryan tribe” really are as dear to them as Russia itself, as well as the inheritance of their native land!?” [Ilyin I. A. Pushkin’s prophetic calling//Pushkin in Russian philosophical prose. M. 1990. P. 334.]
“Whoever wants to be a “brother” of other nations must myself at first become and be , - creatively, original, independently: to contemplate God and His works, to grow one’s spirit, to strengthen and cultivate the instinct of one’s national self-preservation, to work in one’s own way, to build, to rule and to pray. A real Russian is, first of all, Russian and only to the extent of his content, quality, substantial Russianness can he turn out to be both a “supernational” and “brotherly” minded “all-man”. “Let us not be naive and tell ourselves vigilantly and decisively: borrowing and imitation is not a matter of “brilliant reincarnation,” but of groundlessness and powerlessness.” [Ibid]
It is necessary to distinguish (as Ilyin suggests) borrowing and imitation from re-adopting and the ability to learn from other peoples. The imitator blindly borrows and copies something else; a thoughtful student carefully studies other people's experiences and notices in them what can be used to their advantage. Imitation, by its very nature, cannot produce anything creative or original. You can only reincarnate on stage, but in life “reincarnation” is not only unnecessary for anyone, but also leads to voluntary self-denial of oneself, of one’s own individuality. This is true both for an individual and for an entire nation.
We find a peculiar refraction of the idea of “worldwide responsiveness” in L.N. Gumilyov. Gumilyov partially synthesized the idea of Dostoevsky with the concept of the Eurasians, although in general he, of course, should be considered a direct successor of Eurasianism.
It should be noted that the same thing happened to Gumilev’s creative heritage in the post-perestroika period of our history as to the heritage of many authors who were banned and hushed up during the Soviet period. The sudden discovery of huge layers of Russian thought that were previously forbidden and therefore unknown - in a society where the dominance of directives “from above” was common - led to peculiar consequences. One of them was the peculiar effect of the unconditional recognition of everything that was previously forbidden and persecuted: it is recognized as true only because it was previously prohibited and was in confrontation with the theses of the official Soviet ideology. The phenomenon of Gumilev's exceptional popularity in the first post-perestroika years is largely explained by this effect - unless, of course, we exclude the amazing erudition of the thinker and the equally amazing originality of his ideas.
One of the most important concepts of Gumilyov’s concept is the concept of complementarity. By complementarity, Gumilyov understands the spiritual closeness of peoples, from which stems the ability of representatives of these peoples to easily come into contact with each other, get along peacefully and cooperate.
From Gumilyov’s point of view, the Russian people are “complimentary” to the peoples of Asia, but not complimentary to the peoples of the West. In particular, Russians and Jews are not complimentary to each other. The anti-Semitism of Gumilyov’s concept is beyond doubt, since throughout all his constructions the idea clearly runs that Jews from the most ancient times (at least from the era of the Khazar Kaganate) acted as indispensable accomplices of the West in the destruction of Rus', and then Russia. From Gumilyov’s position, Jews by their very nature and spirit are incompatible with the nature and spirit of the Russian people. According to Gumilyov, they are forming an “anti-system” within Russia, aimed at destroying the systemic nature of Russian society. Therefore, the inclusion of Jews in Russian history has always had, and will continue to have, only negative consequences for Russia.
Ideas of this kind cannot, of course, cause anything other than regret that such an outstanding person succumbed to such a primitive and base feeling as everyday anti-Semitism, and moreover, began to justify it by theoretical means. We will consider the so-called “Jewish question” in the next paragraph. Now it is important to emphasize that, in contrast to the insidious West, acting in alliance with world Jewry, Gumilyov puts forward an alliance of the Russian people with the peoples of Eurasia, the peoples of the East, who have long been included in the orbit of Russian history. In relations between Russians and these peoples, the law of “complementarity”, mutual attraction, operates, so they are supposedly destined to live together forever within the framework of a single Russian state. Thus, the thesis of complementarity in the concept under consideration serves the task of preserving the multinational composition of the Russian state, and in the form in which it developed during the era of the Russian Empire and, in its main features, was preserved under the Soviet Union.
The question of the relationship between many peoples within a single state was the “Achilles heel” of the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union. In many ways, it remains the same in today's Russia, although the federal structure enshrined in the current Constitution differs from the imperial principle of tsarist Russia in the most fundamental way. It creates fundamental opportunities for preserving the integrity of the state while ensuring the rights of peoples. However, it is naive to believe that someone can be persuaded to remain part of a particular state through the thesis of “complementarity.” None of the peoples that gained independence as a result of the collapse of the USSR will give it up, and if this happens, then in any case, not because of complementarity with the Russians.
Generally speaking, if the property that Gumilev called “complementarity” really exists (which can be doubted due to the pronounced speculative nature of this concept, as well as Gumilyov’s entire construction), then nothing prevents it from manifesting itself across state borders, “above barriers.” In other words, peoples, for one reason or another, primarily due to a common historical fate that united them over a long period within the framework of a single state formation, are quite capable of maintaining and developing close relations in the future, now being part of new independent states .
The attempt to keep peoples within the empire through the thesis of “complementarity” is by no means original. Based on a similar thesis, for example, the ideologists of the Portuguese colonial empire tried to substantiate and justify its existence. For this purpose, a concept was developed according to which the colonial conquests of the Portuguese led to the formation of a special cultural and ethnic world - the Luso-Tropical world, which united Portugal with its African and South American colonies into an inextricable whole. The Portuguese allegedly differ from other Europeans in that they have the primordial property of “sympathy” (an analogue of what Gumilyov calls “complementarity”) towards African and South American peoples, whose psychological traits, in turn, are such that they do not allow the development of hostility in relation to newcomers from Portugal. This theory was based on real facts of close contacts, mutual influence and centuries-old genetic mixing of the peoples of the colonies and the metropolis. However, it was not possible to save the empire with the help of the idea of a “Luso-tropical world” (from the ancient name of Portugal - Lusitania). Following Brazil, all the other Portuguese colonies gained independence - which, however, does not prevent them from developing close and even special relations between themselves and the former metropolis, relying on the strong cultural and genealogical ties that developed during the colonial period.
Thus, the thesis of “global responsiveness,” as well as its specific version of the idea of “complementarity,” should not be interpreted for the purpose of justifying imperial claims. Moreover, this thesis should be approached from completely different positions - from positions that go far beyond the topic of the national-state structure and political issues in general.
What Dostoevsky called “universal responsiveness” is in reality nothing more than one of the particular manifestations universal qualities Russian soul and Russian spirit: breadth, volume, openness. That scope of the soul (imprinted in the cultural-genetic code of Russian civilization) and that flight of spirit, which are initially born from the immensity of the Russian open spaces, the vastness of the Russian plain, have another source - long-term, continuous and most direct contacts with a huge variety of peoples who have inhabited the space from time immemorial Eurasia. Such contacts taught the Russian people not to stick out their national “I”, stimulated the knowledge of the “other”, not like me, and expanded their spiritual horizons. The empire itself in both its forms - Tsarist and Soviet - was one of the products of the breadth of spirit, its aspiration into the distance, towards infinity, one of the external results of internal life-spiritual freedom, i.e. those qualities that we have already discussed in connection natural and geographical features of Russia, and we will talk further.
A decisive renunciation of imperial claims and the desire to restore the empire does not at all mean that we should “smear black paint” over our imperial past. On the contrary, we have the right to be proud of it, just as the British, Portuguese, and Spaniards are proud of their imperial past. We have the right to be proud of the deeds of our ancestors, whose will and fortitude created one of the greatest empires in the history of mankind.
“If there were no Russian empire, it is not known where modern Almaty and Dushanbe would be located, which arose on the site of fortified settlements created by Russian troops; there would be no Lermontov's "Mtsyri"<…>
"A few years ago,
Where they make noise merging,
Hugging like two sisters,
Jets of Aragva and Kura<…>»
M. Yu. Lermontov (1814 – 1841)
The memory of the imperial power of the tsarist period, of the great multinational country called the USSR, should protect us from despondency and apathy, from resigning ourselves to the national humiliation of Russia today and in the future. If we want to be worthy heirs of our ancestors, we must preserve within ourselves the firmness, breadth and greatness of the imperial spirit.
It should be taken into account that certain forces in the West have already begun to implement policies to transform the ruling elites of the states of the former USSR into political regimes hostile towards Russia. The West, and, above all, the United States, strives to prevent Russia from strengthening at any cost. To this end, enormous efforts are being made to isolate and discredit Russia, in particular, to create political regimes on its borders that are pro-Western and hostile towards Russia.
However, the shared past does not deserve to be viewed solely negatively. Russians are rightfully proud that our ancestors created a great multinational country, one of the greatest in world history. And for the peoples who were part of the USSR, there will be topics for memories that are positive, not negative.
In fact, if it were not for this past, how could many of those phenomena relating to the most diverse areas of life and creativity that are dear to all people of the former USSR, and which are rightfully considered the outstanding achievements of mankind, have taken place at all? Would Gagarin's flight have taken place? Would the world's first nuclear power plant have been built? Would World War II have been won? Finally, could Laima Vaikule and Anya Veski, Sofia Rotaru and Muslim Magomaev, Vakhtang Kikabidze and Joseph Kobzon, Chingiz Aitmatov and Olzhas Suleimenov, like many other figures of art and culture, be able to gain such wide popularity on one sixth of the earth’s land? There are a huge number of such rhetorical questions that can be posed. If there were no Russian empire, it is not known where modern Almaty and Dushanbe would be located, which arose on the site of fortified settlements created by Russian troops; there would be no Lermontov's "Mtsyri", as well as many other poetic works on Caucasian themes; there would be no fascinating film by Edmond Keosayan “The Elusive Avengers”. And certainly, there would not have been a wonderful film “White Sun of the Desert”, with unforgettable images of the Red Army soldier Sukhov and the Tsar’s customs officer Vereshchagin, created by A. Kuznetsov and P. Luspekayev, and with wonderful words that have not lost their relevance to this day: “For It’s a shame for the state!”
It cannot, of course, be completely ruled out (although the likelihood of this today is negligible) that in the future there may be a reunification of Russia with Belarus and Ukraine, and possibly with other republics. Of course, this should not become a restoration of the USSR and the restoration of the previous social order. Such reunification is justified if it is carried out on the basis of democratic principles, taking into account the interests of all peoples included in the union.
However, Russia, even within its modern borders, which are significantly reduced in comparison with the Soviet ones, remains a huge and extremely diverse country. The words of F. Stepun, the feelings expressed in them and the question addressed to her are quite applicable to her: “After the fall of Bolshevik power, will she be able to so wisely combine the firmness of the state will with a thoughtful attitude to the spiritual and everyday characteristics of the peoples she leads, in order to be worthy of owning the open spaces , on which the sun does not set? Just imagine: in the north - light sleighs drawn by deer or huskies are rushing, in the east - waddling camels are slowly but quickly carrying their luggage, in the south - black buffalos are working in a yoke. And all this is not in colonies and dominions, but only in different parts of the single continental ocean. What a joy it is to breathe such distances.” [Stepun F. The past and the unfulfilled. M - St. Petersburg. 1995. P. 197.]
“We are Russian – what a delight!” - Stepun quotes the words of the outstanding commander A.V. Suvorov. All that remains is to add: no less delight is to belong to multinational Russia, to feel like an integral part of one of the great civilizations, regardless of what nationality you yourself originally belong to.
Dear Comrades. Let me present scientific interpretations of the Theme of the Mystery of Dogma - the "Holy Trinity" ...... or in the interpretations of the Ethno-Russian people this is the culture of the work of three triune sets of processes - this is Rule, Reality, Nav ....... or in the more ancient culture are three triune sets of processes - these are Yasun, Mirdgard, Dasun......... in interpretations based on the technology of Russian Philosophical culture - the Trinity from an idealistic beginning? The most commonly used chronology is from the “Creation of the World in the Star Temple” - a peace treaty between Asur, the prince of the Slavic-Aryans, and Arim, the prince of the Great Dragon Empire (China) in 5527 BC. e. (as of 2019 according to modern calendar) after the victory over China. One of the monuments of that era is considered to be the Great Wall of China and the symbolic image of a horseman slaying a dragon. I am sending materials for one purpose - to familiarize myself and find out when and how this technology will be revived in Russia and what actions on my part need to be taken in your opinion??? The theory of organization, work and CHANGE of generations of spirituality of the Ethno-Russian People. (based on the technology of the Trinity from an idealistic beginning) Why do you call the technology of materialistic dialectics, which was brought into Holy Rus' by the Jewish-Christian-Communist religion, the PHILOSOPHY of Spirituality of Orthodoxy? Preamble. Your Christianity contradicts the technology of the culture of life of the Ethno-Russian People. Because modern Civilization is the dominance of the technology of materialist dialectics. And the Technology of work of the culture of people's life in general is the work of Harmony of diversity or is it the technology of trinity from an idealistic beginning. The name "Orthodoxy" comes from the technology of the Rule or the life experience of the Ancestors. And the Spirituality of the Ethno-Russian People is the work of three triune processes - Rule, Reveal, Navi. NU or the technology of work of three triune sets of generations - these are ancestors, contemporaries, descendants. Let me introduce SCIENCE from a simple Russian Scientist - this is a technology of the trinity from an idealistic beginning, this is a technology that has developed from time immemorial as the culture of life of the Ethno-Russian people and is interpreted as the technology of the work of three triune sets of processes - these are Rule, Reality, Nav...... .. Well, or the technology of work of the culture of life of three triune sets of generations - these are ancestors, contemporaries, descendants....... 1. Technology of the trinity from an idealistic beginning. Philosophy is three triune sets of TECHNOLOGIES - these are three monistic (or metaphysics); three dialectical ones are materialistic dialectics, existential. idealistic; three triune technologies are a trinity from the materialistic beginning (this is the technology of Buddhism), this is a trinity from the existential beginning (this is the technology of Islam), this is a trinity from the idealistic beginning (or this is the technology of Christianity). You will generously excuse me, BUT after reading your materials, this is just CHILDREN’S pampering, because you live, understand, and reflect through KNOWLEDGE only the material world. And ONLY in interpretations using materialist dialectics. If you want to have SCIENCE from the Ethno-Russian PEOPLE? 2. Scientific interpretations of the Spirituality of ancient Rus'. (based on the technology of Russian philosophical culture - the trinity from the idealistic beginning). The spirituality of the Ethno-Russian people or in the interpretations of the Jewish-Christian-Communist religion is Paganism. The priestly-church lads reshaped the clothes of Ethno-Russian Orthodoxy onto their Jewish shoulders, and the result was Christian Orthodoxy. This religious CLOTHING was brought by Christianity to Rus' and simply put on the BODY of the cultural work of the spirituality of the Ethno-Russian people. Nowadays, like many years ago, the historical memory of the People, traditions, customs, morals, legends, etc., is being revived, returning both in the spirituality of the common people and in empirics, or is it the experience of ancestors, which is passed on in historical memory, and into science. The Spirituality of the Ethno-Russian People is awakening as the historical Memory of three triune processes - both material HERITAGE and social (this is economics, politics, law), and spiritual (or this is everyday consciousness and KNOWLEDGE, empirical, scientific). Symbols of spirituality are being revived at holy places. Images of gods carved from wood are placed on the temples, and a sacred fire burns in front of them. The words of ancient legends are heard again, new generations of Priests and Magi are being initiated. The renewed pagan movement is gradually gaining strength. Christianity, which originated far from the Slavic tribes, as the spirituality of the humiliated and their masters, perceived Slavic paganism as an alien religion. Because the technology of Christianity is materialistic dialectics. But the technology of work of Ethno-Russian spirituality is a trinity from the idealistic beginning, or from the spiritual, intellectual, SCIENTIFIC. But the objective necessity of the entry of the Ethno-Russian people into the world economic process brought its divine, religious, dogmatic, Christian technologies, terminology, rituals and veneration into Russian SPIRITUALITY. Well, or Christianity is just CLOTHING put on the BODY of Ethno-Russian spirituality. Moreover, in its historical path of development, Christianity also went through three triune sets of stages of complication itself - Protestantism, Catholicism, Orthodoxy. The essence of the stages of development is that there was a change in three triune sets of processes - this is a change in the subject of religion, the technology of its work, the tendency of quantitative-qualitative relationships (the relationships are three triune sets of processes - interactions, relationships, mutual reflections). But the process of development of the spirituality of any people works in the technology of THREE triune processes - this is evolution, revolution, and leaps. So the change in the NAME of the Russian FAITH became Orthodoxy in Christian interpretations and names. But in the interpretations of Russian philosophical culture, the technological principles of trinity, unity, harmony of diversity of the totality of generations remain. Due to the objectivity of the spirituality of every people, Christianity simply changed its names in the Russian FAITH. Moreover, each of the three triune sets of World religions works in the technology of trinity. 3. What is the trinity? This is the simultaneous joint work of THREE triune sets of processes - material, social, spiritual. And the essence of the trinity is that in each specific process of life, of any person of property, all three work simultaneously, BUT one of the processes dominates, the second is a contradiction to it, and the third harmonizes the work of the process as a whole. And the spirituality of people is simply people’s interpretation of the RULES, the work of these processes through the abilities available to each people in the work of three triune sets of principles - matter, space, time. But the basis of the spirituality of each people simply becomes more complicated, but does NOT change about the original one, which is laid in these triune sets of processes. Orthodoxy in Rus' was implanted in contradiction with the original Russian interpretations, because in place of the trinity of FAITH, dialectics or contradiction between the people and the authorities was implanted. And therefore Russian spirituality was brutally destroyed from above. The people resisted this for several centuries and introduced paganism into Christianity in different ways (through allegory, coding, allusion, renaming according to consonance or internal similar essence, etc.), in the end, the folk (original pagan) worldview, ethics, dissolved in Christianity, creating a unique alloy. Russian Orthodoxy, as a spirituality by the way and a pagan name, comes from three triune spiritual processes: Prav, Yav, Nav, well, or three triune processes in the life of generations - ancestors, contemporaries, descendants. Therefore, the name comes from the name of the Experience of the Ancestors - from the Rule. And in a more ancient interpretation of this trinity, the totality of persons of property is given in the following names - these are Yasun, Mirdgard, Dasun. The very concept of culture developed historically in the Russian language as processes built on the basis of people’s WORK, although it has historically different interpretations, which become more complicated depending on the complexity of the rules of the very practice of people’s lives. One of the interpretations of culture comes from the word “cult” - the faith, customs and traditions of ancestors, created by the LABOR of people in the course of socio-historical development. Moreover, labor itself is three triune types - physical, managerial, mental. And therefore there are three triune commodity processes - this is material production, this is social production (or these are constitutions, laws, tariffs, MONEY, etc.), this is spiritual production. And as the practice of people’s lives becomes more complex, people’s abilities to cultivate the process of life change and the interpretations of these rules of life change. Thus, spirituality, as a commodity production of the spiritual sphere of economic processes, is also changing. Here, such a concept as the Master Spirit (and similar ones: ruler; or the spirit of the locus, the spirit of the place, the genius of the place) fits perfectly - a commonly used term in primitive religions, as well as modern folklore, which has passed as a synonym for deity into all higher religions. Thus, the Master Spirit is the work of idealistic processes (spiritual, intellectual, scientific, etc.). And they work in three triune sets of processes - material, social (economics, politics, law), intellectual. 4. Master Spirit. The Master Spirit, as a set of RULES for the operation of any specific process, works in three triune sets of processes: - the first set is three triune sets of objects - matter, space, time. Matter is three triune sets of objects - these are physical, chemical, biological processes. Space is the medium for the distribution of these objects, which work in three triune sets of participation in the organization of the process - dominant, contradictory, harmonizing (this applies to all three triune sets of processes). Time is simply the process of the work of periodicities in each of the components. - the second set of processes is the RULES of the technology - these are monistic, dialectical, triune. Monistic technologies are a process in which the main principle is the dominance of one of the components over the others and the organization of processes based on its operating rules. Dialectical technologies are the organization of a process as a basis, where the principle of contradiction of two or more opposites works. The trinity of process work is when all three components work in each component, BUT one of them occupies a dominant position, the second forms a contradiction to it, and the third harmonizes the work of the process as a whole. - the third set of processes is the RULES of work, the tendency of quantitative-qualitative relationships during the work of processes – these are evolutionary processes, revolutionary, JUMP or transition to a new quality of being. 5. Subjectivity of the information work. What symbols, images, customs, etc. NU or visual, verbal, virtual reflections of the RULES of work of Ethno-Russian culture work in the practice of people's lives. Mention should be made here of the work of the trinity from an idealistic beginning. According to this technology, there are three triune levels of complexity of PERSONS OF PROPERTY in the process of people's lives - these are individual processes of existence of persons of property, these are individual, these are common. Well, or so, in the practice of people’s lives, three triune generations work simultaneously - this is the family, the nation, the INTER-national person of property. Moreover, the trinity of family spirituality is three triune sets of persons of property - this is male spirituality, female, children's. Likewise, national persons have three triune sets of components - past, present, future or continuity of generations, or these are three triune sets of generations - ancestors, contemporaries, descendants. And the INTERNATIONAL person forms three triune world religions - this is Buddhism or the dominance of material spirituality; Islam or the contradiction of the material and spiritual, Christianity is the harmony of the diversity of three triune sets of processes - material, social, spiritual. Moreover, Christianity is three triune STAGES of complication of religious technologies or is it Protestantism, Catholicism, Orthodoxy. Thus, in the practice of people’s lives, according to the existence of the spirituality of the Ethno-Russian people, there are three triune levels of complexity of spirituality processes: - is it the general subjectivity of the process or is it Universal Spirituality. - this is the Mediator between universal and earthly spirituality or a separate one - this is the Spirit-Simargl. - And only then the work of Earthly spirituality is the Spirit-Kin, this is the work of spirituality in the Souls of people or a single or three triune sets of processes or spirituality in the communication of people - these are the Spirits of Mother Earth, which people understand; these are Spirits-Children-People; These are the Spirit-Fathers of the Mind. Sincerely, Simple Russian Scientist Chefonov V.M.
The vast majority of Russians (83%) today feel that they are generally happy people. The happiness index in the country over the past six months has remained at a quarter-century high: in October 2015 it was 70 points, in April 2016 - 68 points, with a possible minimum of -100 and a maximum of 100 points. People are more positive young (92% among 18-24 year olds), financially secure (91%) and highly educated (89%). 15% of all respondents call themselves unhappy.
At the same time, over the past year, according to respondents, there have been slightly fewer happy relatives and friends around. Today, 40% of respondents, according to them, most often communicate predominantly with happy people (in March 2015 - 46%), 15% - with unhappy people and 38% - approximately equally with both. The value of the social happiness index fluctuates slightly: 60 points in March 2015 and 57 points in April 2016 (with a range from 10 to 90 points).
Happiness comes from peace and prosperity in the family (35%), children and grandchildren (21%), and the health of loved ones (18%). Every tenth person associates their happiness with success in life, achievements (13%), good work and studies (9%).
The main reason preventing people from enjoying life is an unfavorable financial situation (34% cite low income). Negative factors also include illness and old age, death of loved ones (10%), lack of a good job (6%), and difficult life in general (6%).
Leading expert-consultant of the Office of Monitoring and Electoral Research of VTsIOM Oleg Chernozub VTsIOM: “It would seem that, subjectively, Russians feel quite good. However, the narrow range of “sources of happiness” (family, children) indicates that compensatory mechanisms are involved, which the consciousness uses to distract itself from the problems associated with the crisis. And a comparison of indicators for 2015-2016. with data from the 1990s shows that the “margin of safety” of these mechanisms is still sufficient.”
The results of the survey were commented on in an interview with Russian People's Line by the rector of the Church of the All-Merciful Savior of the former Sorrowful Monastery on Novoslobodskaya, the father of twelve children, Archpriest Alexander Ilyashenko:
The survey showed interesting and unexpected results. It would seem that during a crisis the number of difficulties increases, but, nevertheless, despite the crisis, the majority of the country's citizens consider themselves happy people. This is gratifying. It is encouraging that respondents associate the concept of “happiness” with family. The health of loved ones and a happy family are perhaps the most important things that people need for a happy life.
The crisis encourages us to mobilize, to take initiative and find the right solutions in difficult situations. It is common for the Russian people not to lose heart, but, on the contrary, to strengthen their spirit, take initiative and use a creative approach in life.
We can only be glad that the situation is changing for the better. Let's hope that the current trend continues in the future.
