hombre y los hechos históricos que lo rodean. La ontología histórica se revela en la filosofía del

pensador ruso como un misterio infinito, cuyas definiciones racionales son muy difíciles. La

metodología de este trabajo está tomada de los trabajos del programa sobre la historia de la

filosofía rusa de V. V. Zenkovsky y N. O. Lossky y consiste en crear una base comparativa para

comparar los principales conceptos de poder en la filosofía occidental y la filosofía rusa. Incluso

un análisis aproximado muestra que el gobierno elude el discurso y evita las definiciones

racionales, de lo contrario sería posible explicar la revolución en Rusia por su carácter

fundamental. El material del artículo puede ser utilizado en estudios sociales y antropológicos

del poder, lo que aumenta y extiende su influencia incluso a las relaciones más simples pero en

lugar de reducirla. Los creadores de nuevas épocas siempre enfrentan un nuevo tipo de

of how Russian religious philosophy, in this case, N. A. Berdyaev, sees it. The methodology of

this work is taken from the program works on the history of Russian philosophy by V. V.

Zenkovsky and N. O. Lossky, and consists in creating a comparative basis for comparing the

main concepts of power in Western philosophy and Russian philosophy. Even a rough analysis

shows that the government eludes discourse and eschews rational definitions, otherwise it

of the article can be used in social and anthropological studies of power, which increases and

extends its influence even to the simplest relationships but rather than reducing it. The creators

of new eras always face a new kind of responsibility in the sense that they are responsible to

the living generations for how they use power and whether it is for good or for harm.

Keywords: Philosophy, power, moral duty, personalism, existentialism, philosophy of history,

revolution, society.

leads to the conclusion that the very freedom to talk about it outside the framework of generally

accepted norms of the positivist sense clearly demonstrates the incomplete grasping of the

power of thinking in the Russian religious and philosophical tradition by this range of problems.

This seems to be caused by a combination of several circumstances. (Zenkovsky, 2014) One of

them is connected with the fact that the world is perceived as a single organic whole, in which

one manifestation is not isolated from others.

addition, philosophy has several roots rather than only one, and all of its originality is

determined by this. Therefore, it is quite natural to merge such features as religiosity and realism

Russian philosophy goes from the particular to the general. German Philosophy is otherwise

directed from the general to the particular. This is how Russian philosophy developed in the

first quarter of the 20th century. In this short period, Russia was beset by two wars and three

revolutions. Therefore, it is rather difficult to imagine that philosophical and historical thinking

can be initiated speculatively, as opposed to origination from the historical practice itself.

concept and the phenomenon of freedom in the world history – to the concretization of the main

a fateful private event (a revolution, a war in Russia – The Fate of Russia by N. Berdyaev, Time

goes back to generalizations of the highest order concerning the entire world, i.e., to the general.

It is little wonder that the revolution was the starting point for the most intense study of the

question of power. Indeed, the stream of theoretical and practical explication of fundamental

definitions of power concerned everyone.

but thought how to seize completely it aiming to achieve certain speculative projects that were

a syncretic product of the 19th century’s social thought and the Russian form of interpreting

Marx’s economic materialism (Inishev, 2018).

in an orthodox way. A case is known when Berdyaev was in exile and polemicized a lot with

Lunacharsky and Bogdanov. After listening to his arguments, they treated them with a fair

that accompany the discussion of his main theories that underlie the study of power as a spiritual

and social phenomenon. Power blurredness in gestures, army commands, hospital regimes,

school discipline, i.e., in all that M. Foucault wrote about in such detail, is one of the signs of

its absolute secularization and instrumentalization.

both modern and historical. The author examines the phenomenon of power not only during the

period of revolutionary changes, but also in ancient times, when power was not yet understood

as a phenomenon of social existence. Basically, this is phenomenality, rather than the essential

rootedness of power. In this form, power does not guarantee a stable form of preserving

traditions, and the initial will to know the source. In Germany, such a source was interpreted in

and materials that relate to the assertion of power in the social system of a stable and rebellious

time. Such a will for something primordial, which has yet disintegrated neither in the objective

world nor in the subjectivity of the human mind into transcendental and immanent planes,

perspective, as well as echoes in modern concepts of power, which today play the role of

fundamental ones. Even here, power reveals itself as a complicated vector for philosophical

thought thinking through and actualizing. It is an obvious sign of the world of necessity and,

therefore, we can talk about its laws and subordination in skillful human hands to be used for

certain purposes. On the other hand, this is its transcendental character. Moreover, this is

Berdyaev’s main theme, to which he will get closer and closer throughout his entire career

(Grober, 2016).

that power can be effectively investigated, and conclusions can be drawn about its sources and

key characteristics of his work. The question of power is just like that. It combines such

significant indicators as the problem of personality, the essence of social transformations, the

possibility with a certain guarantee to refer to the future. The difficulty of analyzing Berdyaev’s

creativity lies in the fact that having paid attention to some detail of reality, he usually gives it

a figurative definition, which is combined with philosophy as a rational science only in part.

philosophical problems by the Russian philosopher is almost the most thorough of all who dealt

with the problem of power. Berdyaev relies not only on the works of philosophers but also on

literary works, which means that his approach is based on a wide cultural context, which is a

promising feature of his reflections and can be turned into new research on the theme of power.

than identifying and exposing the mistakes made by a certain regime, although the philosopher

effective technique of governing and suppression does not at all mean solving the problem, and

even less finding a key to the mystery. It is in the religious mainstream that he finds several

answers that contain a non-technological algorithm for an approach and a preliminary solution.

established Russian aristocracy as a moral force that has imperious class superiority but does

not use it utilitarianly, being burdened with this superiority, and, therefore, accepting power as

a gift, rather than a conquest, not a man-made structure. A unique effect of beneficence arises,

which is a consequence of the fact that power is not considered as an end in itself.

slavery before God. Here Berdyaev touches on the classical formulation of Hegel’s question of

religious’ stages of civilization – the era of law, the era of redemption, and the era of creativity.

dynamics, if, of course, he did not confine himself to the definitions of sociological theory and

society to the objective force of dialectics.

in the conditions of the utmost obviousness of the contradictions and conflicts of civilization in

the first half of the 20th century. Because, according to the philosopher, the creative era has

already gained strength and has an inevitable, providential nature, the image of power also

contains a tendency to amend.

recognition of the essence of power rather in a single source with other practical methods of

regulation and control, transformation, and overcoming of crisis phenomena that are fateful for

society than in phenomenal implementation. Technology must be complemented with

of modernism, as romanticization and softening of the discourses about power to give them a

more humanitarian tone, is apparently also wrong. Berdyaev formulated fairly accurate ideas

and their meaning is clear. This meaning is primary rather than derivative, since it clarifies the

problem of the origin, and expresses the essential peculiarities that outline the area of search for

answers to the main questions.

that both the right and the left, in general, the politicization of all questions of being, was

repugnant to him. Only a synthesis is possible from such a system of views in the key of Hegel’s

dialectics, uniting viable tendencies of both. If one overcomes the limitations of Hegel’s system,

the clash of its completeness with the infinite potential of dialectical development, with time

of society.

the main questions posed in view of the change in the image and quality of power. Berdyaev

not in a figurative sense, but in literally, that is, to influence the character, behavior, self-

perception of a person, the mystery of power will remain “locked behind the seven seals”

(Berdyaev, 2009a) even at the level of resolution of the issue which is accessible to a person in

cognitive practices. By limiting the meaning and content of power, a person removes oneself

from its correct perception and, ultimately, its use. Not to limit, but to expand the possibilities

of cognition – this task can be seen in the efforts of the Russian thinker. And the most important

thing in his approach is that he defined the concrete outlines of the unresolved issue of power.

For this, it is necessary to comprehend the personalistic attitudes of his thinking.

restraint from progressive aspirations and modernist pseudoscientific dreams is very clearly

visible. Christian consciousness, based on the belief in suffering God, in resurrection and

redemption, does not allow the future to be equated with unconditional improvement in the

2003). In other words, almost entire philosophy, without exception, solves the question of

power and subordination within the framework of the classical formulation of the question. The

problem is to settle this question not for the slave’s temporary feeling of being free in some

situations, and not in the context of the master’s slavish subordination to his whims, which

manifest themselves from time to time or constantly. The problem is to solve the whole set of

ambiguities with the question of power and force for the “free” person, for the subject.

of necessity, which is typical for the natural, physical world, and, consequently, for the

temptation of positivist simplification of the true complexity of this philosophical topic. Why

should we decide the question of the unfreedom of the unfree, either in the role of a master or

of one of his books that a truly philosophical formulation of the question asserts itself when we

regret rather than in case we are lamenting the death of the philosopher himself, his unique

personality about the ideas, for example, those of Plato, which leave our world. It is precisely

this construction of thought that makes it possible to speak of entering the set of problems of

religious and philosophical anthropology. As a result of such reasoning, Berdyaev always

formulated friendly resolutions in his letters that Shestov lacks an Eastern Christian perception

of the environment (Shestov, 1993). Abstracting the philosopher’s personality from his

ideology is an artificial technique, although it clearly presents the peculiarities of the

philosophical view.

of the space of Berdyaev’s thoughts as a philosopher, counting the decades since his birth: a

man was born into the world. A whole philosophical school entered Russian thought, which,

unfortunately, got its development not in Russia, but in America and France, and entered the

implementing bright projects for the future? This was noticed by Berdyaev, who pointed out

simultaneously that with all his monarchical and Orthodox views, he cannot resign himself to

with the dream of a complete reconstruction of pre-revolutionary antiquity because that it had

once already created the prerequisites for a revolution, for a bloody and not yet fully

comprehended event in the contemporary history of Russia (Gaisin, 2018). It is not uncommon

that here and there a sad note sounds that the present time is characterized by the fact that

utopias come true, but when they are implemented, people do not find what they want, with all

the formal authenticity of what they have done in mobile historical creativity. And this is

Berdyaev’s idea (Berdyaev, 2002).

Germany. In the texts of this period, he spoke about the change in the legitimation principles of

the entire hierarchy of values and the ways of their substantiation.

from Jung who revealed the phenomenon of regression, and fifty years later, in the texts of

postmodern ideologists: Lacan, Deleuze, Guattari, and others. Psychoanalysts and

postmodernists recorded the reality of their times (Inishev, 2018). They did not repeat the

thoughts of the Russian thinker. If we consider them as successors, much will remain unresolved

and inexplicable. This way of posing the question does not stand up to criticism. Intuitions and

sensations of being have always come from the East, rather than theories or formulations.