Issue #47

Abstract: There is a widespread opinion that the government is based or should be based on the trust of citizens in it. If the social system strives for stability, then its foundation is consensus — a kind of social contract. The foundation of the political structure of society should be the consent of citizens to be ruled, and the solution of issues of public life should be in the hands of those in power. Rationally acting individuals express this consent only when they trust the authorities and the people who carry it out. The common interest of the authorities and citizens is that the latter trust the Government and the state administration apparatus. Only legitimate government can be strong. A.P. Ogurtsov’s research practice makes it possible to challenge this intellectual and political tradition in general, and in relation to Russia in particular. S.S. Neretina formulated many valid points for proof in the reconstruction of A.P. Ogurtsov’s cognitive intentions and the process of their implementation. From this set, several ideas are mentioned: the opposition of philosophers and functionaries who create philosophical rituals; Alexander Pavlovich’s PhD thesis on alienation completed his path “under the banner of Marxism” and opened the floodgates to new approaches; Ogurtsov showed that for Hegel and Marx, the phenomenon of alienation was an important problem; the figure of Marx disappeared from the philosophical horizon due to the fault of its vulgarizers, who initiated the “grandiose failure” of the political, religious and military history of the USSR; in the era of the domination of Marxist-Leninist ideology, reading any text (with the exception of the works of the classics of Marxism-Leninism) occurred under the pressure of this ideology; Ogurtsov developed his own original way of switching the style of ideological orthodoxy to free philosophical reasoning. Every student of the Faculty of Philosophy who chose philosophy as his profession in Soviet times was faced with the need to develop such a way of switching. There is already fresh documentary evidence of this need in the form of the history of four Soviet and three post-Soviet philosophical generations, which can be read from this angle. This possibility is confirmed by the reproduction of the millennial social split of Russia in the modern conditions of its existence. The purpose of the article is to reproduce two fragments of my personal experience of switching on.