Abstract: The question in the article is about understanding, about how much the absorption of one’s own thought is capable of concepting the thought of another. In the preface to the analysis of the philosophy of the act, V.V. Bibikhin writes not about this philosophy at all, but about what the philosophy of language is for. Its value lies in “not accepting our own poverty for the poverty of the word.” These words are puzzling when considering the recipient of the philosophy of action, Mikhail Bakhtin. They are even more puzzling when we consider the possibility of becoming a textual producer for various reasons, such as “fear of appearing ridiculous.” The purpose of analyzing the philosophy of action is to answer two questions: in Bibikhin’s question, “Is it still possible to return to the word-event,” “when everything has turned into a text,” and in question to Bibikhin, did he use the entire analytical arsenal when considering the philosophy of act?