The word “intelligentsia” has changed its meaning more than once, from the noble to the most contemptuous, which once again proves that language is a living organism. But a new time has come and there are even more interpretations, and dictionaries are obliged to record everything in order to please every subjective view. Some openly equate the intellectual with a snob, insisting that he is just a representative of a subculture of pompous, proud people, while others consider the intelligentsia a class of intellectual producers who should occupy a special position in society. So who is an intellectual?
Since reinterpretation of the meaning of this concept has become fashionable, we ourselves decided to offer you the image of an intellectual. First of all, it must be said that it is idealistic, that is, it is as friendly as possible to humans. She argues that everyone can be a representative of the intelligentsia, regardless of status, profession and financial status, in other words, the intelligentsia is a cultural and ethical concept that is primarily based on material achievements. Here is a list of ten rules that form it.
1) Philanthropy
2) The value of time
Despite his altruism, an intellectual understands that some people simply waste his time. He easily breaks ties with annoying people who do not share his values and shamelessly impose their own, and never argues with a person if the only point of a verbal skirmish is to satisfy his pride. A self-sufficient person knows his own worth and does not need to pointlessly establish himself in front of someone, paying with time. The intellectual is also strict with activities that rob him. He carefully plans his leisure time so as not to fork out for nonsense that distracts him from self-development.
3) Education
Representatives of the intelligentsia pay great attention to manners. They tactfully tell people where they made a mistake and never make them feel ashamed. Intellectuals know how to keep secrets and do not participate in the spread of rumors and gossip - they are not bothered by hidden malice, and if a polite person wants to speak out, he will do it delicately, but straightforwardly.
4) Modesty
An intellectual will never allow even an indirect hint of his high status. In the company, he is just an employee of a certain profession, even if he has acquired excessive influence and wealth, he conducts the conversation in one language and does not insert quotes in a foreign language into his speech, does not boast about the countries he has visited, but simply moves on to history, as if he had read it from a book. In a word, the less “I” in a conversation, the more personality is revealed.
5) Education and self-education
An intellectual loves knowledge and acquiring new talents. He definitely gets a university diploma, if only because he likes to study, and his leisure time is filled with books, magazines and various articles from the Internet. An educated intellectual does not boast of knowledge: he never speaks in sophisticated words in mundane companies to show his superiority, and does not reproach a person for not reading Doctor Zhivago; moreover, perhaps the intellectual himself is not familiar with this novel . You can’t learn or re-read everything, but you need to know and understand the key works of culture and science and try to attract the attention of others to them.
6) Competent speech
Language is a reflection of the culture of the people, so it must be treated with extreme care. An intellectual is conservative in relation to foreign words and prefers to replace them with Russian analogues, but he never opposes an already established tradition, that is, with his input, a “hobby” can turn into a “passion,” but no one will call a fountain a water cannon. Considerable importance is given to vocabulary and sentence construction to beautifully express thoughts.
What will an intellectual shout when he hits his finger with a hammer? The same as all people. A well-mannered person knows the words of the popular language very well, but in public he uses them once every hundred years, so that the curse is a real impression, and not garbage that is constantly mixed into speech. If a person must express his position on an absurd issue or opinion about a disgusting character, he will use wit or simply remain silent.
7) Independent point of view
A critical mind does not allow itself to be misled. Despite convincing persuasion, an intellectual always makes decisions on his own. He meticulously studies all sides of the issue, using different sources of information, and then takes the opponent’s position and tries to defend it, in order to ultimately act as a judge and decide who is right - the defense or the prosecution. The cool and impartial gaze of criticism disarms any lie, even if it is pleasant - an intelligent person is, first of all, honest with himself.
8) Patriotism
An intellectual is a convinced patriot and an equally convinced cosmopolitan. The whole world is his home and all foreigners are his brothers, but he has one homeland and needs to take care of it. A representative of the intellectual class does everything to make life better for his fatherland, and never laments that his country is worse than others. Patriots live in the best states, which they create themselves.
9) Respect for culture
Despite the fact that culture is determined by the entire people, it is the intelligentsia that guides it through eras. Through their work, its representatives preserve the history of the mentality of the people, and not only their own, and thanks to this they form the worldview of future generations.
10) Wealth
A thinking person must be able to realize himself, and for this it is not at all necessary to chase giant heights. The life successes of an intellectual are a stable income from a favorite job, a happy family, loyal friends and, of course, a contribution to the well-being and development of society.
Intelligent person
History of the word intelligentsia has been well known since its borrowing from Polish in 1862. Post-reform Russian magazines seized on the word denoting the “thinking class” of their time, and depending on their class position, they either praised or condemned the “intelligentsia” in every possible way. On the one hand, these are “people of critical thought, people of the intelligentsia” (P. L. Lavrov), on the other, “the insignificance of people, the so-called intelligentsia” (censor A. V. Nikitenko). These facets were important in the mid-19th century.
Original root - Latin word intellectus(mind, mind). Reason as opposed to feeling and spirit. Intellectual, we would say today about this meaning of the word. It was perceived as such at the end of the last century. The poet Valery Bryusov in 1899 considered it necessary to translate the new word into the French he knew: “society intellectuals (intellectuals), which I can’t stand.” Historian V. O. Klyuchevsky writes in 1897:
This word has recently come into use among us and is still only used in newspaper slang. It is not beautiful, although it has a classical origin. It’s ugly because it’s inaccurate and doesn’t mean what it wants to mean. It actually means a person who understands, understands, and they usually call a person with a scientific and literary education. As you can see, these are different concepts, although not opposite.
To a professor who knows Latin, the new meaning of the word seems strange: why? educated, if the root itself points to the value understanding? A foreign word, having become a term of Russian social life, does not immediately adapt to Russian speech on the pages of magazines.
They make fun of it, deliberately lowering its meaning. For Goncharov, a sign of the intelligentsia is writing poetry, for Saltykov-Shchedrin it is idleness against the general background of leisure, for the fashionable writer Boborykin it is intelligence, especially among ladies.
At first, only one thing is clear: the intelligentsia is opposed to the common people. “And an intellectual,” explains Shelgunov, “is not everyone who thinks. You have to know what to think, you have to be able to think.” A familiar motive - to know and be able to! The words spoken in 1875 express the opinion of progressive people in Russia, who believe that the main sign of an intellectual is spiritual quest, the desire for social ideals, for business.
In memoir literature we will find many indications of how the intellectual was perceived in contrast to the “cultured people” from the aristocratic salon. We said about someone: “This is a typical intellectual, he doesn’t shave every day, eats out of a knife and doesn’t kiss ladies’ hands...” Or: “This is not a real lady, this is an intellectual, she gives her last name when men are introduced to her.”
But such purely external characteristics did little to disturb those in power; they understood that “in intelligent circles there was mental work going on incriminating and even irritating against the order of things” (from the file of the gendarmerie department). Not to notice this meant opening the way to revolutionary forces. And in the early 80s, Novoye Vremya - a reactionary, protective newspaper - at the direct instigation of the government, unexpectedly exploded with an article directed against the intelligentsia.
“The press was alarmed,” Shelgunov wrote, “and discussions began about who and what should be considered the intelligentsia, which intelligentsia are real and which are not real. Since then, this question has never left the stage and formed the central point of the entire mental movement of the eighties.” Not only the 80s, but further - right up to the 20th century.
In social clashes, that moral force, not yet defined by a precise term, which the watchdogs of the autocracy already felt, matured and grew stronger. “Intelligence was not science, not knowledge, but some higher, all-resolving principle or source, in which all the highest and most correct resolution of all the ambiguities of life was concentrated,” N.V. Shelgunov wrote at the same time.
The reactionaries demanded, and the Minister of Internal Affairs was ready to eliminate the expression from use Russian intelligentsia. Important clarification: Russian. Not at all the same meaning as in the previous collective name intelligentsia, the new expression carries with it a social charge of great power. Gradually the concept of an intellectual matured - a Russian word and a Russian concept. “Not every mental worker,” K. Chukovsky correctly noted, “but only one whose life and beliefs were colored by the idea of serving the people,” an intellectual. In the dictionaries of other languages the word intellectual in this meaning it entered as a Russian word.
The word constantly changed not its meaning - the main meaning, but those elusive social and moral shades due to the passage of time, which alone constituted the term of fast-flowing political life - then, in the heat of battle. We see: first intelligentsia- every educated society, then - the middle class, independent of class boundaries, and even later - the cultural stratum in society. And this whole mass of people, focusing on one common cause, gradually became the embodied conscience of their time, the bearer of high ideals necessarily associated with serving their people. To clarify the concept in this particular sense, additional definitions were initially used: advanced intelligentsia, proletarian intelligentsia, workers' intelligentsia.
The dual nature of the pre-revolutionary Russian intelligentsia was reflected in the emergence of new words, derivatives, secondary ones. Intelligent In terms of cultural appeared around 1870, and intellectual- belonging to the intelligentsia - a little later, around 1880. The choice of adjectives was good. Not only are they all purely Russian words, there is also a semantic difference between them. Intelligentsky- one who belongs to the intelligentsia, and there can be many such signs, including those that are not entirely worthy. Intelligent but this or that which is inherent in an intellectual constitutes his main attribute and is a characteristic of a person, not a class.
That's why the combination appeared: intelligent person, but not intellectual- personal quality, not belonging to a social group. In the last century, first of all, work and professions began to be called intelligent. Chekhov spoke about intelligent life, Korolenko - about intelligent conscience. Everything is in an abstract sense, but everything is about the manifestations of human mental activity. Based on the transfer of meaning from activity to person, which is already familiar to us, combinations arise that successively replace each other: intelligentsia people, then intelligent people, and from the end of the 19th century intelligent person- separately, independently, as an expression of personality. One of the early examples is in Korolenko’s journalism: “Two intelligent people and ten men.”
As soon as different adjectives began to form, they immediately tried to evaluate them: what was good and what was not so good.
Definition intellectual, as condemned, did not develop further. From a stable combination intelligent people, intelligent person according to the general law of the Russian language, compressed into one word, the designation first arose intellectual, and since the 80s - intelligence, the very intelligence that over time became the most common sign of an intelligent person. But history is unpredictable. From intelligent the word was formed intellectualism- narrow interests of the circle to the detriment of national interests.
| |
Intelligent person
History of the word intelligentsia has been well known since its borrowing from Polish in 1862. Post-reform Russian magazines seized on the word denoting the “thinking class” of their time, and depending on their class position, they either praised or condemned the “intelligentsia” in every possible way. On the one hand, these are “people of critical thought, people of the intelligentsia” (P. L. Lavrov), on the other, “the insignificance of people, the so-called intelligentsia” (censor A. V. Nikitenko). These facets were important in the mid-19th century.
Original root - Latin word intellectus(mind, mind). Reason as opposed to feeling and spirit. Intellectual, we would say today about this meaning of the word. It was perceived as such at the end of the last century. The poet Valery Bryusov in 1899 considered it necessary to translate the new word into the French he knew: “society intellectuals (intellectuals), which I can’t stand.” Historian V. O. Klyuchevsky writes in 1897:
This word has recently come into use among us and is still only used in newspaper slang. It is not beautiful, although it has a classical origin. It’s ugly because it’s inaccurate and doesn’t mean what it wants to mean. It actually means a person who understands, understands, and they usually call a person with a scientific and literary education. As you can see, these are different concepts, although not opposite.
To a professor who knows Latin, the new meaning of the word seems strange: why? educated, if the root itself points to the value understanding? A foreign word, having become a term of Russian social life, does not immediately adapt to Russian speech on the pages of magazines.
They make fun of it, deliberately lowering its meaning. For Goncharov, a sign of the intelligentsia is writing poetry, for Saltykov-Shchedrin it is idleness against the general background of leisure, for the fashionable writer Boborykin it is intelligence, especially among ladies.
At first, only one thing is clear: the intelligentsia is opposed to the common people. “And an intellectual,” explains Shelgunov, “is not everyone who thinks. You have to know what to think, you have to be able to think.” A familiar motive - to know and be able to! The words spoken in 1875 express the opinion of progressive people in Russia, who believe that the main sign of an intellectual is spiritual quest, the desire for social ideals, for business.
In memoir literature we will find many indications of how the intellectual was perceived in contrast to the “cultured people” from the aristocratic salon. We said about someone: “This is a typical intellectual, he doesn’t shave every day, eats out of a knife and doesn’t kiss ladies’ hands...” Or: “This is not a real lady, this is an intellectual, she gives her last name when men are introduced to her.”
But such purely external characteristics did little to disturb those in power; they understood that “in intelligent circles there was mental work going on incriminating and even irritating against the order of things” (from the file of the gendarmerie department). Not to notice this meant opening the way to revolutionary forces. And in the early 80s, Novoye Vremya - a reactionary, protective newspaper - at the direct instigation of the government, unexpectedly exploded with an article directed against the intelligentsia.
“The press was alarmed,” Shelgunov wrote, “and discussions began about who and what should be considered the intelligentsia, which intelligentsia are real and which are not real. Since then, this question has never left the stage and formed the central point of the entire mental movement of the eighties.” Not only the 80s, but further - right up to the 20th century.
In social clashes, that moral force, not yet defined by a precise term, which the watchdogs of the autocracy already felt, matured and grew stronger. “Intelligence was not science, not knowledge, but some higher, all-resolving principle or source, in which all the highest and most correct resolution of all the ambiguities of life was concentrated,” N.V. Shelgunov wrote at the same time.
The reactionaries demanded, and the Minister of Internal Affairs was ready to eliminate the expression from use Russian intelligentsia. Important clarification: Russian. Not at all the same meaning as in the previous collective name intelligentsia, the new expression carries with it a social charge of great power. Gradually the concept of an intellectual matured - a Russian word and a Russian concept. “Not every mental worker,” K. Chukovsky correctly noted, “but only one whose life and beliefs were colored by the idea of serving the people,” an intellectual. In the dictionaries of other languages the word intellectual in this meaning it entered as a Russian word.
The word constantly changed not its meaning - the main meaning, but those elusive social and moral shades due to the passage of time, which alone constituted the term of fast-flowing political life - then, in the heat of battle. We see: first intelligentsia- every educated society, then - the middle class, independent of class boundaries, and even later - the cultural stratum in society. And this whole mass of people, focusing on one common cause, gradually became the embodied conscience of their time, the bearer of high ideals necessarily associated with serving their people. To clarify the concept in this particular sense, additional definitions were initially used: advanced intelligentsia, proletarian intelligentsia, workers' intelligentsia.
The dual nature of the pre-revolutionary Russian intelligentsia was reflected in the emergence of new words, derivatives, secondary ones. Intelligent In terms of cultural appeared around 1870, and intellectual- belonging to the intelligentsia - a little later, around 1880. The choice of adjectives was good. Not only are they all purely Russian words, there is also a semantic difference between them. Intelligentsky- one who belongs to the intelligentsia, and there can be many such signs, including those that are not entirely worthy. Intelligent but this or that which is inherent in an intellectual constitutes his main attribute and is a characteristic of a person, not a class.
That's why the combination appeared: intelligent person, but not intellectual- personal quality, not belonging to a social group. In the last century, first of all, work and professions began to be called intelligent. Chekhov spoke about intelligent life, Korolenko - about intelligent conscience. Everything is in an abstract sense, but everything is about the manifestations of human mental activity. Based on the transfer of meaning from activity to person, which is already familiar to us, combinations arise that successively replace each other: intelligentsia people, then intelligent people, and from the end of the 19th century intelligent person- separately, independently, as an expression of personality. One of the early examples is in Korolenko’s journalism: “Two intelligent people and ten men.”
As soon as different adjectives began to form, they immediately tried to evaluate them: what was good and what was not so good.
Definition intellectual, as condemned, did not develop further. From a stable combination intelligent people, intelligent person according to the general law of the Russian language, compressed into one word, the designation first arose intellectual, and since the 80s - intelligence, the very intelligence that over time became the most common sign of an intelligent person. But history is unpredictable. From intelligent the word was formed intellectualism- narrow interests of the circle to the detriment of national interests.
| |
Intelligence is a whole set of characterological, mental and social qualities of an individual that contribute to meeting the expectations of society that are presented to members of a cultural society and other representatives of its highest part. Human intelligence implies a highly developed mental and cognitive processes, which allows a person to evaluate and make his own judgments about various spheres of human manifestation. It is also a certain personal maturity, responsible for the ability to make independent decisions and have one’s own point of view on the concept of the world order. Of the characterological characteristics, a person’s intelligence is manifested in reliability and nobility, consistency of thoughts, words and actions, as well as the presence of an active interest in culture, history and art.
What is intelligence
An intelligent person demonstrates his personal dignity in the professional and social sphere, striving to achieve better results and bring benefit to humanity through his activities to the extent that his chosen specialization allows. The concept of decency and honor is inseparable from intelligence and is manifested in the adequacy of actions, orientation towards one’s own meanings and values, non-susceptibility to external influence, correctness in relation to others, regardless of their position and behavior.
The intelligentsia is a special community of people engaged in mental work, striving to accumulate and systematize existing knowledge, as well as its further transfer and the discovery of new experience. A person’s desire to submit his own intellectual and sensory experience to reflexive analysis, the ability to notice details and patterns, strive for knowledge and never-ending curiosity can be characterized as internal intelligence. This also includes the presence of high internal values in maintaining the moral and ethical qualities and manifestations of humanity.
Inner intelligence is impossible without a broad outlook and great internal experience, as well as constant openness to new things. There is no place for dictatorship, that in the behavior of other people, in their preferences, traditions and beliefs are not condemned. Before making a conclusion about someone, an intelligent person will try to understand as much as possible about a particular action, and if the action turns out to be beyond the limits of what is permissible by morality, then it is the action, not the person, that will be subject to censure.
The concept of intelligence appeared to characterize a certain group of people (intelligentsia) engaged in mental work, when the number of such people increased compared to ancient times, where physical work predominated. When activities that did not bring visible and quick results began to actively shape society and the paths of human development, certain markers appeared for classifying a person as an intelligentsia. Just intellectual work is not enough; it is necessary that the activity corresponds to the maintenance of cultural values and contributes to the development of both an individual person (which is clearly represented by the activities of teachers) and large human associations (which concerns the establishment of legislative state law).
In many societies, the concept of the intelligentsia is replaced by the concept of intellectuals who are engaged in the same type of activity, but do not pretend to bring new good meaning to the masses. These people are characterized by greater modesty, less desire to rank people by class and merit, and also give everyone their own priorities based on their judgments. At the same time, they continue to develop themselves and develop the surrounding space with their own professional contribution.
And there are quite a lot of similar varieties and branches, which complicates the description of intelligence as an unambiguous concept with clear parameters and characteristics. Several centuries ago, for example, even the intelligentsia was divided into certain classes, where there were representatives: the highest intelligentsia, involved in the social and spiritual sphere, having a fairly large influence on the formation of the moral requirements of society; the average intelligentsia also find employment in the social sphere, but their activities are more practical (if the former see the people, the latter see specific faces and destinies), these people are directly involved in the implementation of good ideas (teachers and doctors); The lower intelligentsia is also called semi-intelligentsia and is engaged in helping the middle intelligentsia, combining physical and social development activities (these are physician assistants, assistants, technicians, laboratory assistants).
But, despite such crude attempts to divide people and intelligence itself on the basis of the activity performed, this turned out to be incorrect and reflects only one aspect of the manifestation, while innate intelligence can also manifest itself in a person of physical labor and not high intellectual abilities. Here the first place comes to behavior and the ability to analyze what is happening, draw conclusions, as well as the style of interaction with others. This aspect is closely related to upbringing, which can be instilled, or can be a consequence of a person’s inner worldview. And then the signs of intelligence become not the activity performed, but the presence of a person’s constant desire for development, the ability to behave with dignity, regardless of the circumstances and who is in front of him.
How to become an intelligent person
An intelligent person is able to restrain his emotional manifestations, negative emotions, knows how to process them, and learn from mistakes made. Criticism is perceived as a tool for self-improvement, and having self-confidence helps to treat others with respect and tolerance.
The intelligentsia, as a social stratum, does not always contain exclusively intelligent people. Often there are doctors who are rude to people, teachers who do not respect the individual, but with such frequency you can meet an exceptionally kind and caring technician or a cultured and courteous girl who does not have a higher education. Confusing these concepts is a serious mistake, because class division cannot reflect the totality of personal qualities.
Innate intelligence is not the only factor determining the presence of intelligent manifestations. Of course, some character traits, innate mechanisms of the nervous system responsible for the type of reaction, and the upbringing environment influence the personality, but this is not a given, but only prerequisites with which it will be either easier or more difficult to absorb the principles of decent behavior. Moreover, how the process occurs depends solely on the person and his motivation, accordingly, if you make an effort, you can achieve anything.
The basic concepts of intelligence include cultural behavior, benevolence and tolerance towards people and their manifestations, and only in second place are breadth of outlook and the ability for global or divergent thinking. Therefore, it is necessary to develop your ability to interact with others, starting with goodwill, which will attract more attentive and positive views to you. Look in the mirror and evaluate your gaze (it is the one that creates the first impression upon contact), and if you look gloomy, aggressive, cold, if your gaze makes you want to defend yourself or remain silent, then you should train another one. An open, warm look with a slight smile will endear you to a person and show that you are ready to interact, and not to attack and conflict. Goodwill in communication is manifested by a culture of communication, which implies the absence of obscene words and respect for personal boundaries (beware of inappropriate questions or overly direct, especially negative comments). When communicating, set yourself the goal of making a person’s day a little better, and then act according to the situation - someone needs to be listened to, someone needs to be helped, and for others, tactfulness in not noticing mistakes will be enough.
A tolerant attitude means accepting the existence of other points of view, but this does not mean that they should change your beliefs. If a person acts against your moral values, show tolerance and do not persist in setting him on the right path, but distance yourself, without allowing your own feelings to suffer. Respect other people's choices and demand respect for yours, but not with hysterics and anger, but with a dignified removal from the source of discomfort.
Expand your knowledge, and for this you don’t have to memorize tedious textbooks, the world is much wider and more multifaceted, so look for what interests you. The main thing is to develop and learn new things at least a little from everywhere; in such cases, it is better to go to a concert of a new group than to rewatch the series for the fifth time.
Modesty and sincerity will lead you to a better quality of life, and the ability to live according to your own conscience develops your personality. Try not to weigh yourself down with false merits (like artificial diamonds), but to find and develop your strong traits and.
Written earlier, it resulted in a serious discussion, which we will continue here.
What is an intelligent person? Everyone probably has their own answer to this question. Thinkers, scientists, writers - that is, the intellectuals themselves - responded to it differently, in accordance with their worldview and life experience.
The "Soviet Encyclopedic Dictionary" gives the following definition: "an intelligent (from the Latin intelligens - understanding, thinking, reasonable), social layer of people professionally engaged in mental, mainly complex, creative work, development and dissemination of culture. The term "I. "introduced by the writer Boborykin (in the 60s of the 19th century) and passed from Russian to other languages." Further, the article tells how this “layer” is changing in accordance with domestic political changes, finally finding its highest purpose in unity with the proletariat. It would not be worth quoting the dictionary of Soviet, even pre-perestroika times (1980 edition), if this concept of the intelligentsia had not entered so deeply into our domestic consciousness.
In Russia they believe that intelligence is something Russian, unique, the opposite of foreign lack of spirituality and which is, in essence, one of the synonyms of the very concept of “spirituality.” In everyday thinking, an intelligent person is one who is cultured and educated. Is it so? Do we thoroughly understand what culture and education mean? And in this case, how does a Russian intellectual, for example, differ from an English gentleman?..
In short, anyone who tries to unambiguously answer the question that is the topic of this work will encounter certain difficulties. The answer, in any case, will be connected with a person’s worldview, with which spiritual authorities of the past and present are genuine for him. Thus a certain subjectivity is inevitable.
It seems to us that a full consideration of the topic means, first of all, the study of the historical and modern aspects of the concepts of “intellectual” and “intelligence” themselves, on the basis of which we will have the right to draw our own conclusions.
Intelligentsia before October 1917
Each period of Russian history introduced new nuances to the concept of “intellectual”. In the last century and the beginning of this one, it had a completely definite socio-political overtones. Naturally, in retrospect this could be called - and is now called - by Russian enlightenment freethinkers of the 18th century, the great poets of the early 19th century... But still, this was, first of all, a type of the second half of the last century - a commoner, who became one of the people thanks to his thirst for knowledge, a simple person who received an education, who by his very origin was obliged to fight class and social inequality. Chernyshevsky, Dobrolyubov, and Pisarev were intellectuals of this kind - the “rulers of thought” of the 1860s.
On the other hand, at the same time a type of intellectual appeared that can be called Chekhovian. This is an intellectual who strived not so much for a political, but for a moral reorganization of the world. The model representative of this type was Chekhov himself, who not only created works preaching the ideas of goodness and justice, but also opened free hospitals and libraries, and died of consumption, which he contracted from one of his poor patients. One of the characters in Flaubert’s “Madame Bovary” comes to mind - Doctor Lariviere, who “despised ranks, crosses, academies, was famous for his generosity and cordiality, was a father figure to the poor, did not believe in virtue, but did good deeds at every step, and ", of course, would have been recognized as a saint if not for his devilish insight, because of which everyone feared him more than fire." (Such literary images, by the way, prove the “internationality” of this type of people and somewhat undermine the postulate about Russia’s priority in this matter. However, it should be noted that the uniqueness of Russian cultural and social life left its mark on the local variety of these noble personalities.)
Other intellectuals, the spiritual heirs of Chernyshevsky, did not limit themselves to charity, but called for a change in the social system. One of the most insightful Russian writers, Ivan Bunin, later noted the falsity of this “concern” for the people, from whom radical intellectuals were increasingly disconnected and whom they did not really know, “they did not notice, just as they did not notice the cabs in which they went to some Free Economic Society". He makes a sad conclusion: “If it weren’t for the people’s disasters, thousands of intellectuals would be downright miserable people. How then can they sit together, protest, what should they shout and write about? And without this, life wouldn’t even exist.”
One of these thousands - a comrade-in-arms of the “proletarian writer” Maxim Gorky, Leonid Andreev - even before the revolution, in a private conversation, gave his definition of an intellectual: “This, firstly, did not sing along with the powers that be. Secondly, a person with a heightened, direct - a debilitating sense of conscience. And thirdly, no matter how much you drink, you still remain a cultured person.”
One can agree with such a definition, although far from the canonical one... But it turned out that hostility towards the “powers of this world”, a “debilitating sense of conscience”, the desire to change people’s life for the better led the most radical part of the Russian intelligentsia to the idea that that to build some kind of just society, violence is possible and even necessary (and, to put it bluntly, mass murder). This group - up to and including the Bolsheviks - thus rejected all the humanistic ideas of Chekhov's intellectuals.
This fatal gap between theory and practice, noble thoughts and bloody methods of their implementation, it seems, for the time being, did not at all bother the most influential part of Russian educated society. The terror that broke out at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries against representatives of the tsarist government was vigorously approved in this environment, but any retaliatory attack by the government caused no less violent indignation. Well, whoever sows the wind will reap the storm: the most radical wing of the radical intelligentsia - the Bolshevik elite - having come to power, will begin an unprecedented beating of all dissident brothers in the “layer”. It will come down to Lenin’s now famous expression: “The intelligentsia is not the brain of the nation, but shit.”
Thus, tragically, but, alas, naturally, the pre-October period of the Russian intelligentsia ended. A fundamentally new era has arrived, upending the old ideas about culture, honor, and intelligence.
The topic “Intellectuals and Revolution” was a favorite of Soviet writers. Many of them enriched literature with images of old-fashioned Russian intellectuals who did not accept Bolshevik cruelty and were therefore doomed. There are countless examples - Konstantin Fedin, Alexei Tolstoy, Mikhail Bulgakov... The refraction of this theme in the work of one of the best representatives of the early galaxy of Soviet writers - Mikhail Zoshchenko is very revealing.
At the end of the 20s, this writer (according to Soviet criticism, he was exclusively a humorist and satirist) wrote “Sentimental Stories” - serious and frankly sad things about helpless, beautiful-minded intellectuals, the true “superfluous people” of the Stalinist empire. Shukshin's cute "weirdos" are direct descendants of these characters. The hero of the story "Serenade" (1929) is a clear forerunner of Shurik from "Operation Y", filmed almost forty years later, when, after decades of extinction, the intelligentsia, all these physicists and lyricists, were briefly raised again on the shield. Let us recall his simple plot: the girl prefers a frail student to a hefty diver; the diver, of course, beats him, but this stubborn, bespectacled man began to regularly, wherever they met, “hit the fellow diver in the face.” Upon recovery, he continues his stubborn revenge. The diver, driven to complete breakdown of his nerves, asks for forgiveness... The story, as we see, is very symbolic.
The main object of Zoshchenko’s ridicule and the enduring reason for his hidden bitterness is not the “bureaucrat” or the “philistine,” but the spiritual, or rather, unspiritual, atmosphere that has developed in Soviet Russia, which gives rise to and encourages both. Avoiding direct political denunciations, Zoshchenko pronounces a veiled verdict not on the “legacy of the damned past,” but on a completely modern, deadening regime. His positive hero is none other than the “unfinished intellectual,” a person who keeps in his soul the remnants of the sublime. Unfortunately, in the world of the triumphant boor, he is clearly doomed.
Only later, in this writer’s story “A Good Game” (May 1945), does a special nuance appear that was not in his work of the 20s and 30s: the author’s hope for a new generation. An unprecedented case: at a time when every Soviet writer was simply obliged to compose pathetic military patriotism, Zoshchenko writes a modest story about kind and polite children. At the end of the story, the authors invite adults to learn from them, “and then great victories will be won not only at the front.” Maybe from these children a new call for the Russian intelligentsia will grow?..
This hope, perhaps, came true in the representatives of the literary and artistic bohemia of the sixties, dissidents of the seventies and naively disinterested public figures of the perestroika eighties. The appearance of such types is a natural consequence of spiritual development, which was facilitated by the best examples of Russian literature of the Soviet era.
After the concept of “intellectual” was finally rehabilitated in Soviet culture, Lenin himself was recognized as a kind of standard of this type of personality, a bearer of the greatest culture and education. One of the outstanding Russian writers of recent times, Vladimir Soloukhin, spoke about this as follows: “It would be impossible, loving the intelligentsia or at least not hating it, to kill Gumilyov, to spill tens and hundreds of thousands of educated, cultured people, the flower of the nation and society, outside the country: writers, artists, performers, philosophers, scientists, ballerinas, chess players... And the officers? After all, they [...] were shot in the tens of thousands in all the cities of Russia, but officers are also intellectuals, even if they do not combine in themselves, like Gumilyov, officer rank and political talent [...] The intelligentsia was destroyed with a “backlog” for many years.”
Of course, the person who exterminates the intelligentsia cannot be an intellectual himself. However, wasn’t Vladimir Ilyich, after all, the founder of a certain new version of it - Soviet, with completely different ideas about morality?
It is generally accepted that a first-generation intellectual is, as it were, inferior. Lunacharsky, who, however, was directly related to the Bolshevik atrocities (“this reptile,” Bunin said about him), said that to realize oneself as a true intellectual you need three universities, the first of which was graduated from your grandfather, the second from your father, and the third from you yourself. However, it is clear that having a diploma (as well as grandfather’s and father’s diplomas) of higher education does not in itself guarantee internal culture and serious intelligence. And in a situation where the majority of the educated people of old Russia were destroyed or forced to emigrate, where would real intellectuals come from, even in Lunacharsky’s understanding?..
However, the Soviet intelligentsia still appeared: this name was a priori assigned to everyone who was involved in the so-called. mental (that is, not physical) labor. It is interesting to note the superficial gloss and hypocrisy of the Soviet government, its eternal zeal for “spirituality,” under the cover of which any lawlessness was committed. (To this day, it is the communists who protest especially vehemently against, say, the unspiritual, aggressive and so on mass culture, i.e. the ideological heirs of those people whose every atrocity more than outweighs all American “horror films” combined - not to mention , that the films are a fantasy, in contrast to the antics of the Cheka-NKVD-MGB-KGB.) In line with this zeal, the state took care of people of “intelligent” professions, “favoring” scientists loyal to the regime (especially those who worked for the “defense industry”), writers, artists... They enjoyed a variety of benefits and privileges, had a high social status, and their incomes seriously exceeded the average Soviet salary. This applied, however, only to the scientific, technical and cultural elite - the meager salaries of ordinary engineers and the ridiculous official rates for artistic work were the talk of the town.
While ensuring a high standard of living for selected intellectuals by Soviet standards, the government, however, never abandoned the well-known Marxist-Leninist postulate that the intelligentsia is only a kind of “layer” between classes. For decades, domestic journalism, literature and cinema glorified mainly “ordinary workers.” If an intellectual appeared on the screen or on the pages of books, it was in the image of a “cute eccentric”, which took root in the mass consciousness: glasses, absent-mindedness, physical weakness, inability to adapt to everyday life - in a word, something comical, caricatured.
On the other hand, the realities of life increasingly convinced the citizens of the USSR that being a “knowledge worker” was generally “easier” and better than being a proletarian, no matter how propaganda tried to prove the opposite. Accordingly, the prestige of higher education grew. Our country has taken first place in the world in the number of certified specialists. It’s hard to say, “by the number of intellectuals.” Nevertheless, we are unlikely to be mistaken if we say that from now on only those who had a document of completion of a higher educational institution could count on the reputation of an intelligent person in the eyes of society. The absence of an institute or university diploma has become a kind of “black mark”, meaning a priori the low social status of an individual. (This was also consistent with the general state policy: for example, only a member of the Union of Composers could legally play music publicly, only a member of the Writers’ Union could publish books; in other words, the right to engage in any kind of “mental work” required a documented “official permission” ".)
All categories of the Soviet intelligentsia had one thing in common: the more time passed, the further the formation of Soviet power moved into the past, the weaker the power of communist dogma became, the more the best representatives of the “stratum” gravitated towards the way of thinking of pre-revolutionary intellectuals. In other words, the Soviet intelligentsia gradually ceased to be Soviet: from the generation of “sixties” nurtured by Khrushchev’s “thaw”, who still saw an alternative to Stalinism in some kind of “genuine Leninism” (the abominations of which were strictly classified) - to the intellectuals of the 70s with their “kitchen "freethinking, from among whom came the so-called dissidents who carried out openly anti-Soviet activities. Samizdat appeared, reflecting this hidden, shadow spiritual life, the work of thought independent of the official ideology.
At the same time, the intelligentsia again - as in the second half of the 19th century - was divided into Westerners and Slavophiles, in modern terminology - market liberals and national patriots. These groups, existing and warring to this day, were united by rejection (partial or complete) of the existing state of affairs in the country. As a result, by the end of the Brezhnev era (the so-called stagnation), a situation had arisen where practically not a single person ranked among the spiritual elite of the nation thought in accordance with the official party guidelines. Thus (again, as in the pre-revolutionary era!) the concept of “intelligent person” included opposition to state power as an integral part.
This was the key to the collapse of the socialist system in the USSR. But the era that began after August 1991 was also not to the taste of many intellectuals who so zealously brought it closer...
The fate of the modern Russian intelligentsia
In post-Soviet times, the question: “what is an intelligent person?” - again causes controversy. The idea has become firmly established that it is practically impossible for intellectuals of the “old stock” to survive in the conditions of “wild Russian capitalism.”
On the one hand, we see the implementation of liberal ideas that matured in the “kitchen” conversations of Soviet intellectuals. On the other hand, market transformations led to the “coming of Ham”, i.e. the notorious new Russian - a man from a criminal background with huge incomes, who longs to bring the entire life around him in line with his, so to speak, spiritual needs. In addition, the intelligentsia no longer enjoyed the financial favor of the state. Professions not related to private enterprise, such as a doctor, teacher, scientist, museum and library worker, have now become almost monastic service that does not mean any material benefits.
One gets the impression that this type of intellectuals, of whom there are so many in the Russian provinces - selfless unmercenaries who devote their lives to raising children, science or culture - is not needed by the new Russia (just as the “Chekhov intellectuals” were not needed by Soviet Russia) and is doomed: at best - to emigration to more prosperous countries ("brain drain"), and in the worst case - to physical extinction. In theory, she should be replaced by another type, capable of successfully operating in new realities - combining deep knowledge and personal culture with business, commercial abilities, with the so-called. grip. After all, any of the countless popular guides on the topic “How to succeed in life” suggests that intelligence is, by and large, commercially beneficial: an intelligent person is more pleasant to do business with, which means he will achieve more in business than an uncultured person.
But is this true for today's Russia - with our specific "mentality"? Most often, unfortunately, in our country we observe one thing: either life and financial success, or internal culture. Behind the external stage and television gloss of our new " rulers of thoughts" often hides an internal foulbrood. Using the example of some of our politicians, one can once again be convinced that neither education nor position in themselves creates an intellectual (how can one not recall the notorious “son of a lawyer”, who has two higher educations and a doctorate). This is apparently due to the fact that we are still far from the “civilized” capitalism (which is fashionable to call “post-industrial society”) of developed Western countries. The easiest way to succeed in our “wild capitalism” is for people who can walk on corpses, and not so much. rarely in the literal sense. Any major commercial event, including in the cultural sphere, implies a connection with the criminal world.
Is it possible to call the most polished person who uses criminal means to deal, for example, with his business competitor, as an intellectual? In the old Russian sense, naturally, no. But the “standard” representatives of the intelligentsia, whom one should follow, are, unfortunately, gradually leaving. With the death of each such personality, life becomes poorer, visible examples of spiritual perfection disappear, and it seems that we will soon call any successful manager an intellectual if he is clean-shaven and wearing an expensive suit...
What is an intelligent person?
It seems appropriate to us to quote on this occasion one of the undoubted Russian intellectuals - Alexander Solzhenitsyn. Let's discover the best of his works - "The Gulag Archipelago":
“In the Soviet Union, this word [intelligentsia. - Author] acquired a completely perverted meaning. The intelligentsia began to include everyone who does not work (and is afraid to work) with their hands. All party, state, military and trade union bureaucrats were included here. All accountants and accountants - mechanical slaves of Debet. All office workers are all the more easily included here in all teachers (and those who are nothing more than a talking textbook, and have neither independent knowledge nor an independent view of the education of all doctors (and those who). capable only of zigzagging through a medical history with his pen).
Meanwhile, based on none of these signs, a person cannot be included in the intelligentsia. If we do not want to lose this concept, we should not exchange it. An intellectual is not determined by his professional affiliation or occupation. A good upbringing and a good family also do not necessarily produce an intellectual. An intellectual is one whose interests and will to the spiritual side of life are persistent and constant, not forced by external circumstances and even in spite of them. An intellectual is one whose thought is not imitative."
We, perhaps, have nothing to add to this statement, which contains both criticism of the generally accepted, philistine idea of the intelligentsia, which exists to this day, and one of the most accurate, in our opinion, definitions of this concept in all Russian literature.
Conclusion
We briefly examined what the concept of an “intelligent person” was in different periods of Russian history. At all times, it carried a certain ideological load, which largely distorted its very essence. The time in which we live is no exception: the intelligentsia is “ordered” to change in accordance with market relations.
In contrast to this, it seems correct to us to consider an intelligent person in isolation from political and economic realities - as, first of all, a certain psychological type of personality. An intellectual combines personal culture and education with high moral principles and the need for constant spiritual improvement. Such people, regardless of their occupation, constitute the color of the nation. Sowing “reasonable, good, eternal” in a society, they are necessary for any people and state that even aspires to self-preservation, not to mention an outstanding role in world life.
