Gaming Practices of S. M. Solovyov as a Reflection of the Young Symbolists on V. S. Solovyov’s Ideas and Positivist Approach

Kuzmina Yuliya Alekseevna Graduate student, Department of Culturology, Russian State University for the Humanities 109544, Russia, Moscow region, Moscow, 21 Vekovaya str., building 1, 3 kuzminaulia983@gmail.com Other publications by this author

The influence of V. S. Solovyov's philosophical ideas on the aesthetic principles and theoretical content of Russian young symbolism is well known and has been extensively studied. Among recent studies outlining his philosophical, ideological and artistic boundaries, we can single out the works of E. S. Bujor ^[1], N. G. Yurina ^[2], A. L. Rychkov ^[3], D. D. Romanov ^[4] and M. A. Samarina ^[5]. In most such studies, only theoretical and artistic texts of young symbolists become the material for revealing this phenomenon. Within the framework of this article, an attempt will be made to describe how the symbolists carried out reflection on the ideas of the philosopher not in intellectual or literary creativity, but in their daily practices. In particular, we will talk about the buffoonery that S. M. Solovyov played in front of A. Bely, A. Blok and L. D. Mendeleeva.

The structural-semiotic method considers imitative game practices as linguistic structures. The signifiers in them are produced by the players' bodies by mimetic imitation of elements of other secondary modeling systems (Note: here and further, the principles of structural-semiotic analysis and terminology are derived from the theoretical works of Yu. M. Lotman ^[6-8]). The systems from which Young symbolists drew signifiers for their gaming practices often became 1) V. Solovyov's philosophy and 2) positivism. As for the signified, their production is local, that is, it depends on the location of the element and internal sign connections. That is why the semantic field of the signs "positivism" and "philosophy of V. Solovyov" reproduced in the games of young symbolists cannot be equated with the real theoretical content of positivism and Solovyov's concepts. The semantic content of these elements is connected with the mental representations of the players about this phenomenon, and it has yet to be revealed using the structural-semiotic method. To achieve this goal, we will consider such game practices in more detail. 

After the wedding of A. Blok and L. D. Mendeleeva in the summer of 1903, the young symbolists A. Bely, A. S. Petrovsky and S. M. Solovyov, the nephew of the philosopher V. S. Solovyov, come to visit the newlyweds at the Shakhmatovo estate. In the evenings, friends play buffoonery. In the memoir "The Beginning of the Century", A. Bely leaves such a memory about them: "[S. M. Solovyov] portrayed an academician, elder Lapan, in the coming century, on the basis of data solving a difficult question: was there once a sect like, say, the whips— the "Solovyovites"? Lapan came to the conclusion: there was no sect; it was assumed that there was (like A. Schmidt's nonsense); V. S. Solovyov's friend, S. P. Khitrovo, embodied “Sophia”-de; wise Lapan proved: “Khitrovo" (S. P. X.) — cryptogram: Sophia the Wisdom of Christ; “Madame" Khitrovo, or Sophia Petrovna, who lived in the Desert, the former estate of A. K. Tolstoy, where the “White Bells" are written, is only a legend compiled after the death of V. S. Solovyov. Pampan, “lapanovets", went on: Blok — did not get married; “L. D.” — cryptogram: “Love” with a capital letter, an allegorization of Blok's lyrics in an attempt to revive the cult of Demeter; so: Dmitrievna is “De-me-tro-vna". We laughed" (1990, p. 377).

Also in A. Bely, but already in the memoir "Memories of Blok", we find the following remark: "S. M. [S. M. Solovyov] began buffoonery: and we appeared in parodies in front of us by the "Blok sect"; the contours of the sect are sought out by a hardworking professor of culture from the XXII century; S. M. invented his name: it was the academician, the philosopher Lapan, who put forward the most difficult question: did there exist a “sect” like ours — on the basis of: poems by A. N., works by Vladimir Solovyov and “Confessions" by A. N. Schmidt. Lapan came to the conclusion: S. P. X. [S. P. Khitrovo], a friend of Vladimir Solovyov, of course, has never been; S. P. X. is a symbolic sign, a cryptogram similar to the first Christian one: S. P. X. is Sophia, the Wisdom of Christ. “Sofia Petrovna“ is an allegorical sign: Sofia, or the Third Testament, appearing on the stone of the second, — on the stone ”Peter“: that's what "Sophia" meant Petrovna”, from the biography of Solovyov: it is a legend compiled by the philosopher's disciples. We were laughing. Then, S. M., who had gone off in jokes, announced: Lapan's student, a very, very learned Pampan, continuing the Lapan method, came to the conclusion that A. A. [A. Blok] never married: spouses by name “Lyubov Dmitrievna” did not exist; and this is the legend of the “blockists": In the Block, Sophia Wisdom becomes a new “Love”, which from the Eleusinian mystery in honor of Demeter, “Dmitrievna” — Demetrovna" (1995, p. 68).

A. Blok's aunt, M.A. Beketova, who also visited Shakhmatovo, gives her memories of these gaming practices in the memoir "Alexander Blok. Biographical sketch": "Sergei Solovyov's caricatures were very funny: the future disputes of philologists of the XXII century made us laugh to exhaustion, were extremely witty <...> He drew all sorts of patterns of comic parodies about future scientists of the XXII century, who would decide whether there was a sect of "blokovites", interpret the name of the poet's wife Lyubov Dmitrievna using terms of early mythology, etc." (1930, p. 90).

The syntactic construction of these passages suggests that such buffoonery was played out many times. Having correlated them, we will construct that single abstract model to which the actualized structures of gaming practices go back. Let's denote it and highlight those significant elements (Note: marked in italics) that need to be decoded. S. M. Solovyov reproduces the relationship between friends and L. D. Blok in a parody form, bringing them to the grotesque: "we appeared in parodies in front of us by the Blok sect." After that, the fictional elder-academician / philologist / professor of culture of the XXII century. the hardworking Lapan begins to study the works of V. Solovyov, poems and "Confession" by A. N. Schmidt in order to answer the question based on the data: did there really exist a sect of Blokovites/Solovyovites like the whips? Also , based on the data and the special Lapan method of analysis , Lapan comes to the following conclusions: 1) there was no sect in reality, it existed only in the representation of A. N. Schmidt's delusional texts; 2) V. S. Solovyov's beloved, Sofya Petrovna Khitrovo, also did not exist in reality. For V. Solovyov, she is only a mental image and a philosophical concept, because, firstly, her initials S. P. H. represent a cryptogram (S. P. H. - Sophia Wisdom of Christ), similar to those left by the first Christians, and secondly, the patronymic "Petrovna" refers to the apostle Peter, who is a "stone", on which the Christian teaching is based. The combination "Sofia Petrovna" is thus only an allegorical sign announcing the establishment of the Third Covenant on the stone of the Second. Sofia Petrovna, who appears in V. Solovyov's historical biography, is just a late legend compiled after the philosopher's death by his readers. After a while, Lapan's student and very, very learned Pampan, continuing Lapan's method, came to a new conclusion: L. D. Mendeleeva also did not exist. Blokovskaya L. D. is a transformation of Solovyevskaya S. P. H. and also a cryptogram in which "L" means mystical Love with a capital letter, and "D" actually sounds like "Demetrovna", which indicates the connection of L. D. with the ancient Greek cult of Demeter and the Eleusinian mysteries — an important component of this cult.

This model is a complex two-part structure: 1) an image of the Blok sect and 2) an image of the work of scientists, divided into a) Lapan research and b) Pampan research, which are symmetrical to each other in their structural structure.

Both A. Bely and M. A. Beketova note that the buffoonery caused laughter among the audience. In our opinion, such a humorous effect was partly built on the complex opposition of different types of signs within the game structure. At its first level (the image of the sect of blokovites / Solovyovites) we are dealing with the existing signs, because in the diegetic space of the game, the "sect of blokovites" exists: "we appeared in parodies in front of us by the "blokovtsev" sect." At the second level (the image of the work of scientists), the missing signs prevail: "there was no sect." We note the same mechanics in the functioning of other signs. Of course, the symbolists had no doubts about the existence of either S. P. Khitrovo or L. D. Mendeleeva. However, the conclusions of Lapanand Pampan deny real women and represent them only as philosophical concepts. The special comicality of the situation consisted in the fact that Lyubov Dmitrievna herself was directly present when playing such buffoonery, being a present sign of the game structure.

The above excerpts do not explain exactly how the "sect of Blokovites/Solovyovites" was depicted, nor the content of its teachings. However, the views of the "sect" implicitly implied during gaming practices can be reconstructed based on the principles of the structural-semiotic method. To do this, it is necessary to refer to the general structure where these passages were included — the memoirs of A. Bely. Then we will be able to put forward the assumption that the basis of the teachings of the gaming sect is a kind of interpretation of Solovyov's Sophia, which was born due to the fact that A. Bely and S. M. Solovyov had access to the manuscripts of V. S. Solovyov. Looking at them, friends noticed numerous notes in the margins. "In them [the manuscripts], letters signed "S" and "Sophie" were sketched in the hand of Vladimir Solovyov (modified)." A. Bely also notes that "the manuscript was accompanied by a mediumistic letter with the signatures "S" and "Sophie", appearing everywhere in the drafts of Vladimir Solovyov's creations; it had the appearance of a love correspondence <...> this strange correspondence in the margins between "S" and the philosopher confused us, disposing to significantly different interpretations compared with the interpretations of the venerable Professors of Philosophy" ("Memories of the Block", 1995, p. 25). Fundamentally "different" at the time of 1903-1905 was the fact that friends thought of Sofia, in the terminology of A. Bely himself, "concretely", that is, they believed in her bodily embodiment. In addition, in the same memoir, the poet notes that it was this vision that became for him and With.M. Solovyov is the basis for friendship and spiritual closeness with A. Blok: "S. M. [S. M. Solovyov] was surprised to inform me that A. A. [A. Blok], like us, is quite specific about the topic of Sophia of Wisdom; he draws a connection between the teaching about Sophia and the revelation of Her face: in the lyrics [Note: meaning love lyrics] Solovyov" (1995, p. 30). We dare to assume that the content of the teaching of the game "sect of blokovtsev / solovyevtsev" was the belief in the possibility of the bodily embodiment of Sofia, because the friendship of the young symbolists was unleashed on this basis, and S. M. Solovyov parodically played the "sect", hypertrophiing their interpersonal relationships: "we appeared in parodies in front of us by the "Blok sect"."

It should be noted that talking about the "concrete" Sofia, A. Bely notes the marginality of the position of the symbolists in this matter in relation to the interpretations of the "venerable professors". In the reality surrounding the poet, the latter thought of it as only a philosophical concept. It can be assumed that S. M. Solovyov's buffoonery by its structural structure (the opposition of the existing signs and the missing ones) parodically reflects exactly this really existing split of Sofia's interpretations, because for the gaming "venerable professors" Lapanand Pampan, she is also only an intellectual idea of the philosopher and does not possess flesh.

Returning to reality, it should be noted that representatives of the philosophical circle "Solovyovites" soon began to interpret Sofia in the same way as the Young symbolists. This circle included the creator of the "Third Testament" A. N. Schmidt. As we noted, in the space of the game Lapan reads "Confession" and poems by Schmidt, as well as texts by V. Solovyov himself, but in contrast to the opinion of young symbolists, he concludes that the sect of blokovites (i.e. people who share the idea of the material embodiment of Sofia) exists only in "delusional representations of Schmidt herself", and not in reality. But since it exists in the dietary space of the game, Lapan makes a mistake in the game narrative. Since Pampan continues the obviously incorrect Lapan method, he makes a similar mistake: he declares L. D. Mendeleev only an idea and an allegory. The semantic content of such a distorted method will be established by referring to the context of more general structures — the memoirs of A. Bely and the historical situation.

From the use of the Latin alphabet in writing names and their phonetic sound, it is easy to conclude that scientists are French. This assumption also agrees with the historical context. According to the study by A. Etkind, as a result of a combination of the most diverse reasons, it was in France that there was a long-term increased interest in exotic Russians, and especially populist sects like whips ^[9] (and after all, A. Bely conducts the structural adjacency of game blockers with whips). Therefore, the very situation in which French scientists are studying the Russian sect looks quite plausible, although naturally, this reason is far from the only one.

The recollections given differ in the discipline to which the "old" and "hardworking Lapan academician" should belong. He is either a "philologist" or a "professor of culture" who builds research "on the basis of data". There can be no discrepancies in one thing — the themes of A. Bely's memoirs leave no doubt that Lapan and Pampan are symbols of positivist scientists for young people. The very concept of "positivist" in the circle of young symbolists was a stigma and expressed the impossibility of finding a common language. Let's give an example of a scene from A. Bely's memoir "The Beginning of the Century": "They are positivists," Blok explains to us [Note: the reason for the failed conversation with lawyers], "they do not interfere: they are ... But they despise themselves" (1990, p. 371). Often White even ranks positivists among the "enemies" of symbolism. Moreover, it is precisely the disillusionment with positivism that becomes an impulse for the poet to develop symbolist epistemology. In this regard, his remark from the memoir "At the turn of two Centuries" is interesting: "if a catalog list of symbolists were compiled (who are their fathers, from what environment they are, and so on), a very curious fact would be noted; the fathers of most symbolists are educated positivists; and symbolism in this case is an interesting phenomenon in his "decadent" separation from the fathers; he is the antithesis of "positivism"" (1989, p. 203). Thus, symbolism itself appears as a counterculture in relation to the dying culture of the surviving "positivist fathers". There can be no doubt that the "elder" Lapan and his disciple Pampan are positivists also because there were no other old academicians in the world of young symbolists: "my father, grandfather by age, and Blok's grandfather, Andrei Nikolaevich Beketov, were great scientists" (1989, p. 121). In this case, the choice of the nationality of scientists is a tribute to the homeland of positivism. It turns out that the essence of the teachings of the gaming sect, the belief in the possibility of a "concrete" embodiment of Sophia, remained misunderstood by Lapan and Pampan precisely because of the depravity of the "Lapan" (positivist) method.

Approaching the decoding of the game sign "sect" in the structure of the buffoonery, it is impossible not to turn to the text of Gustave Lebon "Psychology of peoples and masses", one of the first major studies in social psychology, affecting the phenomenon of sects. Lebon refers the sect to the type of organized and spiritualized crowd, where completely different individuals acquire something similar "to a collective soul that makes them feel and think completely differently than each of them would think individually" ^{[10, p. 62]}, while this soul is characterized by increased susceptibility to images that the crowd transforms into myths: "a crowd capable of thinking only in images is susceptible only to images. Only images can captivate her or generate terror in her and become the engines of her actions" ^{[10, p. 76]}. The beliefs of an organized crowd always take the form of a religious feeling, regardless of the positioning of its members. The following remark of Lebon is interesting: "If it were possible to make the crowd assimilate atheism, it would express itself in the same fervent intolerance as any religious feeling, and in its external forms would soon turn into a real cult. The evolution of a small sect of positivists curiously confirms this position" ^{[10, p. 76]}.

Of course, the founder of positivism, Auguste Comte, really formed a religious cult around his own philosophical ideas (we can refer to an article by A. I. Korsakov exploring the rituals and organization of this cult ^[11]). However, the concept of G. Lebon seems controversial. For us, it is not important whether there is a religious cult of positivism in reality, but what the Young symbolists themselves believed in this regard, because it is their idea of positivism that will reveal to us the signified figures of Lapanand Pampan. Once again, let's turn to the memoirs of A. Bely. Adult academicians who visited the father of little Bori Bugaev did everything to make the "foundations of positivism" his first mythology ("At the turn of two centuries", 1989, p. 99). He directly calls positivism "the religious foundation of professorial existence" and writes: "Lagrange, Abel, Darwin! These words were perceived by me as the names of the gods and heroes of our Olympus, which has temples (universities), altars (pulpits)" (p. 189). Also extremely interesting is his remark that he had real religious feelings for the tenacious-tailed monkey in childhood, because her image was experienced by him as the image of the Foremother of Mankind. The connection of positivism with religious feeling is also noted by A. Blok. Positivism in his view is akin to religious enlightenment makes the world understandable (clairvoyance as opposed to clairvoyance) ("Notebooks 1901-1920", pp. 72-76).

It turns out that S. M. Solovyov's buffoonery contains another complex opposition. Their single abstract model can then be represented as follows: sectarian scientists study sectarian blocs and deny the latter the right to exist. Such mutual "sectarianism" is the point of intersection of two game spaces, which sets the tension of the game, because it includes both contiguity (the general structure of the organization of sects) and opposition (the inability to understand each other).

In addition to Blokovites and positivists, there are mentions of other cults in the above passages. The "Sect of Blokovites" is compared with the "sect of whips", and the cryptogram "L. D." correlates with the "Eleusinian mysteries" and the "cult of Demeter". All these elements are iconic for the game space, so let's look at the relationship between them in more detail.

Based on the research of A. Etkind, it can be concluded that in real life the Young symbolists showed great interest in populist ecstatic sects and, in particular, to the whips. Thus, A. Blok not only communicated with the whips, but also attended their "secular" meetings ^[9]. The whips themselves invited the poet to become their "leader" ^{[12, p. 480]}. In addition to the apparent experience of mystical experience and ecstasy by the whips, symbolists could be interested in the striking theoretical similarity in the teachings of the sect and their own aesthetic ideas. According to Hoffmann's observation, the question of epistemology was at the center of the aesthetics of symbolism ^{[13, p. 55]}. The process of cognition for the Young symbolists was revealed not as the mental operations of an alienated subject over an object, but as a direct union with Existence. Such unity is achieved due to the potential of the symbol to connect the earthly and the transcendent. The poetic word-symbol, on the other hand, acts as the materiality in which Existence can be embodied and subjected to the creative transformation of the poet-theurgist. That is why the poet cannot produce a word-symbol logically, it can only, in the words of A. Bely, "intuitively know", see in the Nature of the Upper World (See: "Symbolism as a worldview", 1994). This type of cognition was formed as a result of V. S. Solovyov's ideas about "mystical intuition", which "allows the cognizing subject to cross the border separating him from the subject" ^[14]. Therefore, when the Truth appears as the object of knowledge, unity with it leads to the fact that the subject overcomes the individual and becomes a "superpersonal"Self" [See: 15-17]. Let us correlate the briefly described epistemological concept of Young symbolism with the teaching of the Khlysts.

A. Etkind ^[12], D. N. Ovsyaniko-Kulikovsky ^[18], F. I. Fedorenko ^[19] and other researchers of the khlyst sect note its central legend, where "the founder of khlystovism throws all books into the water", and also announces to people "that neither new nor old books lead to salvation that this requires <...> A pigeon book, the Holy Spirit Himself" ^{[19, p. 116]}, directly Existing, with which a person must come into contact. Such contact is revealed in an unexpected way. Researcher of Russian folk sects D. N. Ovsyaniko-Kulikovsky notes in relation to "khlystovshchina" that "the grain of its mystical teaching was and still is in the belief that the deity can constantly descend to earth and incarnate into his chosen ones" ^{[18, p. 112]}, after which representatives of the sect begin to worship such chosen ones like the gods. The goal of the famous Khlystov's joys is an attempt to embody the divine in the corporeal due to the mystical convergence of the Spirit. Moreover, the author notes that "the enormous significance of [incarnated] false virgins in khlystovshchina is known" ^{[18, p. 146]}, linking this phenomenon with the atavisms of the matriarchy.

Thus, the expression describing the game sect of the Blokovites, "a sect like, say, whips," is a marking of the adjacency of the iconic relationships of the game structure. This contiguity is based on two characteristics that are most important for the worldview of young symbolists: 1) the idea of a "concrete" incarnation of the divine in a woman and 2) the type of epistemology. According to the same characteristics, two sects are opposed to the third — the positivists. According to sources, scientists are positivists: 1) denied the "concrete" incarnation and 2) built the study only "on the basis of data" gleaned from books (A. N. Schmidt's "Confessions" and V. Solovyov's texts), and not on direct interaction with the Truth.

The same type of adjacency can be noted in another marked point of the game structure — the "cult of Demeter" and the "Eleusinian mysteries". On the one hand, Pampan claims about the involvement of Blokovites in the ancient Greek cult, which means it may turn out to be false, because his other conclusions are not true. On the other hand, the connection between the cult of Demeter and the teachings of the whips can be traced by comparing the practices of the Eleusinian mysteries described by J. Fraser in the chapter "Demeter and Persephone" ^{[20, pp. 15-19]}, with the practices of Khlystov's joys described by both Ovsyaniko-Kulikovsky and Fedorenko. Ovsyaniko-Kulikovsky identifies an archaic layer of joys associated with the cult of Mother Earth, which is also reflected in the cult of Demeter ^{[18, p. 146]}. It is no coincidence that the main joys of the whips fell in the spring and were associated with a rite where "a girl came out of hiding in a colored outfit and with a sieve on her head" (as Persephone from the kingdom of Hades once did), with fruits illustrating the blessing of Mother Earth in her hands (which refers to the reward of Demeter for the return of her daughter — disclosure secrets of rituals necessary for high fertility) ^{[18, p. 147]}. It is essential that in both cases the central motive becomes the independent assertion of the mystery rite by the deity in materiality, with the help of which the direct interaction of a person with him is achieved. Thus, since there is a connection between the whips and the cult of Demeter, then according to the principle of structural adjacency of the device of the whips and the Bloks, it is possible to transfer this connection to the latter.

A complex game structure is revealed before us: on the one hand, Pampan accurately and shrewdly noticed the connection between the Eleusinian mysteries and the symbolists' ideas about the essence of L. D. Blok, and on the other, he made completely "wrong" conclusions about its nature. Thus, his figure in the game marks the type of cognition that leads to incomplete understanding. Speaking about the influence of V. S. Solovyov's ideas on the worldview of Russian young symbolists, it is worth mentioning after V. V. Balanovsky that the philosopher did not deny rationality as such, but only limited its cognitive potential ^{[21, pp. 117-134]}. Logical cognition is capable of producing only a formal organization of knowledge, but, unlike mystical intuition, it cannot claim a holistic understanding of Existence. It is for this reason that Lapan and Pampan are able to formulate important philosophical ideas about Sofia and Eternal Femininity, but they are not able to know them holistically and to the end.

Such a complex construction of game practice reveals the reflection of young symbolists on two types of epistemology, in which they see both points of adjacency and tension of opposition. It is easy to see that it is this opposition that is the structure-forming core of the game structure around which the game narrative unfolds.

The subsequent levels of structural opposition, which we will note, are produced in the buffoonery only as variable in relation to the primary. Among them, one can distinguish, for example, the attitude to the institution of the family. So Ovsyaniko-Kulikovsky divides sects into two camps according to this characteristic: 1) mythologizing the family and 2) denying it. "Moreover, a positive and creative direction in relation to the family prevails in rationalistic sects, while a negative one prevails in mystical sects" ^{[18, p. 139]}. The game structure just illustrates two such opposite types. On the one hand, positivism, which both in the religious cult of Comte ^[12] and in Russian practice is expressed in the real cult of family relations. As already noted, the Young symbolists came from families representing entire genealogical clans of positivist academics. In the memoir "At the Turn of Two Centuries" (1989, p. 121) by A. Bely, we find an interesting remark about the hereditary nature of Russian positivism: "Positivists," Blok and I used to say in our youth; and the "type" got up, not so much "daddies" as Pasha, Arkasha, Nikolasha, or whatever his name is [Note: by context, we mean the children of positivist scientists]; also with "daddies" I struggled; with the Arkashas, with the Nikolashas — never; I knew them too well in their "status of the nascendi", they went into service at the university; and were hired as pedels guarding dad's achievements." In addition, the very legacy of Pampan Lapan's Lapan method also continues the line of "sanctified" fatherhood. This hereditary line is opposed by the whips, who, according to Fedorenko's research, on the contrary, sought to break with the family and "virgin purity" ^[19]. In this sense, the Skoptsy are a radical branch of the cult of whips. At the same time, using the observations of Ovsyaniko-Kulikovsky, we note that the whips did not "defeat the institution of the family", but on the contrary, were at the archaic "pre-family" level, hence the phenomenon of "hetaerism" so common for the sect ^[18]. Parallels with the family relations of the Blocks, in this case, suggest themselves.

Similarly, it is possible to make up the oppositions of the sects represented in the game practice according to the types of sermons. Mystical sects are built around the sermons of the founder of the cult and his followers, it is no accident that both the texts of Solovyov himself and the works of followers (texts by Schmidt and Blok) are marked in the buffoonery. Rational sects are built around works claiming scientific status (Lapan and Pampan studies). In addition, two different types of ecstatic experience can be noted in the game structure: mystical and contemplative, associated with intellectual insight. We will also note different ways of organization: physical unity of members (in the participants' house) and alienated existence (in the intellectual space).

In the structural structure of S. M. Solovyov's gaming practices, one can distinguish many more oppositions similar to the above mentioned between its iconic elements. However, all of them unfold in accordance with the principle set by the central one — the opposition between the symbolist type of cognition formed under the influence of V. S. Solovyov's ideas and the epistemology of positivism. Once again, we emphasize that the semantic fields of signified, which were highlighted in this article, do not reflect the real ideas of the philosopher and the principles of positivism, but only the reflection of young symbolists about them. It was the need to implement this reflection that gave rise to S. M. Solovyov's gaming practices in life.

You can simply select and copy link from below text field.