Page:The Spirit of Russia by T G Masaryk, volume 1.pdf/419

Rh is not entirely deserved. He was acquainted with European thinkers; he lived in Europe and derived his culture from Europe; but he adopted only what was congenial to him, and from the diverse elements that have been enumerated he constructed a whole that was expressive of his own individuality. He displayed the energy of organic synthesis.

Some of the European cultural elements by which he was influenced were operative in Russian elaborations. We trace in his mind the influence of Bělinskii, Homjakov, Kirěevskii, Čaadaev, Bakunin, and above all Černyševskii; he read Puškin and Gogol as well as Goethe and Byron.

There is no occasion to undertake a detailed exposition of the points in which Herzen agrees with his predecessors, teachers, and friends, or to trace the derivation of his views from theirs. Nor need I consider further how far Herzen modified his opinions in the year 1848. A close study will convince us that he carried Feuerbach's thought to its logical conclusion, moving in the direction of Stirner; but nevertheless Herzen's mood differed greatly from Stirner's. For Herzen, positivist disillusionment destroyed, not the religious illusion alone, but also the political illusion, the illusion of revolution.

Herzen's philosophy of religion and philosophy of history are of interest to us. First of all it must be pointed out that Herzen, like Bělinskii (and like Feuerbach, Comte, and Hume), confused religion with mythology. Moreover, Herzen failed to distinguish clearly between religion and the church, between religion and ecclesiastical religion.