Keyword: «comparative studies»

The article presents different aspects of Russian and Turkish 20th century literary relationships research; the ways of their teaching and studying at Saratov State University is shown; major controversial and advantageous aspects of the issue are outlined; a wide corpus of literature on theory and methodology has been used; further trends of issue development have been defined

The article is devoted to the topic of "traces of the past” interpretation; its relevance is due to both the need to improve the training of history majors and the aggravation of the fight against falsifications of history (primarily domestic). The aim of the research is to analyze the correlation of humanitarian, social and technological components in the methodology of teaching historical disciplines. The comparative method was chosen as a key method. The work uses the method of hypotheses, content analysis of the source base, and experience in studying University teaching practice. Identifying the prerequisites for «incorrect" interpretation of historical events, the author compares legal, forensic and philosophical approaches. The theoretical significance of the article lies in the novelty of an interdisciplinary, integrated technosocial humanitarian outlook on historical research. According to the author, the best way to overcome bias is adherence to principles; a person must inspire and justify trust: this requirement is true for both a forensic expert and a scientist. The main thing is to avoid simplifications, geometric sketching of the past, reducing it to parallels and piles of additional constructions, politicized speculations. No less great is the temptation to fall into exegesis, and from the interpreter of texts to become the owner of stylization and meta-history. The task of the researcher is to establish the specifics of the typical. It is extremely difficult to find the “median nerve” of an era, but this is the only way to “qualify the subjective side of an act” from a historiosophical perspective. The sensation and awareness of belonging to humanity obliges the scientist to think in integral, complex, figurative, and not abstract categories. Intersubjectivity itself (even intrasubjectivity) characterizes history as a humanitarian science, and not as narrowly social one (akin to jurisprudence or sociology, especially in their positivistic interpretations). The practical significance of the study lies in the fact that the material of the article can be used in the pedagogical process, and a comparison of fundamental and applied disciplines will help history majors to sort out professional and worldview issues, and teach them to distinguish between the eternal and the vain-trendy, the ideological and the tendentious. History, the author believes, is about the eternally alive, and not about the outdated things.