Paradigms or Approaches? Reply to D.P. Isaev

Abstract. The authors discuss the main ideas of D.P. Isaev, formulated in a polemic with their theory of two paradigms in contemporary Russian historiography. The main objection of D.P. Isaev concludes that the «paradigm» is not a correct term for understanding the modern divergence between anthropological and conceptual tendencies, and the historian of science should speak about the only modern paradigm that, in doing so, has different approaches. The authors believe that D.P. Isaev uses a very rigid definition of «paradigm», more rigid than T. Kuhn. In current situation, a historian of science should be more flexible in terms of terminology, but also more attentive in understanding the essence of current processes.

Keywords: historiography, paradigm, new history if ideas, intellectual history, anthropologism.