Abstract

At present, as the paper states, social philosophy and philosophy of history – are generally considered to be independent domains. This is evidenced by the fact that each of the above‐named domains has to be discussed in a separate congress section, the practice which was common for previous congresses as well. It is argued in the paper, that social philosophy and philosophy of history are the two most important aspects of the integral philosophical study of society. It is impossible to say which aspect is dominating. The report contains a number of arguments to support this point of view. Possible reasons for such a “division of labor” in European philosophical thought and its consequences are exposed. The question arises: why are social philosophers incline to discuss a correlation between social philosophy and theoretical sociology and don’t like to discuss a correlation between social philosophy and philosophy of history? And why are philosophers of history so reluctant to discuss ontological issues of society?