The integral methodology of history in the light of the integral views of Vladimir Solovyov, Rudolf Steiner, and Ken Wilber

This article examines the methodology of historical science as a research subject that remains highly relevant and in demand due to its vast development potential and emerging opportunities for historical research. Within this framework, attention is focused on the creation and development of a holistic, or integral, methodology of history. The paper outlines the historiography of historical methodology and offers a retrospective look at various philosophical and religious aspirations for a holistic understanding of reality from ancient times to the present day, which, to varying degrees, have influenced the formation and development of science in general and historical science in particular. Among the most promising systems of holism for historical research, according to the author, are the integral approaches formulated in Vladimir Solovyov's philosophy of total unity, Rudolf Steiner's theory of social tripartism, and Ken Wilber's integral metatheory. A comparative analysis demonstrates the commonalities between the systems of Solovyov, Steiner, and Wilber and demonstrates how their developments can be applied to historical research. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate that the currently established methods of viewing and understanding history, inherent in various historical schools and auxiliary historical disciplines, can be incorporated into a holistic, or integral, methodology of history, which could unite them all and provide the keys to the intensive development of an integral methodological approach. Based on the research results, the article concludes that the creation and development of a holistic methodology of history based on a synthesis of the integral developments of Solovyov, Steiner, and Wilber will enable a more complete and profound understanding of the past, reduce the likelihood of historical falsification, and, furthermore, will have a pedagogical effect beneficial to the development of both integral historical researchers themselves and the recipients of their work.