The idea of Sobornost’ presupposes many different contexts in its interpretation. The first context is of Russian philosophy, which regards the emergence and the development of the ideas of Slavophilism, as opposed to Westernism, in its various interpretations. The second context is religious, ecclesiastical and even confessional. The third context, which I may call “philosophical”, allows a broader interpretation of this term. Sobornost' can be viewed as a construct which determines human cultural interaction. This article will mainly focus on the third context. This paper argues that if one only uses the restricted confessional meaning of the concept of Sobornost’, they will most likely face theoretical problems in interpretation and practical problems in application of this idea. The objective of this article is to prove not only the possibility, but the necessity of the expansion of meaning. Grounds for this expansion as well as the proof of its necessity will be presented through analysis of Khomiakov's writings. In the first part of the article I will discuss two possible aspects of the current applicability of the idea of Sobornost’. In the second part, I will offer the basis for the interpretation of this idea in the broadest sense of the word. Finally, in the third part, dangers of the distortion of this idea caused by the restriction of its meaning will be demonstrated, and ways of interpretation of its expanded meaning will be shown. I will demonstrate the relation of expanded interpretation with the concept of potentiality and with the maintaining the cognitive position of rationality, but not rationalism.