In the current research, using methods of oral history of philosophy, oral communication (in particular, interviews) is considered only as a technical phase in preparing the final text. The author claims that the primary audio or video recordings of such an interview, an "oral draft," should be considered independent material. After all, the written text does not reflect the interlocutors' intonations; comparing the source material and the final text may become important for future researchers. After the transcribed and agreed text (...) of the interview took its final shape, it should be analyzed by the interlocutors and supplemented with a commentary. This commentary aims to (1) clarify vague points of the text and (2) record the further opinions of the interviewer and interviewee. Therefore, the purpose of an interview that uses an oral history of philosophy should be an audio/video recording, a final text, and a commentary. (shrink)