scholarly journals Russian Neo-Kantianism: Experiments (self)definitions and modern perspective

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 0
Author(s):  
Vladimir Belov
Keyword(s):  
Objective Assessment ◽  
Transcendental Philosophy ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Philosophical Tradition ◽  
Russian Philosophy ◽  
Research Practice ◽  
European Philosophy ◽  
History Of ◽  
Kantian Philosophy ◽  
Modern Perspective

One of the most important tasks in each philosophical tradition is to determine the methodological foundations and the target reason for research practice. Russian Russian neo-Kantianism raises several fundamental questions, including the criteria for distinguishing individual systems and the possibility of their integral reconstruction, the identification of the independence of Russian philosophers in overcoming the key contradictions of transcendental idealism, as well as discussions regarding the contribution of Russian neo-Kantians to the history of the development of Russian and European philosophy. No less significant is the problem of uniting Russian neo-Kantianism in the context of the general tradition of neo-Kantianism in its development to the latest trends. The prospect of turning to the heritage of Russian philosophers is largely determined by the design of post-Kantianism and post-Neo-Kantianism. In the works of A.I. Vvedensky, and then B.A. Focht, V.E. Seseman, S.L. Rubinstein, and many others, the transition from German classical idealism in the prism of the specifics of Russian philosophy to the formation of a new understanding of transcendental philosophy and its tasks was marked. In many ways, the proposed solutions were distinguished by originality and obvious independence, but at the same time they were implicitly within the boundaries of the tradition of German neo-Kantian philosophy set by I. Kant. Comparing the latest prospects for the development of neo-Kantian methodology, it can be assumed, not without reason, that Russian neo-Kantianism has largely anticipated the latest trends. Russian neo-Kantians need to reveal the unity of the entire tradition for an objective assessment and subsequent actualization of the heritage of the Russian Neo-Kantians, accompanying this process with a historical and philosophical reconstruction of individual systems of philosophy, but also identifying those perspectives for philosophy that were designated by Russian thinkers. Russian neo-Kantians' problem field of self-determination within the framework of the history of Russian and European philosophy is proposed in the content of the article. Special attention is focused on the unity of methodological tasks and the target reason for the research practices of thinkers who at different stages of their development contributed to the formation of the phenomenon of Russian neo-Kantianism.

scholarly journals A few remarks on some issues and problems of self-determination and foundation in the works of Milan Brdar

2020 ◽  
pp. 271-280
Author(s):  
Marinko Lolic
Keyword(s):  
Self Determination ◽  
Way Of Life ◽  
Social Phenomena ◽  
Self Reflection ◽  
Modern Times ◽  
Reliable Instrument ◽  
European Philosophy ◽  
History Of ◽  
Main Ideas ◽  
Crucial Condition

This paper critically discusses the achievements of the most important representatives of the history of philosophy, sociology, political science in the interpretation of the fundamental philosophical issues and social phenomena of modern times. In the philosophical works which begin with the debate with Popper through the most recent papers in which the research in the modern and postmodern European philosophy is intensified, Milan Brdar critically reconsiders the main ideas of Descartes? and Hegel?s philosophy trying to address the modern idea of reason as self-conscious self-relation in the spirit of analytic Cartesian method and radical philosophical self-reflection. This form of critical theoretical reconsideration implies that, if we want to be autonomous and free subjects not only of our individual but also of our collective way of life and history, we have to relate to ourselves as well as to others critically and to be conscious of that relation. This paper points out that the author starts from the crucial idea of the modern European philosophy that philosophy does not address, only the matter itself, but also one?s self-reflection. In his opinion the permanent self-reflection of philosophy represents the crucial condition which philosophy has to fulfill in order to become the reliable instrument of understanding of the society.

scholarly journals Hegel as an atheist and intuitivist in the interpretations of Alexandre Kozhève and Nikolay Lossky

2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-15
Author(s):  
Alexander A. Korolkov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Strong Influence ◽  
Russian Philosophy ◽  
Creative Work ◽  
Karl Jaspers ◽  
European Philosophy ◽  
History Of ◽  
Common Interests ◽  
Christian Understanding ◽  
Work Abroad ◽  
Religious Evolution

The Russian exiled philosophers Alexander Kozhevnikov (Alexandre Kozhève) and Nikolay Lossky, who had to leave Russia in the 1920s, gave paradoxical interpretations of Hegel’s work: Kozhève treated Hegel as an atheist whereas Lossky interpreted him as an intuitivist. Both philosophers have influenced the development of Western European philosophy and contemporary understanding of Hegel’s texts. The history of Russian philosophy would be poorer if we forget that Kozhevnikov acquired recognition as a French philosopher Kozhève only at a mature age. A strong influence on Kozhève’s treatment of Christianity was exerted by Vladimir Soloviev’s philosophy, to which he devoted his first dissertation under the guidance of Karl Jaspers. His attention to the Christian understanding of love as an endless power over the finite manifestations of spirit, which was expounded upon/revealed in his course of lectures on Hegel, enjoyed great popularity in France and influenced the formation of eminent philosophers. Hegel’s atheism in Kozhève’s interpretation is not a denial of religion, since religion and philosophy have common interests applied to eternal themes; they differ only in methods of the cognition of the Absolute. The logic of the anthropological interpretation of Hegel led Kozhève to the rationalization of religion by elevating philosophy over it. Hegel’s atheistic anthropology turned his study into a summary of religious evolution, with theology eventually ousted by anthropology. Nikolay Lossky, who had written a book on intuitivism before the revolution, in his creative work abroad extended his notion of intuitivism by calling Hegel an extreme intuitivist. He based this conclusion on Hegel’s upholding of the principle of the identity of thinking and being, that is following the logic of an object in cognition. The possibility to eliminate the contradiction between knowledge and being, about which Hegel wrote, is interpreted by Lossky as intuitivism and even empiricism.

Asceticism and Foolishness of Christ in Friedrich Nietzsche's Philosophy

2021 ◽  
pp. 64-70
Author(s):  
Vyacheslav T. Faritov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Significant Degree ◽  
Western Philosophy ◽  
Self Awareness ◽  
Holy Fool ◽  
The World ◽  
European Philosophy ◽  
History Of ◽  
And Behavior ◽  
Distinguishing Features ◽  
Kantian Philosophy

The article considers the phenomena of asceticism and foolishness for Christ in the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche. The author substantiates the thesis that asceticism and foolishness for Christ are subjects of Nietzsche's philosophical reflections. The author also shows that the figures of the ascetic and the holy fool also act as “conceptual characters” of Nietzsche's philosophizing. The author suggests that Nietzsche himself felt a tendency towards self-identification with these characters and therefore tried to “dis-identify”, which he did not always succeed in. The article concludes that Nietzsche's position in relation to asceticism is ambiguous and internally contradictory. The philosopher exposed and criticized ascetic ideals, but this criticism is also directed at himself. Nietzsche himself, his character and way of thinking reveal a significant degree of kinship with ascetic views. Therefore, Nietzsche's criticism of asceticism is in many ways an attempt to overcome the ascetic in himself. For this task, Nietzsche appeals not only to the figures of an atheist and a pagan, but also to the image of a jester, a holy fool. The author substantiates the idea that one of the main distinguishing features of the holy fool's lifestyle is that he does not seem to be what he really is. A real fool, a real insane person is not a holy fool. The holy fool undertakes the feat of appearing to be a fool or insane, while he himself is not. In this way, the holy fool renounces the world and himself in the world, the state when his behavior corresponded to the norms and criteria of this world. Thus, a view of the world from a reverse perspective is achieved. Something close to this mode of thought and behavior is found in Nietzsche's philosophy. His philosophizing is deeply personal, but, at the same time, he constantly does not show the reader who he really is. Nietzsche's style is a constant play with masks and disguises. As a result of the study, the author concludes that Nietzsche's position in the history of European philosophy can be characterized as foolishness for Christ. His doctrine is formed during the crisis of European metaphysics and is the self-awareness of this crisis. Belief in reason, in the ability to comprehend God in terms of reason, characteristic of Western philosophy, is denied. This conviction in the omnipotence of reason was criticized already in Kantian philosophy, but criticized by means of reason itself. This was the peculiar “cunning of reason”, which, having preserved itself as a tool of criticism, subsequently triumphed in Hegel's philosophy. The claim of reason to absolute significance cannot be refuted by means of reason itself. Nietzsche understood this. He realized that breaking the impasse in which Western metaphysics found itself thanks to the deification of reason requires a completely different path.

scholarly journals Soteriological problematic of personality in the Russian religious tradition

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Sergei Vladimirovich Pugin
Keyword(s):  
Role Model ◽  
Religious Tradition ◽  
Russian Philosophy ◽  
Ethical Practice ◽  
Folk Culture ◽  
Spiritual Community ◽  
European Philosophy ◽  
History Of ◽  
Western European ◽  
Russian Religious Thought

The subject of this research is the problem of personality in the context of Russian religious thought. The study of such phenomenon as personality, which resembles a person’s unique individuality has been actively pursued in Western European philosophy. However, the history of Russian philosophy indicates other storylines related to personality that take roots in the religious tradition of Orthodoxy. One of the fundamental grounds is the Trinitarian problematic in perception of the doctrine on personality by the Russian philosophers. Application of historical-philosophical material allows comparing the reflection of the phenomenon of personality in Western European and Russian thought. Works of the modern authors on the topic are also attracted. In the course of studying the phenomenon of personality in Russian culture, the author formulate the following conclusions: the original concept of personality, which emerged in the pre-Peter tradition, was not only an intrinsic part of folk culture, but also played an important role as an anthropological marker of “friend and alien” on the level of behavioral or ethical practice. The personal marker is a holy, although such role model is an unachievable goal of self-impersonation. The essence of such devotion is revealed only through personal faith inherent to a group of people who share similar views and affiliate themselves with Orthodox Christians. Impersonation of a holy as a spiritualized person becomes a significant ethical and pedagogical dominant, and personality of a human is understood in relation to the personality of God, which manifests as spiritual marker for each person and simultaneously goal the purpose of earthly life. Namely through this, the phenomenon of Sobornost (Spiritual community of many jointly living people) obtains its transcendent meaning.

scholarly journals Moral Problems in Russian Neo-Kantianism: The Specifics of the Formation of Transcendental Philosophy in Russia

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 398-402
Author(s):  
Leonid I. Tetyuev ◽  
◽  
Pavel A. Vladimirov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Methodological Approach ◽  
Complex Problem ◽  
Transcendental Philosophy ◽  
Philosophical Tradition ◽  
General Tendency ◽  
Moral Issues ◽  
Moral Problems ◽  
History Of ◽  
Transcendental Method ◽  
The Relationship

The article is devoted to the complex problem of the development of Russian Neo-Kantianism in the context of the history of transcendental philosophy. The general tendency of the development of transcendental philosophy in the form of “the history of motives”, identified on the basis of historical and philosophical analysis, is outlined. The formation of Russian Neo-Kantianism as an original creative direction is the result of its development in the context of German Neo-Kantian methodology and the pursuit of Russian philosophers for independent thinking. The specificity of moral issues and its originality are most clearly reflected in the writings of Russian Neo-Kantians, starting with A. I. Vvedensky. Nevertheless, the general vector of development of their views is consistent with European philosophical tradition. B. A. Focht and V. E. Sezeman deal with the problems of the transcendental method, and S. I. Hessen directs his efforts to the formation of the philosophy of education on the principles of critical idealism of I. Kant. The novelty of the study consists in the identification of the specifics of the Russian NeoKantian methodological approach in the context of the development of transcendental philosophy project. Particular attention is paid to the problem of the relationship between freedom and responsibility, the specifics of the disclosure of the “principle of obligation”. In conclusion, it is noted that a characteristic feature of Russian neo-Kantianism is the rethinking of the inextricability of a holistic worldview and the complementarity of three “Critics” of I. Kant.

scholarly journals Ethical and legal doctrines in Russian neo-Kantianism (P.I. Novgorodtsev and B.A. Kistyakovsky)

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 0
Author(s):  
Stanislav Kushner
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
Moral Philosophy ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Psychological Theory ◽  
Russian Philosophy ◽  
Philosophy Of Law ◽  
Ethical Aspects ◽  
History Of ◽  
Theory Of Law ◽  
Kantian Philosophy

The article is devoted to the analysis of the legal theories of P.I. Novgorodtsev and B.A. Kistyakovsky, based on the moral philosophy of I. Kant in comparison with the psychological theory of law of L.I. Petrazhitsky. The unity of the positions of Novgorodtsev and Kistyakovsky in focusing on the ethical aspects of law, as well as highlighting morality as the highest principle, is revealed. Attention is paid to the disclosure of neo-Kantian motives in the philosophy of law and in the context of the development of the theory of natural law in Russia. The main content of the article is a consistent analysis of Novgorodtsevʼs ideas in their dynamics, compared with the neo-Kantian philosophy of law of Kistyakovsky. It is emphasized that the psychological theory of the source of Petrazhitskyʼs legal relations is in the same intention of thought with the motives of the Russian neo-Kantians, which allows them to be compared in the history of the development of the Russian theory of law. The modern scientific literature is analyzed in order to identify the problem of comparing different approaches in the history of Russian philosophy of law, in which German transcendental philosophy is one of the key foundations. The question of the independence of Russian scientists in the construction of ethical and legal doctrines is actualized, but, at the same time, a single motive is emphasized with the Kantian provision on the need to establish a general civil society on the principles of a developed system of rules and norms.

Kyoto School

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.W. Heisig
Keyword(s):  
Philosophical Tradition ◽  
Self Awareness ◽  
Kyoto School ◽  
Western Philosophical Tradition ◽  
European Philosophy ◽  
History Of ◽  
Kyoto School Of Philosophy ◽  
Nishitani Keiji ◽  
The One ◽  
Nishida Kitaro

The Kyoto school of philosophy pivots around three twentieth-century Japanese thinkers who held chairs of philosophy or religion at Kyoto University: Nishida Kitarō (1870–1945), Tanabe Hajime (1885–1962) and Nishitani Keiji (1900–91). Its principal living representatives, who also held chairs at Kyoto until their retirement, are Takeuchi Yoshinori (1913–) and Ueda Shizuteru (1926–). The keynote of the school was struck by Nishida in his attempt, on the one hand, to offer a distinctively Eastern contribution to the Western philosophical tradition by bringing key Buddhist concepts to bear on traditional philosophical questions, and on the other, to enrich Buddhist self-understanding by submitting it to the rigours of European philosophy. The name ‘Kyoto school’ was coined in 1932 by the Marxist philosopher Tosaka Jun (1900–45) to denounce what he saw as a bourgeois ideology – which he characterized as ‘hermeneutical, transhistorical, formalistic, romantic, and phenomenological’ – that had grown up around Nishida, Tanabe and their immediate disciples at the time. These latter included Miki Kiyoshi (1897–1945), Kosaka Masaaki (1900–69) and Koyama Iwao (1905–93) as well as the young Nishitani. At the time the Japanese state had taken its first definitive steps in the direction of a militaristic nationalism that would involve it in the ‘fifteen-year war’ with Asia and finally the West over the period 1930–45. As the leading philosophical movement in Japan, the Kyoto school was caught up in this history, although there was little unanimity among the responses of the principal figures. Postwar criticisms and purges of the Japanese intelligentsia attached a certain stigma to the school’s name, but later and more studied examination of those events, as well as the enthusiastic reception of translations of their works into Western languages, has done much to ensure a more balanced appraisal. Today, the philosophy of the Kyoto-school thinkers is recognized as an important contribution to the history of world philosophy whose ‘nationalistic’ elements are best recognized as secondary, or at least as an unnecessary trivialization of its fundamental inspirations. As a school of thought, the common defining characteristics of the Kyoto school may be seen in an overlap of four nodal concerns: self-awareness, the logic of affirmation-in-negation, absolute nothingness and historicity.

“You Have Living Legends among You”

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Awartani
Keyword(s):  
Social Movements ◽  
East Coast ◽  
Puerto Ricans ◽  
Black Panther Party ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Multiple Generations ◽  
Young Lords ◽  
History Of ◽  
Lincoln Park

In late September 2018, multiple generations of Chicago’s storied social movements marched through Chicago’s Lincoln Park neighborhood as part of the sold-out, three-day Young Lords Fiftieth Anniversary Symposium hosted by DePaul University—an institution that, alongside Mayor Richard J. Daley’s administration, had played a sizeable role in transforming Lincoln Park into a neighborhood “primed for development.” Students, activists, and community members—from throughout Chicago, the Midwest, the East Coast, and even as far as Texas—converged to celebrate the history of Puerto Ricans in Chicago, the legacies of the Young Lords, and the promises and possibilities of resistance. As Elaine Brown, former chairwoman and minister of information for the Black Panther Party, told participants in the second day’s opening plenary, the struggle against racism, poverty, and gentrification and for self-determination and the general empowerment of marginalized people is a protracted one. “You have living legends among you,” Brown insisted, inviting us to associate as equals with the Young Lords members in our midst. Her plea encapsulated the ethos of that weekend’s celebrations: “If we want to be free, let us live the light of the Lords.”

The Art of Chinese Philosophy

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Goldin
Keyword(s):  
Chinese Philosophy ◽  
Philosophical Tradition ◽  
Current Form ◽  
Han Feizi ◽  
Textual History ◽  
Classical Chinese ◽  
History Of ◽  
Crucial Characteristic ◽  
The Way

This book provides an unmatched introduction to eight of the most important works of classical Chinese philosophy—the Analects of Confucius, Mozi, Mencius, Laozi, Zhuangzi, Sunzi, Xunzi, and Han Feizi. The book places these works in rich context that explains the origin and meaning of their compelling ideas. Because none of these classics was written in its current form by the author to whom it is attributed, the book begins by asking, “What are we reading?” and showing that understanding the textual history of the works enriches our appreciation of them. A chapter is devoted to each of the eight works, and the chapters are organized into three sections: “Philosophy of Heaven,” which looks at how the Analects, Mozi, and Mencius discuss, often skeptically, Heaven (tian) as a source of philosophical values; “Philosophy of the Way,” which addresses how Laozi, Zhuangzi, and Sunzi introduce the new concept of the Way (dao) to transcend the older paradigms; and “Two Titans at the End of an Age,” which examines how Xunzi and Han Feizi adapt the best ideas of the earlier thinkers for a coming imperial age. In addition, the book presents explanations of the protean and frequently misunderstood concept of qi—and of a crucial characteristic of Chinese philosophy, nondeductive reasoning. The result is an invaluable account of an endlessly fascinating and influential philosophical tradition.

The Problem of the Formation of Philosophical Prose in Persian

2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (6) ◽  
pp. 126-137
Author(s):  
Tatyana G. Korneeva
Keyword(s):  
Arabic Language ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Philosophical Tradition ◽  
Alternative View ◽  
Ibn Sina ◽  
Language Of Science ◽  
Persian Language ◽  
Arab Muslim ◽  
History Of ◽  
Philosophical Texts

The article discusses the problem of the formation of philosophical prose in the Persian language. The first section presents a brief excursion into the history of philosophical prose in Persian and the stages of formation of modern Persian as a language of science and philosophy. In the Arab-Muslim philosophical tradition, representatives of various schools and trends contributed to the development of philosophical terminology in Farsi. The author dwells on the works of such philosophers as Ibn Sīnā, Nāṣir Khusraw, Naṣīr al-Dīn al-Ṭūsī, Aḥmad al-Ghazālī, ʼAbū Ḥāmid al-Ghazālī and gives an overview of their works written in Persian. The second section poses the question whether the Persian language proved able to compete with the Arabic language in the field of science. The author examines the style of philosophical prose in Farsi, considering the causes of creation of Persian-language philosophical texts and defining their target audience. The article presents viewpoints of modern orientalist researchers as well as the views of medieval philosophers who wrote in Persian. We find that most philosophical texts in Persian were written for a public who had little or no knowledge of the Arabic language, yet wanted to get acquainted with current philosophical and religious doctrines, albeit in an abbreviated format. The conclusion summarizes and presents two positions regarding the necessity of writing philosophical prose in Persian. According to one point of view, Persian-language philosophical works helped people who did not speak Arabic to get acquainted with the concepts and views of contemporary philosophy. According to an alternative view, there was no special need to compose philosophical texts in Persian, because the corpus of Arabic philosophical terminology had already been formed, and these Arabic terms were widely and successfully used, while the new Persian philosophical vocabulary was difficult to understand.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document