Is the Kantian Transcendentalism Idealism? Kant's Conceptual Realism

In my paper I argue, relying on Kantian definitions and conceptual distinctions, the thesis that Kantian transcen-dental philosophy, which he characterizes as a second-order system of transcendental idealism, is not [empirical] idealism, but a form of realism (resp. compatible with empirical realism [A370-1]). As arguments in favor of this “realistic” thesis, I consistently develop a realistic interpretation of the Kant’s concept of appearance (the theory of “two aspects”), as well as of Kantian Copernican revolution, of his theory of intuition as cognitive ability which 'giving' ‘us objects, of the concept of double affection and noumenal causality.

Some Remarks in Defense of Immanuel Kant's Theory of Experience

The author attempts to answer a question of whether the fact that Immanuel Kant’s theory of experience most likely has a conceptual nature decreases an importance of Kant’s ideas for contemporary philosophy, because if experience is conceptual by nature, then certain problems with the search for means to verify experiential knowledge arise. In particular, two approaches are proposed. According to the first approach, the exceptional conceptuality of Kant’s theory of experience may be a consequence of absence of some important chains in arguments contained in the Critique of Pure Reason, which could clarify a question of how the conceptual apparatus of the subject corresponds to the reality. The author puts a hypothesis that the missing chains are not a mistake, but Kant’s deliberate silence caused by the lack of accurate scientific information that could not have been available to humankind in Enlightenment epoch. According to the second approach even if Kant’s theory of experience is exclusively conceptual by nature, this cannot automatically lead to a conclusion that it is unsuitable for obtaining reliable knowledge about reality, since transcendental idealism has powerful internal tools for verifying data in the process of cognition. The central position among them is occupied by transcendental reflection.

Kontseptualizm i non-kontseptualizm u Kanta: obzor nedavnikh diskussiy

A lively debate has been taking place among Kant interpreters as to whether Kant’s position in the First Critique and other Critical works contains something like the contemporary notion of non-conceptual mental content. The aim of this paper is to provide a survey of central moves in this debate.

The Tantalus’ Torments of Transcendentalism

Kant’s manuscripts of 1796–1803, which the Academic German edition of his works combined in 21–22 volumes of under the invented by H. Vaihinger name ‘Opus postumum’, still attract the attention of researchers. Was there really a significant theoretical “gap” in the system of Kant's “critical”, transcendental philosophy, which built by 1790, needed to be filled, namely, to undertake a conceptual "transition" from the already constructed a priori metaphysics of corporeal nature (metaphysical principles of natural science) to experimental mathematical physics, to the entire scientific empirical investigation of nature? In the last years of his life Kant tried to solve a problem that was really decisive for the fate of transcendentalism, which he had already realized in ‘Critique of Pure Reason’ and concretized in ‘Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science’, however he found himself in a hopeless situation, which doomed him to the “Tantalus’ torments”. The problem that he was constantly thinking about necessarily arises in the system of transcendental philosophy, but has no solution in it. ‘Opus postumum’ is an important piece of evidence on the insurmountable difficulties faced by the attempt to “save” philosophy as a perfect and complete system of absolutely reliable, "apodictic" science, based on the idea of universal and necessary conditions for the experience possibility.

Cogito, ergo est cogitabile. Cogitabile est, ergo cogito

Over the last two decades, the controversy between conceptualists and nonconceptualists has provided important insights into Kant’s critical project and especially the transcendental deduction. At the same time, the differentiation of the various positions has led to a seemingly unsolvable paradox in interpretation. However, if the intensifications of the debate are withdrawn and the current positions are placed in the context of historical interpretations, it becomes apparent that a nonconceptualism can indeed be developed without coming into (irresolvable) conflict with Kant’s conceptualism. In this sense, Alois Riehl proposes in his Philosophical Criticism (vol. 1) a so-called state nonconceptualism. Even if he does not have the terminology in use today, he can defend this on par with the current debate especially with regard to A 89–90 / B 122–123. In doing so, Riehl’s realistic interpretation of Kant’s transcendental idealism offers strategies that again question a hasty skepticism towards nonconceptualist interpretations.

Neo-Kantian motifs in the works of A. Bely

The article is devoted to the work of A. Bely in the development of Russian culture in the late 19th - early 20th centuries. Attention is paid to the motives of the creative path of the philosopher-poet, who created the basis of Russian symbolism. By analyzing the cultural and historical manifestations of the second half of the 19th century and the first half of the 20th century, reflection in the works of art and science workers, an assessment of the severity of symbolism for the development of Russian philosophy and the field of art in general. In the process of the formation of symbolism in Bely's work, neo-Kantian motives are clearly revealed in the formulation of the problem of the difference between subjective perception and the essence of the object of perception in itself, that is, distinguishing between the symbol and the signified. By comparing Bely's views with the concept of sophiology and anthroposophy, distinct Kantian positions of the philosopher-poet stand out. These include the schematism of space and time, an attempt to apply the categories of natural science to the field of philosophy of art, as well as the demarcation of the immanent and the transcendent. Despite the fact that the ideas of the philosopher-poet in their form have similar positions with the anthroposophy of R. Steiner and with the ideas of V. Solovyov, however, the key content is the neo-Kantian methodology of "critical deepening" of thought and its rationalization. The actualization of Bely's creativity and the issue of his neo-Kantian motives is carried out by attracting research from related branches of knowledge on the principles of interdisciplinary consideration and implementation of an integrated approach.

Russian Neo-Kantianism and Philosophy in Russia

Russian neo-Kantianismʼs status in the history of the development of Russian philosophy is an important, but poorly presented in scientific publications, issue is revealed in the article. With some exceptions, which are represented by a number of few, but informative and informative articles and a monograph, the problem remains without proper reception in the scientific discourse of our time. Russian neo-Kantianism, however, leaving aside the question of what is the phenomenon of Russian neo-Kantianism, it is impossible to productively and consistently actualize the content of Russian neo-Kantians and, moreover, to show their significance in the history of Russian philosophical and socio-humanitarian thought in general. Three key difficulties stand out: 1) the question of originality and the related theme of the independence of the philosophical direction (originality, independence and originality – differ from each other, but are united in their immanent orientation); 2) Russian neo-Kantianism, which in many ways seems to be the most difficult task for researchers engaged in historical and philosophical reconstruction; 3) the question remains ambiguous as to whether Russian neo-Kantianism is a continuation of the German tradition or whether it is a direction of Russian philosophy of thought. Russian neo-Kantianism, the three difficulties identified in the reception of the phenomenon of Russian neo-Kantianism taken as a whole, are consistently revealed in the content of the proposed article, supplemented by a brief overview of the most systemic positions of Russian philosophers, ranked among Russian neo-Kantianism. Overcoming the indicated difficulties, which undoubtedly affect the objective disclosure of the creativity of each representative of Russian neo-Kantianism or thinkers related to them, seems appropriate not only from the standpoint of the history of philosophy, but also for actualizing the heritage of philosophers in the conditions of modern socio-humanitarian pragmatics. Russian neo-Kantianism The author of the article suggests that one of the ways to overcome the ambiguity of the definition of Russian neo-Kantianism in the history of Russian thought may be, firstly, a more detailed consecration of the activities of Russian neo-Kantians in the historical and philosophical literature, and secondly, a comprehensive representation of this direction, including studies of individual personalities and their works. Despite the controversial and polemical nature of the task, its formulation is necessary for the objectivity of the meaning of Russian thought in the global context.

Problem of method and Subject in the early philosophy of S.L. Rubinstein

The article examines a number of methodological and conceptual features in the philosophical work of S.L. Rubinstein of the early (Marburg) period. It is assumed that the copies of Rubinstein’s doctoral inaugural dissertation available at the university of Marburg (Germany) and it the private archive of K.A. Abulkhanova represents two parts of one research, which understated expect in it’s first part (the text submitted for defense) an interpretation and criticism of Hegel’s absolute rationalism, and in the second part an exposition of the author’s own concept. It is proved that Rubinstein overcomes the logical limitation the Hegelian philosophical absolutization – the opposition of being and consciousness, the author fuses object and subject in a single being as a domain of accommodation of both, the construction of the internal consistent picture of being as the actual being of a leaving subject. Acknowledgement of Sources. The author is sincerely grateful to the D. Sc. in Philosophy, Professor, Academician of the Russian Academy of Education K.A. Abulkhanova for the materials provided from her personal archive.

Some Remarks on Kant's Theory of Experience (Translated by M. Evstigneev)

Kant never tires of telling us that Nature and the Space and Time which are its forms exist as a system of “representations.” Now a prepresentation is either a representing or a something represented. Does Kant mean that nature is a system of representings? Or that it is a system of representeds? And, in any case, what would the claim amount to? (Sellars W. (1974) Some Remarks on Kant’s Theory of Experience. In: Essays in Philosophy and Its History. Philosophical Studies Series in Philosophy, vol 2. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-2291-0_3)