The article for the first time presents the powerful historical and philosophical potential of the collection of handwritten candidate works of Kyiv Theological Academy students, which is kept at Manuscript Institute, V. I. Vernadskyi National Library of Ukraine. According to the analyzed manuscripts, despite the church-confessional and specialized theological orien-tation of the theological academies, as well as the system of rigid regulations and control by the Most Holy Synod in the subject matters and content of the final works, the students (...) showed a persistent research interest in philosophy. The author identifies more than 150 candidate works of KTA students that are directly relevant to philosophical topics and issues. Most of them are research on the history of Western, Eastern and Russian philosophy. At the same time, the handwritten works available in the col-lection express the interest of students in the problems of epistemology, philosophy of history, social philosophy, axiology, ethics and aesthetics, philosophy of religion, as well as their attrac-tion to complex interdisciplinary studies, combining the issues of philosophy and history of phi-losophy with theology, psychology, pedagogy and literary studies. (shrink)

The article offers an attempt to understand the present state of Kant’s legacy in Russia on the threshold of the Tercentenary. An explanans is found in the metaphors of “ tabula rasa ” and “unplowed virgin soil,” first used by Leibniz in relation to Russia in his letters and memoranda addressed to tsar Peter I and other members of the Russian elite, which became the country’s “absolute metaphors to live by” up to present time. Several known and unknown episodes from (...) the history of the reception of Kantian ideas, his followers in Russia, and the transformation of the urban environment of Kant’s life in Königsberg, as it was becoming Kaliningrad, are presented through the prism of this metaphor. Without hoping to make specific recommendations of any use from such metaphorical grounds, this study aims to emphasize the depth, interconnectedness, and basic, metaphysical tension of the relationship between Europe and Russia, which cannot be terminated at will by either side, or by a third party. In a situation where the sides are doomed to dialog, Kant, appropriated by Russia as its “subject,” occupies the unique position of mediator of philosophical understanding and peaceful action. (shrink)

This paper concerns the Russian émigrée translator and philosopher Natalie Duddington (1886–1972). By establishing Duddington’s dependence on Nicholas Lossky (1870–1965), the paper argues that Duddington formed a unique synthesis of Russian intuitivism and British realism in her essay ‘Our Knowledge of Other Minds’. Despite the historical significance of Duddington’s work, it will be concluded that her synthesis succumbs to the most recent criticism which has been posed against perceptualists such as Fred Dretske (1932–2013). Russian ‘intuitivism’ is understood here as the (...) school of thought that was first developed by Lossky and subsequently inherited by Duddington. ‘Perceptualism’ will be understood as the broad claim that we perceive the contents of another mind in an immediate way rather than infer them. (shrink)

This article deals with the question of the interrelation between two papers, both called, in short, “Onomatodoxy”, dedicated to the doctrine of Name-glorification (Imiaslavie, Onomatodoxy), both of which were created in line with the Neo-Patristic movement in the Russian philosophy of the Silver Age. One of these papers is by Alexei Losev and the other by Pavel Florensky. In my opinion, there are sufficient grounds to state that Losev’s “Onomatodoxy” was written either after Florensky created his own “Onomatodoxy”, i.e., after (...) November 1922, or, at the earliest, after Florensky started to give clandestine lectures about Onomatodoxy in Moscow (where Losev lived), i.e., not earlier than spring 1921. Therefore, Losev’s article “Onomatodoxy” could have been intended for the religious-philosophical collection of articles planned for publishing by Yaschenko in 1922 in Berlin. (shrink)

This paper restates and subjects to analysis the polemics in Russian pre-revolutionary Populist and Marxist thought that concerned Kant’s practical philosophy. In these polemics Kantian ideas influence and reinforce the Populist personalism and idealism, as well as Marxist revisionist reformism and moral universalism. Plekhanov, Lenin, and other Russian “orthodox Marxists” heavily criticize both trends. In addition, they generally view Kantianism as a “spiritual weapon” of the reactionary bourgeois thought. This results in a starkly anti-Kantian position of Soviet Marxism. In view (...) of this the 1947 Communist Party decision to preserve Kant’s tomb in Soviet Kaliningrad becomes something of an experimentum crucis that challenges the soundness of the theory. (shrink)

The article for the first time presents the powerful historical and philosophical potential of the collection of handwritten candidate works of Kyiv Theological Academy (КТА) students, which is kept at Manuscript Institute, V. I. Vernadskyi National Library of Ukraine. According to the analyzed manuscripts, despite the church-confessional and specialized theological orientation of the theological academies, as well as the system of rigid regulations and control by the Most Holy Synod in the subject matters and content of the final works, the (...) students showed a persistent research interest in philosophy. The author identifies more than 150 candidate works of KTA students that are directly relevant to philosophical topics and issues. Most of them are research on the history of Western (from Classical antiquity to the beginning of the 20th century), Eastern and Russian philosophy. At the same time, the handwritten works available in the collection express the interest of students in the problems of epistemology, philosophy of history, social philosophy, axiology, ethics and aesthetics, philosophy of religion, as well as their attraction to complex interdisciplinary studies, combining the issues of philosophy and history of philosophy with theology, psychology, pedagogy and literary studies. (shrink)

Shpet’s interpretation of Husserl’s phenomenology has caused puzzlement because of the lack of clarity with which he treats the transcendental turn in Appearance and Sense. I suggest that we find a more comprehensive discussion on the topic in Shpet’s 1917 article, “Wisdom or Reason?” There, Shpet reacts to Husserl’s treatment of a cluster of problems related to the latter’s transition to transcendental idealism. I read “Wisdom or Reason?” not only in relation to Husserl’s Logos article of 1911, but also to (...) his 1907 lecture series “The Idea of Phenomenology.” My analysis of Shpet’s phenomenology reveals that he followed through with the transcendental turn, although his philosophy developed in a direction different from Husserl’s transcendental idealism. Shpet postulates a collective consciousness, in which meaning-constitution takes place, and discovers the “word” as the foundation for any cognition. Shpet’s phenomenology remains ontological, as he considers language or culture as the “form of being” in which human beings live. In “Wisdom or Reason?,” Shpet argues that we can have direct knowledge of this meaningful reality: being is not “represented” but “presented” in a word. A certain compatibility thus exists between Shpet’s phenomenology of cultural reality and Husserl’s search for the absolute validity of knowledge. (shrink)