Закрыть

Логин:
Пароль:
	Запомнить меня на этом компьютере
Забыли свой пароль?

  Войти      Регистрация

2015. Том 10. Выпуск 1. ПРОСТРАНСТВО И ВРЕМЯ ТЕКСТА / SPACE AND TIME OF THE TEXT / RAUM UND ZEIT DES TEXTES

ФИЛОСОФИЯ: ОТ ТЕКСТА К ИНТЕРПРЕТАЦИИ / PHILOSOPHY: FROM TEXT TO INTERPRETATION / PHILOSOPHIE: VOM TEXT ZUR INTERPRETATION

Нижников С.А.

Иммануил Кант и русская метафизическая мысль: особенности интерпретации

Нижников Сергей Анатольевич, доктор философских наук, профессор кафедры истории философии Российского университета дружбы народов (Москва)

E-mail: nizhnikovs@mail.ru

В настоящее время существенно возрос интерес научной общественности к антропологической тематике, наблюдается своеобразный «антропологического ренессанса». В статье представлен сравнительный анализ оснований антропологии Канта (трансцендентальной) и отечественной мысли (теолого-метафизической), позволяющий увидеть общее и особенное в развитии философии на Западе и Востоке Европы.

Ключевые слова: антропологический теизм, духовная антропология, трансцендентальная онтология, трансцендентная онтология, наука о человеке, персонализм, философская антропология.

Литература 

Ахутин А.В. София и черт (Кант перед лицом русской религиозной метафизики) // Вопросы философии. 1990. № 1. С. 51—69.

Белый А. Душа самосознающая. М.: Канон+, 2004. 560 c.

Бердяев Н.А. Духовный кризис интеллигенции. М. Канон+, 1998. 400 c.

Бердяев Н. Философия свободы. Смысл творчества. М.: Правда, 1989. 608 с.

Гайденко П.П. Владимир Соловьев и философия Серебряного века. М.: Прогресс-Традиция, 2001. 472 c.

Гейне Г. К истории религии и философии в Германии // Полн. собр. соч.: В 12 т. Т. 7. М.; Л.: Academia, 1936. 496 c.

Зеньковский В.В. История русской философии: В 2 т. Т. 2. Ч. 1. Л.: ЭГО, 1991. 256 с.

Кант И. Критика чистого разума // Соч.: В 8 т. Т. 3. М.: Чоро, 1994. 741 c.

Кант и философия в России. М.: Наука, 1994.

Круглов А.Н. Философия Канта в России в конце XVIII – первой половине XIX веков. М.: Канон+; РООИ «Реабилитация», 2009. 586 c.

Мотрошилова Н.В. Вл. Соловьев и поиск новых парадигм в западной философии последней четверти XIX века // История философии. М., Феноменология-Герменевтика, 2001. С. 44-136.

Несмелов В.И. Наука о человеке: В 2 т. Казань: Заря-Тан, 1994. 369+438 c.

Семушкин А.В. Метафизика веры как проблема познания (предисловие) // В кн.: Нижников С.А. Метафизика веры в русской философии. М.: ИНФРА-М, 2014. 3-5 c.

Трубецкой Е.Н. Метафизические предположения познания (опыт преодоления Канта и кантианства). М.: Издание автора, 1917. 337 c.

Франк С.Л. Сочинения. М.: Правда, 1990. 354 c.

Эрн В.Ф. Сочинения. М.: «Правда», 1991. 571 c.

Eliade M., Trask W.R., trans. The Sacred and the Profane (The Nature of Кeligion). Trans. W.R. Trask. New York: Harper and Row, 1961. 247 р.

Meerson M.A. "Put' Against Logos: The Critique of Kant and Neo-Kantianism by Russian Religious Philosophers in the Beginning of the Twentieth Century." Studies in East European Thought 47.3 (1995): 225—243.

Nemeth T. "From Neo-Kantianism to Logicism: Vvedenskij's Mature Years." Studies in East European Thought 51.1 (1999): 1—33.

Nemeth T. "The Rise of Russian Neo-Kantianism: Vvedenskij's Early ‘Critical Philosophy’." Studies in East European Thought 50.2 (1998): 119—151.

West J. "Kant, Kant, Kant: The Neo-Kantian Creative Consciousness in Bely’s Petersburg." The European Foundations of Russian Modernism. Ed. P. Barta. Lewiston: Edwin Mellen Press, 1991, 87—135.

Nizhnikov S.A.

Immanuel Kant and Russian Metaphysical Thought: Features of Interpretation

Sergei A. Nizhnikov, D.Phil., Professor at the Chair of History of Philosophy, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (Moscow)

E-mail: nizhnikovs@mail.ru

Today scientific community’s interest to anthropological subjects has essentially increased, and we can see so called ‘anthropological Renaissance’. Problems of human person and its spiritual foundations are urgent from both social point of view, and from the scientific one. As soon as any philosopher addresses to these fundamental issues, he will inevitably have to turn to Kant's philosophical heritage. Kant's thought is deeply rooted in the whole of modern philosophical culture. Therefore, none of the Russian philosopher could escape perception Kant's creativity. Thus, it is especially interesting to carry out the comparative analysis of the foundations of Kant’s anthropology (transcendental) and Russian thought (theo-metaphysical) to see common and especial in development of philosophical anthropology in the West and the East of Europe.

My article is a brief sketch of attitudes of Russian religious (theo-metaphysical) philosophy to Kant’s philosophical system. The methodology I use in my research is based an analytical reading of Russian religious-philosophical texts, as well as on the comparative method. Using these approaches I have shown there are three types of attitudes to Kant’s philosophy among Russian thinkers: (i) frank and radical antagonism; (ii) attempt to interpret Kant's creativity for its assimilation into the ‘Russian world outlook’; (iii) the full acceptance and epigonism, which actually was not (including domestic neo-Kantianism), because those who have tried to understand Kant’s philosophy, concerned it mostly creatively.

In this article, I focused on more detailed studying views on Kant’s philosophy from such diverse thinkers as Alexander Vvedensky, Andrey Bely, and Vladimir Ern, especially Victor Nesmelov.

Thus, Vvedensky, though he remained faithful to the Kantian philosophy, carried out fundamental revision of critical philosophy: he spread the primacy of practical reason not only through the adoption of moral precepts, but also through attachment to morality and faith more ontological weight than it was in Kant.

Andrey Bely named Kant ‘a policeman’, ‘Koshchei’ (in Russian folklore this is a bony, emaciated old man, rich and wicked, who knows the secret of eternal life), who produced ‘spiritual heck’, he described the Kant’s philosophy as ‘manometer, capable of displaying a degree of pressure of Ahriman’s forces.’ However, after such eschatological and absolutely uncompromising critique of Kant's critical philosophy, Andrey Bely returned not to Leibniz and Plato, but to Steiner and anthroposophy.

Vladimir Ern comes to a paradoxical conclusion that the ideas of the great German humanist, along with other ideas of his national-philosophical fellows, prepared the First World War.

Viktor Nesmelov not only justifies the faith as epistemological and worldview necessity. He claims the object of faith as an ontological reality. Faith serves as a specific and unique method of learning transcendental reality. Due to the fact that rational thought is not able to go beyond the limits of things in existence, and to conceive the absolute, cognition of this field is the prerogative of faith. In contrast to Kant, however, Nesmelov argues ontological status of the object of faith, so that in his philosophy, it turns into an objective epistemological method. Although Nesmelov depend on some issues from Kant, but contradicts him with respect to ontological and epistemological status of the individual. Like Kant, he describes human personality as thing that is directly given in the consciousness of a person, but from this Nesmelov doing the opposite (especially to Hume), concludes: "if a man thinks of himself not as a phenomenon, but as a being-in-itself and as the essence, he thinks true." For Nesmelov, consciousness cannot deceive man, because "people in his inner nature, is really what he is conscious of himself.”

I conclude Russian classical philosophy sought at the same time both to overcome Kant on its metaphysical principles, and to assimilate the achievements of his logic. The complexity of this problem was due to the fact that Russian philosophy has absorbed diverse spiritual and intellectual influences and the pursuit of their synthesis occasionally turned round eclecticism. The major influences were those three: Eastern Christian tradition, new European rationalism and pantheistic mysticism. Depending on what tradition exerted the greatest influence on the thinker, such was his attitude to the critical philosophy of Kant.

Keywords: anthropological theism, spiritual anthropology, transcendental ontology, transcendent ontology, personalism, human sciences, philosophical anthropology.

References 

Akhutin A.V. "Sofia and the Devil. (Kant in the Face of Russian Religion Metaphysics)." Problems of Philosophy 1 (1990): 51—69. (In Russian).

Bely A. The self-Conscious Soul. Moscow: Kanon+ Publisher, 2004. 560 p. (In Russian).

Berdyaev N.A. Philosophy of Freedom. The Meaning of Creativity. Moscow: Pravda Publisher, 1989. 608. (In Russian).

Berdyaev N.A. The Spiritual Crisis of the Intelligentsia. Moscow: Kanon+ Publisher, 1998. 400 p. (In Russian).

Eliade M., Trask W.R., trans. The Sacred and the Profane (The Nature of Кeligion). Trans. W.R. Trask. New York: Harper and Row, 1961. 247 р.

Ern V.F. Writings. Moscow: Pravda Publisher, 1991. 571 p. (In Russian).

Frank S.L. Writings. Moscow: Pravda Publisher, 1990. 354 p. (In Russian).

Gaidenko P.P. Vladimir Solovyov and Philosophy of the Silver Age. Moscow: Progress-Traditsia Publisher, 2001. 472 p. (In Russian).

Heine H. "To the History of Religion and Philosophy in Germany." Complete Writings. Moscow-Leningrad: Academia Publisher, 1936, volume 7. 496 p. (In Russian).

Kant and Philosophy in Russia. Moscow: Nauka Publisher, 1994. (In Russian).

Kant I. "The Critique of Pure Reason." Writings. Moscow: Choro Publisher, 1994, volume 3. 741 p. (In Russian).

Kruglov A.N. Kant’s Philosophy in Russia at the End of 18th — the First Part of 19th Centuries. Moscow: Kanon+ Publisher; Reabilitatsiya Publisher, 2009. 586 p. (In Russian).

Meerson M.A. "Put' Against Logos: The Critique of Kant and Neo-Kantianism by Russian Religious Philosophers in the Beginning of the Twentieth Century." Studies in East European Thought 47.3 (1995): 225—243.

Motroshilova N.V. "Vladimir Solovyov and the Search of New Paradigms in Western Philosophy of the Last Quarter of 19th Century”. History of Philosophy. Мoscow: Fenomenologiya-Germenevtika Publisher, 2001, pp. 44—136. (In Russian).

Nemeth T. "From Neo-Kantianism to Logicism: Vvedenskij's Mature Years." Studies in East European Thought 51.1 (1999): 1—33.

Nemeth T. "The Rise of Russian Neo-Kantianism: Vvedenskij's Early ‘Critical Philosophy’." Studies in East European Thought 50.2 (1998): 119—151.

Nesmelov V.I. Human Being Studies. Moscow: Kazan: Zarya-Tan Publisher, volumes 1 and 2, 1994. 369+438 p. (In Russian).

Semushkin A.V. "Metaphysics of Faith as the Problem of Cognition (Introduction)." Metaphysics of Faith in Russian philosophy by S.A. Nizhnikov. Moscow: INFRA-M Publisher, 2014, pp. 3—5. (In Russian).

TroubetzkoyE.N. Metaphysical Presumptions of Cognition (Essay on Overcoming Kant and Kantianism). Moscow: Trubetskoy Publisher, 1917. 337 p. (In Russian).

West J. "Kant, Kant, Kant: The Neo-Kantian Creative Consciousness in Bely’s Petersburg." The European Foundations of Russian Modernism. Ed. P. Barta. Lewiston: Edwin Mellen Press, 1991, 87—135.

Zenkovsky V.V. History of Russian Philosophy. Leningrad: EGO Publisher, 1991, volume 2, part 1. 256 p. (In Russian).