Irina S. Rodicheva, PhD (Philosophy), Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy and Humanities, Novosibirsk State University of Economics and Management; e-mail: iriy.rodicheva@yandex.ru
This article examines the phenomenon of Russian neo-Kantianism in modern rethinking. The author seeks not only to reconstruct the ideas of Russian neo-Kantians of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, but also to show their relevance and connection with the teaching and development of the discipline “Fundamentals of Russian Statehood”. Revealing the issues of duality and sociocultural features of Russian philosophy, the author analyzed the prerequisites for the emergence of this teaching and the desire of thinkers to combine Russian culture with Western thinking, as well as to create a new philosophical approach that would be relevant for Russia. Based on research into the works of leading philosophers in this area, attention is focused on the philosophical variability of individual branches of Russian neo-Kantianism in the context of the cultural aspect, and also notes the rethinking by Russian thinkers of this direction of the role of rational thinking as the only way to understand the world, and the revaluation of the philosophical ideas of the Marburg school as ‘strict’ theoretical basis. The article touches on the issue of the anthropological approach in neo-Kantianism and a new look at the idea of objective moral norms, which is presented in Russian philosophy of the late 19th — early 20th centuries as an individual set of preferences, and not generally accepted rules of behavior. The article also examines the features of the sociological epistemology of Russian neo-Kantianism and its basic concepts, such as the “ideal model of a social phenomenon”.
An important role is given to one of the most prominent representatives and critics of the neo-Kantian trend in Russian philosophy — Nikolai Berdyaev, who significantly influenced this teaching in Russia, contributing to a radical revision of its development, since he believed that it was important to take into account the traditions and spiritual needs of the Russian people.
As a result of the study, the author noted that, despite the adoption of Western values and ideas that the intelligentsia of the early 20th century strove for, Russian neo-Kantians retained a connection with the tradition and culture of Russia, and the philosophy itself is relevant today in the state-humanitarian context, including as a methodological and value support for teaching and rethinking the foundations of Russian statehood.
Keywords: discipline “Fundamentals of Russian statehood”, Russian neo-Kantianism, Marburg school, critical analysis of knowledge, synthesis of philosophy and science, criticism of metaphysics, logical positivism, I. Kant, S. Hessen, N.A. Berdyaev
References
1. Abramov, A.I. Kantianism in Russian university philosophy. Voprosy philosophii. 1998. No. 1. P. 58–69.
2. Abramov, A.I. Hessen. In: New Philosophical Encyclopedia: in 4 vols. 2nd edition, revised and supplemented. Мoscow: Mysl, 2010. 2816 p.
3. Berdyaev, N.A. Russian Idea. St. Petersburg: Azbuka-Klassika, 2008. Pp. 30–37.
4. Berdyaev, N.A. Philosophical truth and intellectual truth. In Search of Truth: Russian Intellectuals and the Fate of Russia. Moscow: Respublika, 1992. P. 34.
5. Gogotsky, S.S. Philosophical Lexicon. In: Kant: pro et contra. St. Petersburg, 2005. Pp. 202–250.
6. Dostoevsky, F.M. Publicity and Letters. Vol. XVIII–XXX. September-November. The Complete Works in Thirty Vols. Leningrad: Nauka, 1984. Vol. 26. Pp. 41–43.
7. Ilyin, I.A. Berdyaev’s Nightmare. Necessary Defense. In: N.A. Berdyaev: pro et contra. Anthology. Book 1. St. Petersburg, 1994. Pp. 341.
8. Losev, A.F. Vladimir Solovyov and his time. Moscow: Progress, 1990. Pp. 624–628.
9. Lossky, N.O. The Doctrine of Ideas and the Foundations of Intuitive Metaphysics. In: Russian Philosophy of the XIX–XX Centuries. Moscow: Mysl, 2005. 495 p.
10. Rodicheva, I.S. Culture of ‘cancelation’ / anticulture: philosophical reflection. Alma Mater (Vestnik vysshey shkoly). 2024. No. 10. Pp. 76–80. DOI: 10.20339/AM.10-24.076
11. Rodicheva, I.S. Mythodesign technologies in the cultural spheres of modern society. In: Dialogues on culture and art Perm, 2019. Pp. 203–208.
12. Sadovnichy, V.A. Pavel Alexandrovich Florensky (1882–1937). In: On People of Moscow University. 3rd ed., supplement. Moscow: Publ. House of Moscow University, 2019. Pp. 98–101.
13. Solovyov, VL.S. Russian idea [translation of the report read in 1888 in Paris. In French, transl. from fr. G.A. Rachinsky]. Leningrad: Nauka, 1984. 18 p.
14. Dowler, W. Dostoevsky, Grigor’ev, and Native Soil Conservatism. Toronto, 1982. 240 р.
15. Fedotov, G.P. The Russian Religious Mind. The Tenth to Thirteenth Centuries. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1960. P. IX–XI.
16. Lossky, N.O. History of Russian Philosophy. New York: International University Press, 1951. 416 р.
17. Nicholas Hans, Sergius Hessen. Educational Policy in Soviet Russia. London: P.S. King & son, ltd., 1930. 236 р.
.png)
