Institute of Philosophy
of the Russian Academy of Sciences

  Daniil Aronson
Home Page » » Department of the History of Western Philosophy » Staff » Daniil Aronson

Daniil Aronson

Year and Place of Birth

 ORCID ID: 0000-0002-8027-8509
 Web of Science Researcher ID: Q-7451-2017


Born July 12, 1988 in Moscow.





  • Graduated from National Research University «Higher School of Economics», Faculty of Philosophy, in 2011.
  • Doctorate Study at the National Research University «Higher School of Economics», Faculty of Philosophy (2011–2014).


Academic Degrees

  • PhD in Philosophy (2015): «Кant: transcendental justification of the principles of the right» (National Research University «Higher School of Economics», Moscow)».

Field of Studies

  • Kant's philosophy;
  • German classic philosophy; 
  • Political philosophy.


  • Research Fellow at the Department of Western Philosophy

List of publications




  • Non-prescriptive, Still Normative: Once More on the Character of Juridical Laws in Kant’s Metaphysics of Morals, Akten des 12. Kant-Kongress. Bd. 3. (forthcoming)
  • Kant Scholarship in Russia after Gulyga (from 1996 until 2017) [Кантоведение в России после Гулыги (с 1996 по 2017 год)], A New Kant Reading-book, Edited Eiji Makino, Hosei University Publishing, Tokyo, 2018, pages 71‒84. (in Japanese)
  • "The More Loving One": Wystan Auden and Hannah Arendt, in: Philosophical Emanations of Love, Compiled and edited by Yulia V. Sineokaya. Moscow, LRC Publishing House, 2018, pages 188–197.

Poet Wystan Hugh Auden and political thinker Hannah Arendt became acquainted in 1958 and remained friends until Auden’s death in 1973. The story of their friendship, as well as that of their intellectual exchange, had its twists. The article attempts to clarify the story of their personal relationship through their respective standpoints in their dispute on love and forgiveness, and vice versa.


  • Judge, And You Will not be Judged: From Judgement to Responsibility in Later Arendt’s Thought, Abstracts. Curricula Vitae. Workshop. Hannah Arendt und die Wertungen der Moderne (Wien 21.–23 June 2017). Wien, 2017.

  • Philosophy without Speculation: Kant’s Response to Aenesidemus, Istoriko-filosofskii ezhegodnik [History of Philosophy Yearbook] 2016. Moscow, Aquilo Press, 2016, pages 118–144 (in Russian).

Summary: Schulze-Aenesidemus’s criticism of the systems of I. Kant and K. L. Reinhold made a big impression on his contemporaries and galvanized the development of idealism, romanticism and some less notable branches of the German philosophy at the turn of nineteenth century. Yet, it was Kant who didn’t in fact respond to that criticism. Nevertheless, the article argues that in his later years Kant produced an understanding of his own philosophy, which dodges the most part of Schulze-Aenesidemus’s arguments and might be seen as an alternative to the idealistic as well as the romantic development of Kant’s ideas. According to that later understanding the concepts of ‘reflective judgment’ and the ‘need of reason’ come to constitute the grounding principles of the whole of Kant’s philosophizing, which distances Kant from Schulze as well as Reinhold, to whom the foundations of Kantian philosophy were to be sought for in the theory of cognition. It is the theory of reflective judgment that ultimately allows Kant to reconcile the task of drawing demarcation lines (which is still seen as the hallmark of Kant’s thinking by some positivist philosophers) with the strive for metaphysical unity (which became the prime preoccupation of Fichte, Schelling and Hegel).

  • The Phenomenon of Universality in Ethics (Roundtable Discussion): Ruben Apressyan, Daniil Aronson, Olga Artemyeva, Helen Demidova, Leonid Maximov, Boris Nikolaichev, Andrey Prokofiev, Konstantin Troitskiy, Ethical Thought, 2016, Vol. 16, No 1, pages 144‒173. DOI: 10.21146/2074-4870-2016-16-1-144-173. (in Russian).

2014 and earlier

  • Freedom and Punishment: Kant's justification of a concept of the Right, Russian State University for the Humanities (RGGU) Bulletin. 2014. №10 (132), pages 17‒25. (in Russian).
  • Transcendental Deduction in Kant's Practical Philosophy, Philosophy and Culture, 2014, No 11, pages 1664‒1671. DOI: 10.7256/1999-2793.2014.11.10886. (in Russian).

Summary: The present article is devoted to an important method of Immanuel Kant’s critical philosophy – transcendental deduction. The author of the article focuses on how this method is used in Kant’s main woks on practical philosophy such as ‘Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals’ and ‘Critique of Practical Reason’. The purpose of the article is to clarify whether Kant’s practical philosophy describes the transcendental deduction of the groundwork of practical reason just like the transcendental deduction of pure reason categories is presented in ‘Critique of Practical Reason’. To solve the aforesaid problem, the author of the article provides a brief description of the deduction of reason categories. After that the author reconstructs the logic of reasoning in the main works of Kant on practical philosophy based on the supposition that the structure of the deduction of Kant’s practical philosophy must be similar to the structure of deduction in speculative philosophy. The author shows that Kant’s practical philosophy presents a successful deduction of the main grounds of partial reason. It is concluded that despite a common opinion in the studies of Kant, his Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals and Critique of Practical Reason present the same project of deduction. The author of the present article reconstructs metaphysical and transcendental deduction in Kant’s practical philosophy. The author eliminates the visibility of the vicious circle connected with Kant’s statement that freedom and unconditional partial law are mutually interdependent. It is concluded that the logic of deduction in practical philosophy makes us to significantly extend the term ‘experience’ in Kant’s philosophy.

  • The Justification of Legal Punishment in Kant's Philosophy, Kantovskii sbornik [Kant Studies], 2013. №3 (45), pages 50‒58. (in Russian).

The subject matter of the article is the problem of justification of punishment within Kant’s practical philosophy. Modern interpretations tend to reduce this problem to the issue of “retributivism”: To what extent is Kant’s theory of punishment to be regarded as retributivist? While acknowledging the significance of this question the author stresses a more fundamental one lying behind it: Is a non-contradictory theory of punishment conceivable at all within Kant’s philosophy? It is demonstrated that a solution of this question largely determines a justification of the doctrine of right as such as well as a solution of the problem of relation between right and ethics in Kantian philosophy. Some recent interpretations of Kant’s theory of punishment are examined, particularly those by O. Hoeffe and B. Byrd. It is demonstrated that neither is actually compatible with Kant’s statement that punishment is a categorical imperative. Futhermore, it is shown that this statement is crucial and necessary for Kant’s universalist project of justification of right. At the same time, it is shown that it is the universalism of Kant’s practical philosophy that leads to a kind of paradox of punishment: the categorical imperative of punishment might well demand those very actions which the categorical imperative as we know it from the “Groundwork” seems to forbid. It is proposed to see this paradox as another antinomy of practical reason. The hypothesis is offered that the separation of the principles of virtue directed to an individual will and right covering the public sphere can be considered as an attempt to solve this very antinomy.


TRANSLATIONS (from English and German)

  • Arendt, Hannah. Between Past and Future: Eight Exercises in Political Thought. Moscow, Gaydar Institute Press, 2014. – 416 pages. (in Russian)
  • Arendt, Hannah. «Prologue», «Some Questions on Moral Philosophy», «Thinking and Moral Considerations», «Collective Responsibility», in: Arendt, Hannah. Responsibility and Judgment. Мoscow, Gaydar Institute Press, 2013. (in Russian)
  • Geertz, Clifford. Art as a Cultural System // Sociological Review. 2010. Т. 9 № 2. pp. 31‒54. (in Russian)
  • Latour, Bruno. Scientific Objects and Legal Objectivity / Translated by Daniil Aronson, Vitaliy Dolgorukov, and Yana Zakorko // Kultivator. 2010. № 2. pp. 74‒95. (in Russian)
  • Rehmann, Jan. Re-Reading Nietzsche with Domenico Losurdo’s Intellectual Biography // Logos. 2009.  № 4‒5, pp. 196‒223. (in Russian)

Participation at conferences



  • That, in Comparison with Which Everything Else Is Small: Kant's Critique of Climate Change Denial, ‒ Multilateral Kant Colloquium - 8th Edition: Kant and the Contemporary World: Philosophy, Science, Politics. Catania, 11‒13 October 2018.
  • «A Right to Have Rights: Political Measures to Make the Refugee Crisis Ethically Relevant», ‒  Conference "Refugees and Minority Rights", Tromsø Conference 2018, UiT, Tromsø (Norway), 14-15 June 2018.


  • Judge, And You Will not be Judged: From Judgement to Responsibility in Later Arendt’s Thought // Abstracts. Curricula Vitae. Workshop. Hannah Arendt und die Wertungen der Moderne, Wien 21.–23 June 2017.
  • «The Secret of Kant's Philosophy of Right» // a Talk in the Departament of the History of Western Philosophy, January 19th, 2016.
  • «Philosophy's choice: moral dilemma a borderline concept between the moral and the political» // VII International Conference «Modes of Thinking, Ways of Speaking», National Research University «Higher School of Economics», Faculty of Humanities School of Philosophy, April 27th, 2016.
  • e-mail:
Web-page in Russian