History of Philosophy. 2019, Vol. 24, No. 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
WORLD PHILOSOPHY: THE PAST AND THE PRESENT
Maria N. Varlamova. Aristotle as a Historian of Philosophy.
Aristotle prefaces a range of his philosophical treatises with the description of views of his predecessors. The modern researchers agree on that the description should not be recognized as a history of philosophy, for its purpose was not doxography but reflection and consideration of the subject and principles of his own philosophy. Most probably, Aristotle’s account of the predecessors is a part of his own philosophical method. His method can be described as a proceeding from what is clearer and more knowable to us, to what is clear and more knowable by nature. This method is composed of two parts: induction to the existence of the principles on the basis of predecessors’ accounts; investigation and acquiring the definition of the principles by the dialectical analysis of the predecessor’s views. The usage of this method depends on the Aristotelian conception of history of philosophy within the frames of teleology.
HISTORY AS A METHOD OF INDUCTIVE REASONING OF THE FIRST PRINCIPLES
Dmitry A. Fedchuk. The Unity of the First Cause and the Multiplicity of Existence in the Philosophy of Albert the Great.
The purpose of the article consists in demonstration in the metaphysics and cosmology of Albert the Great that the esse primum creatum (first created being) and the beings have the necessary dependence from the First Cause as sufficient basis of being of the Universe. In order to achieve these purposes it is necessary to solve the following tasks: (1) explication of meaning of the concept “the first created being”; (2) an analysis of the differences between thing’s being and being of God by Albert; (3) to disclose the meaning of the influence of the beings and their existence from One and the explanation of the origin of multiplicity. The method of research consists in studying of the original Latin sources, as well as related works on the history of philosophy, and with the hermeneutics of obtained results. The main conclusions of researches can be specified as follows. The first created being derives from God and is not in potency to that what flows from him. The process of outflow comes from the act in act. The Efficient Cause transmits the existence to other things through being and by way of gradually decreasing the degree of being’s intensity. The flow of being is limited and becomes more specific. The multiplicity of specific forms of being is reduced to the unity of their objective meanings (rationes), and the difference of rationes is reduced to the unity of the First Cause. The rejection of the One as a universal causality had to lead to revision of the principles of classical metaphysics as was the case in the 18th century.
Andrey V. Prokofyev. Polemics on the Content of Moral Virtue in British Philosophy of the 18th Century.
The paper analyses the eighteenth-century British polemics on the range of duties constitutive to virtue. The contemporary understanding of morality is concentrated on duties to others (individual human beings, society, and humanity as a whole). It is a rightful heir of the well-known identification of moral virtue with benevolence which was characteristic of moral philosophy of Anthony Ashley Cooper (the Third Earl of Shaftesbury), F. Hatcheson, and J. Gay (though, in a different degree). Some British thinkers of the period including J. Butler, J. Balguy, and R. Price vigorously opposed this identification. Their polemical reasoning combined the criticism of the narrow understanding of morality with the criticism of some protoutilitarian ideas of Shaftsbury, F. Hatcheson, and J. Gay. The main goals of this paper are 1) to establish relations between this two kinds of critique, 2) to reconstruct particular arguments against the restrictive interpretation of moral virtue, 3) to identify who was a real target of critical comments (in the case of J. Batler, this is not obvious).
Pyotr N. Kondrashov. Epicurus and Karl Marx: Points of Contact.
The article presents an attempt of historical-philosophical explication of contact between the philosophy of Epicurus and the philosophy of Karl Marx. Although the influence of Epicurus on the young Marx was not direct and immediate, nevertheless, it was the Epicurean tradition, critically rethought, that at a deep level affected Marx’s many concepts. The author shows that Marx’s ideas about the total historicity of the world, the unity of subject and object, freedom, praxis, pleasure, methodological pluralism, man as the starting point and goal of philosophy, the correlation of philosophy and the world have one of their sources namely in the Epicurus philosophy. Epicurus’ ideas about spontaneous rejection (παρέγκλισις) as freedom, about the immanence of motion by atoms themselves, about interpenetration of the world and man, searching for «many reasons», randomness (τύχη), etc., in critical synthesis with ideas of other thinkers were developed by Marx further in his teaching about man as the substantial basis of social being, man as a suffering being, the continuity of man and the world. These ideas of Epicurus led Marx to the methodology of multivariate analysis, and also led to the formulation of the doctrine of the true being of man as a spontaneous creative productive activity that brings pleasure (Selbstbetätigung).
Ksenia V. Vorozhikhina. Lev Shestov as a Publicist and Literary Critic (1895‒1900). Unknown Articles.
The article concerns first Lev Shestov publications in the Kiev newspaper of the populist direction “Life and Art”. In his early articles (1895‒1899) the future philosopher acts as a literary critic, close to the leaders of the 60s, preaching humanism and love to fellow beings, and as a journalist writing on juridical, social and economic topics. Shestov is opposed to violence in its various forms – revolutions, wars and principle of repression – in the name of respect for human rights and the protection of human dignity. He supports the liberal reforms of the “Tsar Liberator”, the introduction of a jury trial (as a progressive form of legal proceedings), advocates the introduction of the institution of suspended sentences. On the basis of unknown Shestov’s articles, the author traces how his convictions were transformed and “reborn”, how he evolved from Narodism to religious philosophy. The article uses fragments of unpublished correspondence between Shestov and V.G. Malakhieva-Mirovich.
Julia V. Klepikova. Historian or Philosopher of History? George Fedotov about the Causes of Revolution and Mission of Russia.
Thе paper analyzes the articles of George Fedotov published during 1918‒1930 years, giving a presentation of philosophical and historical concept, its genesis and formation peculiarities; the author makes the attempt to trace scientific interest transformation path of Fedotov from historian to the political publicist and philosopher of history. The paper deals with the path of the philosopher, who appeared to be among Russian intellectuals who gone “from materialism to idealism”, and then to religious thought; the author explores the works of native and foreign researchers of Fedotov. This paper also discusses the views of George Fedotov concerning the mission of Russia and its place in historical process. The paper raises the question about opportunity to consider intellectual evolution of George Fedotov in historical and philosophical context expanding traditional biographical approach in frames of the existing discourse on his work.
Yanina E. Manovas. “I am the Other” (M. Heidegger and F. Fedier).
The article attempts to reveal the implicit connections between the ideas of F. Fedier’s essay “A friend’s voice” and Heidegger’s philosophy. The phenomenon of friendship is interpreted in the context of the question of being. The nature of the self is double; duplicity is its dimension, it always exists in the process of discerning between “me” and me. There are two kinds of reflexivity: egocentric and non-egocentric. Egocentric reflexivity is directed to the ego as an absolute center. Non-egocentric reflexivity is beyond ego’s sphere and is directed to the Other of everything (the being). In the friend’s voice we can hear the voice of the Other of everything that articulates itself in ourselves; the Other of everything, that is present in ourselves, makes it possible for us to hear it in the friend’s voice.
Sergey A. Gashkov. Michel Foucault and Claude Lefort: Toward a Post-classical Philosophy of History.
French philosophers Michel Foucault (1926‒1984) and Claude Lefort (1924‒2010) are often called as “historians of present”. They treat the history as the history of ideas, the history of thinking. They consider the present as a realization of the history of thinking in a functioning of social institutions and practices. They are rarely considered by the scholars as philosophers of the history, because their early “historiosophical” projects (the “archeology” of Foucault and the “phenomenological Marxism” of Lefort) are unachieved and eclipsed by their later work, especially their studies of the power. In our paper we try to show these projects have their proper value for the history of philosophy and create a special context for comparative studies of the both thinkers. The author elucidates a meaning of some basic concepts of the “early” Foucault’s and Lefort’s philosophies in the light of a possible post-classical philosophy of history.
Vlada S. Belimova. Intercultural and Comparative Philosophy: Some Contemporary Discussions.
The publication discusses some current discussions on the status of intercultural philosophy. The question is raised whether the intercultural philosophy is a new stage of comparative philosophy or it can claim to be an independent approach or even a discipline of philosophical knowledge. The prerequisites for the emergence of intercultural philosophy, the concept of a dialogue of cultures, the problem of intercultural philosophy and orientalism, intercultural philosophy and postcolonial studies are investigated in the paper. The author concludes that although the subject of intercultural philosophy overlaps with the problems of comparative philosophy, it does have the potential to become a new philosophy of the future. The paper offers an analytical review of Russian and foreign publications concerning the place and role of intercultural philosophy in the contemporary philosophical discourse, referring to the views of representative Russian and foreign philosophers (Stepanyants, Lysenko, Mall, Fornet-Betancour, Wimmer, Chakrabarti, Siderits, etc.)
PUBLICATIONS AND TRANSLATIONS
Kare Johan Mjor, Alexander Tsygankov. The Study of Russian Thought in Norway: Major Milestones and Representatives (Foreword to Translation).
The following foreword to the translation of Kåre Johan Mjør’s article “The Slavophile Idea of Russia” provides an outline of the history of how Russian philosophy and thought have been studied in Norway and who its main representatives have been. The main centers for studying Russian philosophical thought are the Russian departments at the universities of Oslo, Bergen and Tromsø. As in most European countries Russian philosophy makes up a part of Slavic studies (or Russian studies), and more specifically of cultural studies, a field that in turn has traditionally served as a preparation for the study of Russian literature. This suggests that the study of Russian philosophy has not yet gained sufficient independence in Western Europe. Nevertheless, the study of Russian philosophical thought in Norway does have a tradition of its own. For instance has Nikolay Berdyaev’s philosophy attracted wide interest both in terms of scholarship and translations. A characteristic feature of the study of Russian thought in Norway more recently is a philological approach, where keen attention has been drawn to the linguistic structures and rhetorical patterns of philosophical texts.
Kare Johan Mjor. The Slavophile Idea of Russia.
This article analyses two classic texts of Russian Slavophilism: “On the Character of the Civilization of Europe and its Relationship to the Civilization of Russia” by Ivan Kireevsky and “A Few Words from An Orthodox Christian on the Western Confessions” by Aleksey Khomyakov. The Slavophile project of these thinkers is seen as an attempt to construct a new national identity for Russia in the context of an emergent secularization. This new Russian identity was typically formulated in relation to an Other, which was Western Europe. Particular attention is drawn to the way in which the Slavophiles created a specific idea of Russia rhetorically, by means of a set of metaphors, where in particular the epithets “inner” and “outer” are noteworthy. The article argues that the Slavophiles understood the relationship between Russia and the West as an analogue to a specific understanding of the human being, which had emerged in Western thought from the late Antiquity onwards, above all in St. Augustine’s Christian vision of an “inner man,” as opposed to the “outer” body. This idea was later reformulated by Descartes, according to whom the fact that we think makes up the foundation for confident knowledge about the physical world. The Slavophiles, in turn, transferred this dual image of the human being onto Russia and Western Europe. They described the understanding of Christianity in Russia as “inner,” claiming thereby that it has traditionally been more genuine and truer to its origins, whereas the West did from early on develop an “outer” attitude to Christian dogmas – a mechanical and, according to the Slavophiles, superficial understanding characterized by logical reasoning and rationalization.
MATERIALS OF SCIENTIFIC EVENTS
Pyotr V. Ryabov. The Tradition of Free Thought is Reviving in the Birthplace of Mikhail Bakunin (a Brief Outline of the Pryamukhino Readings 2001‒2018).
The article presents the conference that is held every summer since 2001 in the village of Pryamukhino, the Tver Region. Being the birthplace of Mikhail Bakunin this village is remarkable for Russian and world culture. The conference is organized on principles of self-organization, without participation of the state. The main topics of the conference are history of anarchism as well as Bakunin’s biography and ideas. Being made on a wide range of philosophical and historical problems, presentations fuel the development of libertarian thought in Russia.
Olga I. Kusenko. Kant and Russian Philosophy. Italian perspective.
The review presents the recently published monograph of Italian scholar Vera Pozzi “Kant and Russian Orthodoxy. Spiritual Academies and philosophy in Russia between 18th and 19th centuries”. The book is dedicated to a detailed reconstruction of the reception of Kant and his philosophy in Russian spiritual academies based on two case studies (“the case of I. Vetrinskii” and “the case of P. Yurkevich”). Pozzi examines various philosophical responses of Russian thinkers to
Information for Authors.