Thomas Nemeth – författare

This volume offers a critical examination of the later philosophical views of Vladimir Solov’ëv, arguably Russia’s most famous and most systematic philosopher. It offers a philosophically informed approach to this pivotal figure and to his era. Inside, readers will discover a detailed portrait of the often overlooked evolution of the philosopher’s views during the final two decades of his life. The author explores Solov’ëv’s still evolving aesthetic philosophy and his entry into the lively Russian discussion of free will. The work then turns to the philosopher’s mature statements on many figures from within the history of philosophy. This includes Kant and Hegel. Next, readers will learn about his disagreements with several contemporaries as well as contemporaneous movements. These include positivism and materialism. In addition, the coverage includes an elucidation and examination of Solov’ëv’s final expression of his ethical philosophy as set forth in his major ethical treatise Justification of the Moral Good.

The overall picture that emerges is of a much more vibrant and heated philosophical community than typically portrayed in Western secondary literature. The book ends with a reflection on the rise of Solov’ëv as a religious mystic at the expense of a critical evaluation of his thought.

This, the first in-depth and comprehensive book-length study of the Russian neo-Kantian movement in English language, challenges the assumption of the isolation of neo-Kantianism to Germany. The present investigation demonstrates that neo-Kantianism had an international dimension by showing the emergence of a parallel movement in Imperial Russia spanning its emergence in the late 19th century to its gradual dissolution in the aftermath of the Bolshevik Revolution. The author presents a systematic portrait of the development of Russian neo-Kantianism starting with its rise as a philosophy of science. However, it was with the stream of young students returning to Imperial Russia after a period of study at German universities that the movement accelerated. More often than not, these enthusiastic, young philosophers returned home imbued with the neo-Kantianism of their respective but divergent host institutions. As a result, clashes were inevitable concerning the proper approach to philosophical issues as well as the very understanding of Kant''s philosophy and his legacy for contemporary thought. In the end, the broad promise of a Western-oriented neo-Kantianism could not withstand the pressures it confronted on all sides.

This, the first in-depth and comprehensive book-length study of the Russian neo-Kantian movement in English language, challenges the assumption of the isolation of neo-Kantianism to Germany. The present investigation demonstrates that neo-Kantianism had an international dimension by showing the emergence of a parallel movement in Imperial Russia spanning its emergence in the late 19th century to its gradual dissolution in the aftermath of the Bolshevik Revolution. The author presents a systematic portrait of the development of Russian neo-Kantianism starting with its rise as a philosophy of science. However, it was with the stream of young students returning to Imperial Russia after a period of study at German universities that the movement accelerated. More often than not, these enthusiastic, young philosophers returned home imbued with the neo-Kantianism of their respective but divergent host institutions. As a result, clashes were inevitable concerning the proper approach to philosophical issues as well as the very understanding of Kant''s philosophy and his legacy for contemporary thought. In the end, the broad promise of a Western-oriented neo-Kantianism could not withstand the pressures it confronted on all sides.

This work is a historical study of the philosophical writings emerging from Imperial Russia''s theological "academies" – Orthodoxy’s higher educational institutions that ran parallel to the secular universities – from their inception to the aftermath of the Bolshevik Revolution. Unlike with nineteenth century Russian revolutionary thought, there are few secondary studies of the philosophical works stemming from the academies. These philosophical works focused on ontology and, as such, stand in sharp contrast to the shift toward epistemology in that century as happened in Germany. Another feature of the "academy" philosophies was the continual and explicit attempt to set themselves apart from the pervasive "subjectivism" of Western philosophical systems, although a largely unacknowledged influence persisted. At no time did the academy philosophers look to rational inquiry for more than an assist in understanding their theology. Instead they appealed to tradition and to an alleged direct insight into religious truths at the expense of logic and rational argument. The ultimate result was the pecular historical insularity of their community and concomitantly a subservience to the political state, traits that persist to this day.

This work is a historical study of the philosophical writings emerging from Imperial Russia''s theological "academies" – Orthodoxy’s higher educational institutions that ran parallel to the secular universities – from their inception to the aftermath of the Bolshevik Revolution. Unlike with nineteenth century Russian revolutionary thought, there are few secondary studies of the philosophical works stemming from the academies. These philosophical works focused on ontology and, as such, stand in sharp contrast to the shift toward epistemology in that century as happened in Germany. Another feature of the "academy" philosophies was the continual and explicit attempt to set themselves apart from the pervasive "subjectivism" of Western philosophical systems, although a largely unacknowledged influence persisted. At no time did the academy philosophers look to rational inquiry for more than an assist in understanding their theology. Instead they appealed to tradition and to an alleged direct insight into religious truths at the expense of logic and rational argument. The ultimate result was the pecular historical insularity of their community and concomitantly a subservience to the political state, traits that persist to this day.