This article is the result of a practically textual reading of Part II of Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. The author's method was to stay as close as possible to the text and context and ask only those questions that were directly prompted by the text. At the same time, all preliminary positions had to be reduced, if possible. The results of the work done are as follows. 1) The transcendental apparatus of reason is a toolkit and resource that can be likened to the materials and plans of a well-thought-out construction. 2) The author was inspired by the word die Zucht, to which Kant reduced the understanding of the discipline of pure reason (in a purely negative aspect). Reason is a critical bridle that allows a person to exercise total (ideally) control over one’s feelings, views, the strength and productivity of the intellect, and the highest metaphysical values, i.e., to become free. 3) The author could not ignore the disproportionately large place that the comparison of mathematical and philosophical knowledge occupies in the exposition of the discipline of pure reason. The solution to these two opposing methods, which grow out of the same transcendental root, leads us to the fundamental difference between the form of a phenomenon (space/time) and what is revealed in it. At the same time, the author insists on the assumption of a special kind of reality in which mathematical figures and symbols exist and in which pure contemplation constructs them. 4) The article covers all the subtleties associated with the relationship between discipline (Zucht) and freedom (and even apodicticity) of reason in both the epistemological and social planes.

Keywords:

transcendental method, transcendental instrumentalism and constructivism, hypothetical nature of pure
reason, discipline (Zucht), anthropologism, Enlightenment.

Vladimir N. Zheleznyak – Doctor of Philosophy, Professor, the Department of Philosophy
and Law, ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9071-0468, e-mail: shlezo2@gmail.com.

1. Kant I. Kritik der Reinen Vernunft. Leipzig, Verlag Philipp Reclam jung, 1979, 1022 s.
2. Kant I. Kritika chistogo razuma [Critique of Pure Reason]. Moscow, «Mysl'», 1994, 591 p.
3. Kant I. Antropologiia s pragmaticheskoi tochki zreniia [Anthropology from a pragmatic point of view]. Saint Petersburg, «Nauka», 1999, 471 p.
4. Kant I. Otvet na vopros: Chto takoe prosveshchenie? [Answer to the question: What is enlightenment?]. Moscow, «Mysl'», 1966, vol. 6, 743 p.
5. Losev A.F. Iz rannikh proizvedenii [From early works]. Moscow, Pravda, 1990, pp. 194-369.
6. Kant I. Kritika prakticheskogo razuma [Critique of Practical Reason]. Moscow, Moskovskii filosofskii fond, 1997, vol. 3, 784 p.
7. Stangl W. Immanuel Kant – Über Pädagogik – Einleitung (in NR) – arbeitsblätter news, available at: https://arbeitsblaetter-news.stangl-taller.at/immanuel-kant-uber-padagogik-einleitung-in-nr/ (accessed 02 August 2024).
8. Ortmeyer B. Gehorsam, Disziplin und der denkende Mensch. Überlegungen zur systematischen Widerlegung gängiger Argumente für das Erziehungsziel des „Gehorsams“ und zur Klärung des Disziplinbegriffs, available at: https://www.uni-frankfurt.de/51739618/Ortmeyer_Disziplin_und_Gehorsam.pdf (accessed 02 August 2024).
9. Bim-Bad B.M. Lektsii Immanuila Kanta «O pedagogike»: perevod i kommentarii [Lectures by Immanuel Kant “On Pedagogy”: translation and commentary], 43 p. Kommentarii I – CXXIII, available at: https://nsportal.ru/sites/default/files/2018/03/18/i._kant.pdf (accessed 02 August 2024).
10. Brandhorst M., Hahman A., Bernd L. Sind wir Bürger zweier Welten? Freiheit und moralische Verantwortung im transzendentalen Idealismus. Kant-Forschungen, 2012, no. 20, 398 p.
11. Kruglov A.N. O poniatii kritiki i kriticheskogo metoda u Kanta [On the concept of criticism and the critical method in Kant]. Philosophy. Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 2023, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 225-260.
12. Koriako D. Kants Philosophie der Mathematik. Kant-Forschungen, 1999, no. 11, 364 p.
13. Schubbach A. Kants Konzeption der geometrischen Darstellung. Kant-Studien. Philosophische Zeitschrift der Kant-Gesellschaft, 2017, Band 108, Heft 1, pp. 19-54.
14. Katrechko S.L. Transtsendental'nyi analiz matematicheskoi deiatel'nosti: abstraktnye (matematicheskie) ob"ekty, konstruktsii i dokazatel'stva [Transcendental analysis of mathematical activity: abstract (mathematical) objects, constructions and proofs]. Dokazatel'stvo: ochevidnost', dostovernost' i ubeditel'nost' v matematike. Mosscow, 2014. - s. 86 – 120.
15. Schmid J. Ein «Experiment der reinen Vernunft»: Kants Erfindung des philosophischen Gedankenexperiments, available at: https://praefaktisch.de/gedankenexperimente/ein-experiment-der-reinen-vernunft-kants-erfindung-des-philosophischen-gedankenexperiments/ (accessed 02 August 2024).
16. Universitaet Trier, Philosophie. Prof. dr. Kristina Engelhard, available at: https://www.uni-trier.de/universitaet/fachbereiche-faecher/fachbereich-i/faecher-und-institute/philosophie/home/personal-a-z/engelhard-prof-dr-kristina (accessed 02 April 2024).
 

The article analyzes the concept of reflection in Kant's philosophy. The distinction between consciousness (Bewußtsein) and thinking (Denken) in the structure of Kantian experience allows different functions of reflection to be distinguished. It is shown that in Transcendental Logic reflection is considered, first of all, as a means of controlling the process of cognition. Transcendental reflection is aimed at realizing the relationship of cognitive abilities (sensuality and reason) and is carried out as their transcendental topic. Since, however, the reverse side of awareness of the way an object is given is awareness of the subject of cognition itself, to the extent transcendental reflection also has an implicit existential meaning. Therefore, reflection in the Critique of Pure Reason acts as "consciousness about consciousness." In contrast, in the Critique of the Faculty of Judgment, reflection acts in the function of the faculty of judgment as a tool for the implementation of productive cognition. If the defining faculty of judgment connects already existing contemplations with concepts, then the reflective faculty of judgment serves to search for general concepts. And in this sense, reflection in the mode of the reflective faculty of judgment acts as "thinking for thinking." It is indicated that in this case, the principle for the operation of the determining ability of judgment is the principle of expediency; only in this case is it possible to search for a general concept for special empirical phenomena given in experience. It is shown that the search for such a rule for the determining ability of judgment is carried out by the reflexive ability of judgment. In the latter case, it appears in the mode of teleological judgment that links imagination not with the concept of reason but with the rule (principle) of the purpose of reason. But in pure reflection, the reflective judgment is directed at itself and gives the principle to itself. This means that in this mode of aesthetic judgment, the reflective ability is an expression of the pure subjectivity of the subject. It is concluded that Kant's teaching implicitly contains many points that become the subject of analysis in modern philosophy.

Keywords:

reflection, judgment, imagination, reason, expediency, schematism, teleological judgment, aesthetic judgment.

Sergey V. Komarov – Doctor of Philosophy, Associate Professor, Professor
at the Department of Philosophy, Dean, the Faculty of Philosophy and Sociology,
ORCID: https://orcid.org/ 0000-0001-7358-6151, e-mail: philos.perm@gmail.com.

1. Refleksiia v nauke i obuchenii [Reflection in science and education]. Moscow, «Nauka», 1984, 272 p.
2. Kryukov A.N. Poniatie «iavleniia» i «fenomen» v transtsendental'noi filosofii (Kant, Gusserl', Fink) [The concept of "phenomenon" and "phenomenon" in transcendental philosophy (Kant, Husserl, Fink)]. Kantian Journal, 2020, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 29-61.
3. Kant I. Kritika chistogo razuma [Critique of Pure Reason]. Moscow, Mysl', 1994, 591 p.
4. Kant I. Kritika sposobnosti suzhdeniia [Critique of the faculty of judgment]. Saint Petersburg, Nauka, 1995, 512 p.
5. Lehrmann G. I.Kant. Erste Einleitung in der KU. 2-te Auslage. Berlin, 1990, 520 p.
6. Willaschek M. Wer kritisiert die Vernunft?. Willaschek M. Kant. Die Pevolution des Denkens. Verlag C.H.Beck oHG, Munchen, 2023, 430 p.
7. Komarov S.V., Kordon S.I. Osnovy metodologii: sistemodeiatel'nostnyi podkhod. Kategorii [Fundamentals of methodology: system-activity approach. Categories]. Perm', 2005, 384 p.
8. Shchedrovitsky G.P. Iskhodnye predstavleniia i kategorial'nye sredstva teorii deiatel'nosti [Initial ideas and categorical means of the theory of activity]. Izbrannye trudy. Moscow, Shkola kul'turnoi politiki, 1995, pp. 233-280. (800p.)
9. Shchedrovitsky G.P. Ob iskhodnykh printsipakh analiza problemy obucheniia i razvitiia v ramkakh teorii deiatel'nosti [On the initial principles of analysis of the problem of training and development within the framework of activity theory]. Izbrannye trudy. Moscow, Shkola kul'turnoi politiki, 1995, pp.197-227.
10. Irrlitz G. Nicht bestimmende, sondern regulative Urteilskraft. Irrlitz G. Kant Handuch. Leben und Werk. J.B.Metzler Verlag, 2015, pp. 340-342 (p. 549).
11. Shchedrovitsky G.P. Refleksiia [Reflection]. Myshlenie. Ponimanie. Refleksiia. Moscow, Nasledie MMK, 2005, pp. 217-226.
12. Nancy J.-L. Lektsii o Kante (po konspektam Eleny Petrovskoi) [Lectures on Kant (based on notes by Elena Petrovskaya)]. Moscow, Common Place, 2023, 224 p.
13. Perov Yu.V. Lektsii po istorii klassicheskoi nemetskoi filosofii [Lectures on the history of classical German philosophy]. Saint Petersburg, Nauka, 2010, pp.293-294.
14. Irrlitz G. Analityk der äshetischen Urteilskraft. Irrlitz G. Kant Handuch. Leben und Werk. J.B.Metzler Verlag, 2015, pp. 349-353.
15. Ogurtsov A.P. Otchuzhdenie, refleksiia i praktika [Alienation, reflection and practice]. Moscow, Golos, 2024, 426 p.
16. Lepskiy V.E. Refleksivno-aktivnye sredy innovatsionnogo razvitiia [Reflexive-active environments of innovative development]. Moscow, Kogito-tsentr, 2010, 254 p.
17. Shchedrovitsky G.P. Poniatie refleksii. Refleksiia i myshlenie. Refleksiia i soznanie [The concept of reflection. Reflection and thinking. Reflection and consciousness]. Na perekrestke mysli: vvedenie v sistemomysledeiatel'nostnyi podkhod. Moscow, MIF, 2024,
pp. 138-167. (672p.)
18. Shchedrovitsky G.P.  Chistaia refleksiia i organizovannaia refleksiia [Pure reflection and organized reflection]. Na perekrestke mysli: vvedenie v sistemomysledeiatel'nostnyi podkhod. Moscow, MIF, 2024, pp. 168-192.
19. Lysachev M.N., Prokhorov A.N. Iskusstvennyi intellekt. Analiz, trendy, mirovoi opyt [Artificial Intelligence. Analysis, Trends, World Experience]. Ed. D. A. Larionov. Korporativnoe izdanie. Moscow; Belgorod, Konstanta – print, 2023, 460 p.
20. Oliveira A. Tsifrovoi razum: kak nauka meniaet chelovechestvo [Digital Mind: How Science is Changing Humanity]. Ed. M. Falikman. Moscow, Izdatel'skii dom «Delo» Rossiiskaia akademiia narodnogo khoziaistva i gosudarstvennoi sluzhby, 2022, 448 p.
21. Shchedrovitsky G.P. Refleksiia v deiatel'nosti [Reflection in activity]. Myshlenie. Ponimanie. Refleksiia. Moscow, Nasledie MMK, 2005, pp. 64-125.
22. Henrich D.  Myshlenie i samobytie. Chteniia o sub"ektivnosti [Thinking and Self-Existence. Readings on Subjectivity]. Moscow, Izdatel'stvo «Ves' Mir», 2018, 318 p.
23. Komarov S.V. Problema inzhenernogo myshleniia [The Problem of Engineering Thinking]. Ph. D. thesis.. Sverdlovsk, 1991, 178 p.
24. Hui Yu. Rekursivnost' i kontingentnost' [Recursivity and Contingency]. Moscow, V-A-C Press, 2020, 398 p.
25. Antonovsky A. O tekhnike kak kul'ture, tekhnologicheskoi manipuliatsii tekhnologicheskoi normativnosti [On technology as a culture, technological manipulation of technological normativity]. Ontologii artefaktov. Vzaimodeistvie «estestvennykh» i «iskusstvennykh» komponentov zhiznennogo mira. Moscow, Izdatel'skii dom «Delo», 2012, pp. 270-284.
26. Rozov M.A. Inzhenernoe konstruirovanie v nauchnom poznanii [Engineering design in scientific knowledge]. Konstruktivistskii podkhod v epistemologii i naukakh o cheloveke. Moscow, Kanon + : Reabilitatsiia, 2009, pp. 197-215.
27. Shchedrovitsky G.P. Refleksiia, ponimanie i myshlenie v gruppovoi intellektual'noi deiatel'nosti [Reflection, understanding and thinking in group intellectual activity]. Myshlenie. Ponimanie. Refleksiia. Moscow, Nasledie MMK, 2005, pp. 341-390.

The problematic of reality is necessarily included in any thorough philosophical system. Kant's transcendental philosophy is no exception. However, Kant is traditionally understood as an idealist and constructivist, and on this basis, attempts to reconstruct his "conceptions of reality" do not seem particularly productive. This article seeks to do just that - to clarify Kant's understanding of this issue, especially since the concept of reality is one of the most frequently used terms. The first part of the article analyzes the ontological structures of Kant's philosophy and the problems associated with the relation of phenomenon, noumenon, and thing-in-itself, and their complex coordination. The second part considers the significance of the problematics of the objective for clarifying the conceptions of reality. The third part analyzes assessments of Kant's metaphysical project in the studies of S.L. Katrechko, V.V. Vasiliev, S.A. Chernov, A.N. Kruglov, and V.E. Semenov. Researchers of Kantian philosophy do not agree on how to define the form of theoretical analytics given by the Critique of Pure Reason: is it a continuation of the metaphysical tradition, can it in a certain sense be attributed to ontology, is it a new - transcendental - logic, or should it still be treated as a "critical method"? In Kant himself one can find grounds for contradictory answers regarding the aims of his critical philosophy. This article is devoted to clarifying the reasons for this kind of disagreement between the followers of Kant's philosophy and its analysts. In Kant's "shadow" appears all further European philosophy, in one way or another oriented towards the anti-realist foundations of analyticis, in particular phenomenology and anti-realism. The aim of this article is to reconstruct the ontological foundations of Kant's critical method and to clarify his understanding of reality in this context.

Keywords:

Kant, reality, objective, phenomenon, noumenon, thing-in-itself, ontology, transcendental philosophy, Kant's metaphysical project.

Vera An. Serkova – Doctor of Philosophy, Professor, Professor at the Higher School of Social Sciences,
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4543-0496, e-mail: henrypooshel@rambler.ru.

1. Kant I. Kritika chistogo razuma [Critique of Pure Reason]. Moscow, Akademicheskii proekt, 2020, 567 p.
2. Fragmenty rannikh grecheskikh filosofov. Chast`1 [Fragments of early Greek philosophers. Part 1]. Moscow, Izdatel`stvo Nauka, 1989, 576 p. 
3. Husserl E. Idei k chistoi fenomenologii i fenomenologicheskoi filosofii. Tom 1 [Ideas for a Pure Phenomenology and Phenomenological Philosophy. Vol. 1]. Moscow, Dom intellektual'noi knigi, 1999, 336 p.
4. Kant I. Venskaia logika [Viennese logic]. Ed. A.N. Kruglova. Moscow, Kanon+ ROOI «Reabilitatsiia», 2022, 496 p.
5. Chaly V.A. Retsenziia na knigu Venskaia logika, Immanuil Kant [Review of the book Viennese Logic, Immanuel Kant]. History of Philosophy Yearbook, no. 37 (2022), pp. 434-438. 
6. Katrechko S.L. Transtsendental'naia argumentatsiia Kanta kak formal'naia ontologiia [Kant’s transcendental argumentation as a formal ontology]. RATsIO, 2011, no. 5, pp. 89-105.
7. Vasiliev V. «Marginal'naia» metafizika Kanta [“Marginal” metaphysics of Kant]. Logos, no. 10, 1997, pp. 100-107.
8. Semenov V.E. Chto takoe transtsendental'naia logika? [What is transcendental logic?]. Kantian Journal, 2010, no. 3, pp. 7–23.
9. Kant I. Fragmenty chernovykh nabroskov po metafizike [Fragments of rough drafts on metaphysics]. Logos, no. 10, 1997,
pp. 108-128.
10. Vasiliev V. V. Podvaly kantovskoi metafiziki (deduktsiia kategorii) [Cellars of kantian metaphysics (deduction of categories)]. Moscow, «Nasledie», 1998, 160 p.
11. Katrechko S.L. Kak vozmozhna metafizika (v svete transtsendental'noi perspektivy)? [How is metaphysics possible (in light of the transcendental perspective)?]. Metaphysics, 2011, no. 1, pp. 31-54.
12. Chernov S.A. Metafizika nauki [Metaphysics of science]. Kantian Journal, 2016, no. 2, pp. 30–48. DOI: 10.5922/0207-6918-2016-2-2
13. Katrechko S.L. Kak vozmozhna metafizika [How is metaphysics possible]. Voprosy filosofii, 2005, no. 9, pp. 83-94.
14. Serkova V.A. Fenomenologicheskaia deskriptsiia [Phenomenological description]. Saint Petersburg, Sankt Peterburgskii universitet, 2013, 320 p.
15. Serkova V.A. Fenomenologiia kul'tury [Phenomenology of Culture]. Saint Petersburg, Politekhnicheskii universitet, 2010, 138 p.
16. Hintikka J. O Gedele [About Gödel]. Ed V.V. Tselishcheva, V.A. Surovtseva. Moscow, «Kanon+» ROOI «Reabilitatsiia», 2014, 256 p.
17. Putnam H. Realizm s chelovecheskim litsom [Realism with a Human Face]. Analiticheskaia filosofiia: stanovlenie i razvitie. Antologiia. Ed. A.F. Griaznova. Moscow, 1998, pp. 466-494.
18. Strawson P.F. The Bounds of Sense: An Essay on Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. London, Routledge, 2006.
19. Evstigneev M.D. Deskriptivnaia metafizika i Kant [Descriptive Metaphysics and Kant]. Studies in Transcendental Philosophy, 2020, no. 1, pp. 31-54, available at: https://transcendental.su/S123456780008217-9-1 (accessed 11 September 2024).
20. Ognev A. I. Uchenie o real'nosti Kanta v ponimanii i otsenke Gartmana [Kant's Doctrine of Reality as Understood and Evaluated by Hartmann]. Kantian Journal, 2012, no. 1(39), pp. 62-69. DOI: 10.5922/0207-69182012-1-7.
21. Kusliy P. Veshch' sama po sebe v kontseptsiiakh Kanta i Kuaina [The Thing in Itself in the Concepts of Kant and Quine]. Forum molodykh kantovedov (Po materialam Mezhdunarodnogo kongressa, posviashchennogo 280-letiiu so dnia rozhdeniia i 200-letiiu so dnia smerti Immanuila Kanta). Moscow, 2005, pp. 190-200.
22. Makeeva L.B. Analiticheskaia filosofiia, ee istoriia i Kant [Analytical philosophy, its history and Kant]. Kantian Journal, 2013, no. 2 (44), pp. 56-68.

The antinomic understanding of reason is the basis of all of Kant's critical philosophy. However, such an understanding does not find its explicit expression in the systematic doctrine of man that Kant offers. Nevertheless, the principle of the antinomic understanding of all human (rational) existence also underlies Kant's Anthropology and finds its expression in the rational effort required of man to ''make himself''. In this way, Kant anticipates the formulation of the question of man that is characteristic of twentieth-century existentialism. To see this connection, it is necessary to change the usual view of antinomy as a formal or dialectical contradiction. In the general sense (and in Kant’s philosophy), antinomy is a mutually exclusive choice of one possibility to the detriment of others. It is Heidegger’s interpretation of Kant's metaphysics and ethics that allows us to have such a view of the antinomism of human life (existence). Man, since he acts rationally (pragmatically, according to Kant’s philosophy), is always in an antinomic situation of existential choice of his possible path. The laws of reason acquire their moral force only if the subject consciously overcomes his natural inclinations dictated by the laws of nature. In Kant's Anthropology, the idea of antinomianism goes beyond the antinomies of pure and practical reason, which opens up the prospect of revealing the antinomian relationship between language and thinking. This approach emerged and developed in the Russian philosophy of the XIX and XX centuries. The final conclusion is that only such an act, action, or deed can be meaningful (reasonable), and therefore free, which in its cognitive, pragmatic, or moral necessity is tense with the awareness of another possibility. The rationality and freedom of human existence is constituted by this tension.

Keywords:

Kant's anthropology, antinomy, antinomies of reason, antinomies of language, existential choice, idea of freedom, linguistic turn in philosophy, Kant and Heidegger.

Sergey E. Yachin – Doctor of Philosophy, Professor, Professor at the Department
of Philosophy and Religious Studies, School of Arts and Humanities,
ORCID: https://orcid.org/ 0000 0002 4309 2211, e-mail: yachin.se@dvfu.ru.

1. Heidegger M. Kant i problema metafiziki [Kant and the problem of metaphysics]. Moscow, Russkoe fenomenologicheskoe obshchestvo, Logos, 1997, 228 p.
2. Gadamer H.-G. Istina i metod: Osnovy filoskoi Germenevtiki [Truth and Method: Foundations of Philosophical Hermeneutics]. Moscow, Progress, 1988, 704 p.
3. Apel K.-O. Transformatsiia filosofii [Transformation of philosophy]. Moscow, Logos, 2001, 344 p.
4. The Linguistic Turn: Essays in Philosophical Method. Edition by Richard M. Rorty. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1967.
5. Kassirer E. Filosofiia simvolicheskikh form. Tom 1. Iazyk [Philosophy of Symbolic Forms. Volume 1. Language]. Moscow; Saint Petersburg, Universitetskaia kniga, 2002, 272 p.
6. Kassirer E. Zhizn' i uchenie Kanta [Life and teachings of Kant]. Saint Petersburg, Universitetskaia kniga, 1997, 448 p.
7. Mamardashvili, M.K. Kantianskie variatsii [Kantian variations]. Moscow, Agraf, 2002, 320 p.
8. Heidegger M. Tezis Kanta o bytii [Kant's Thesis on Being]. Vremia i bytie: stat'i i vystupleniia [Time and Being: Articles and Speeches]. Moscow, Respublika, 1993, pp. 361-381.
9. Heidegger M. Bytie i Vremia [Being and Time]. Khar'kov, Folio, 2003, 509 p.
10. Yachin S. E., Pchelkina S. Yu. Antinomizm kul'tury i sotsial'nyi radikalizm [Antinomianism of Culture and Social Radicalism]. Uchenye zapiski Krymskogo federal'nogo universiteta imeni V.I. Vernadskogo. Filosofiia. Politologiia. Kul'turologiia, 2020, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 60-69.
11. Kant I. Antropologiia s pragmaticheskoi tochki zreniia [Anthropology from a pragmatic point of view]. Sochineniia. Tom 7. Moscow, Choro, 1994, 495 p.
12. Deleuze J. Kant: Uchenie o sposobnostiakh [Kant: The Doctrine of Capacities]. Empirizm i sub"ektivnost': opyt o chelovecheskoi prirode po Iumu. Kriticheskaia filosofiia Kanta: uchenie o sposobnostiakh. Bergsonizm. Spinoza [Empiricism and Subjectivity: An Essay on Human Nature According to Hume. Kant's Critical Philosophy: The Doctrine of Capacities. Bergsonism. Spinoza]. Moscow, PER SE, 2001, pp. 145-217.
13. Kant I. Kritika chistogo razuma [Critique of Pure Reason]. 1nd ed. (A). Sochineniia na nemetskom i russskom yazykakh. Moscow, Nauka, 2006, vol. 2, part 2.
14. Sartre J.-P. Ekzistentsializm eto gumanizm [Existentialism is humanism]. Sumerki bogov. Moscow, Politizdat, 1990, 403 p.
15. Langle A. Samost' vo ploti: ekzistentsiia i psikhosomatika [The Self in the Flesh: Existence and Psychosomatics]. Counseling Psychology and Psychotherapy, 2015, no. 1, pp.7-69.
16. Kant I. Kritika prakticheskogo razuma [Critique of Practical Reason]. Sochineniia na nemetskom i russkom yazykakh. Moscow, Moskovskii filosofskii fond, 1997, vol. 3, pp. 277-734.
17. Zenkovsky V.V. Istoriia russkoi filosofii [History of Russian philosophy]. Leningrad, Ego, 1991.
18. Vygotskiy L.S. Lektsii po psikhologii. Myshlenie i rech' [Lectures on psychology. Thinking and speech]. Moscow, Iurait, 2019, 432 p.
19. Potebnya A.A. Mysl' i iazyk (1862) [Thought and Language (1862)]. Kiev, Sinto, 1993, 192 p.
20. Losev A. Filosofiia imeni. Veshch' i imia [Philosophy of the name. Thing and name]. Moscow, Ast, 2023, 352 p.
21. Florensky P.A. Imena [Names]. Maloe sobranie sochinenii. Moscow, Kupina, 1993, iss. 1, 319 p.
22. Sossyur F. Trudy po iazykoznaniiu [Works on linguistics]. Moscow, Progress, 1977, 695 p.
23. Shklovsky V.B. Voskreshenie Slova [Resurrection of the Word]. Saint Petersburg, Tipografiia Sokolinskogo, 1914, 16 p.
24. Shpet G.G. Vnutrenniaia forma slova: Etiudy i variatsii na temy Gumbol'ta [Internal form of the word: Etudes and variations on themes by Humboldt]. Moscow, URSS, 2009, 216 p.

The article reconstructs Kant's views on the problem of forgiveness. Despite the fact that the German philosopher speaks very little about forgiveness in his texts, showing remarkable restraint with regard to this topic, in the corpus of his works, nevertheless, one can find enough indirect indications that the problem of forgiveness was significant for him. This circumstance is one of the reasons why in this study the Kantian view of forgiveness is revealed in connection with a number of related problems that Kant touches upon in the development of his ethics and philosophy of religion. These are, first of all, such important moral, legal, and theological subjects as guilt and punishment, hatred and thirst for vengeance, autonomy and heteronomy of the will, the struggle between the good principle in man and the evil one, revolution of the heart and change in the cast of mind, and also divine grace and human mercy. The article shows that Kant considers forgiveness and peacefulness (placabilitas) to be a duty of virtue, that is a wide obligation. On the contrary, he considers the maxim of unforgiveness to be at variance with moral duty. The Kantian approach is based on the belief that all human beings need forgiveness because everyone bears the burden of guilt due to the radical propensity of human beings to evil. The study defends the thesis that forgiveness, according to Kant, involves an intelligible replenishment of the deficiency of time that the forgiver gives to the offender in response to the latter’s decision to morally transform himself and follow the path of virtue. At the same time, the article emphasizes that, for Kant, the case of forgiveness cannot in any way be the basis for the abolition of punishment since the deed done cannot be undone and guilt cannot be atoned for. The article also notes that Kant finds an elegant solution to the contradiction between the duty of forgiveness and the inevitability of punishment: he proposes the idea of doubling the moral subject.

Keywords:

forgiveness, peacefulness, guilt, punishment, revenge, wide obligation, divine grace, mercy, change in the cast of mind, deficiency of time replenishment.

Kirill V. Prozumentik - Candidate of Philosophy, Associate Professor at the Department of Humanities,
ORCID: https://orcid.org / 0000-0002-4815-4733, e-mail: kprozumentik@mail.ru.

1. Derrida J. Le Siècle et le Pardon: entretien avec Michel Wieviorka / Derrida J. Foi et savoir; suivi de Le siècle et le pardon: entretien avec Michel Wieviorka. – Paris: Gallimard, 2001. P. 101-133.
2. Griswold Ch.L. Forgiveness: A Philosophical Exploration. – New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007. – 242 p.
3. Nussbaum M.C. Anger and Forgiveness: Resentment, Generosity, Justice. – New York: Oxford University Press, 2016. – 315 p.
4. Hieronymi P. Articulating an Uncompromising Forgiveness // Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. – 2001. – Vol. 62. – No. 3. – P. 529-555.
5. Sussman D. Kantian Forgiveness // Kant-Studien. – 2005. – Vol. 96 – No. 1. – P. 85-107.
6. Scheid D.E. Kant’s Retributivism // Ethics. – Vol. 93. – 1983. P. 262-282.
7. Zaibert L. The Paradox of Forgiveness // Journal of Moral Philosophy. – 2009. – No. 6. – P. 365-393.
8. Lang B. Forgiveness // American Philosophical Quarterly. – 1994. – Vol. 31. – No. 2. – P. 105-117. 
9. Kant I. Kritika prakticheskogo razuma / Kant I. Sochineniya. V 8-mi t. T. 4. – M.: Choro, 1994. C. 373-565.
10. Kant I. Metafizika nravov / Kant I. Sochineniya. V 8-mi t. T. 6. – M.: Choro, 1994. C. 223-543.
11. Moran K., Timmerman P. Kant on Punishment, Pardon, and Forgiveness / Conflict and resolution: the ethics of forgiveness, revenge, and punishment. – Cham: Springer, 2022. P. 229-238.
12. Kant I. Metafizika nravov / Kant I. Sochineniya na nemeckom i rus-skom yazykah: v 5 t. Metafizika nravov: v 2 ch. T. 5. Ch. 2: Metafiziche-skie osnovnye nachala ucheniya o dobrodeteli. – M.: Kanon+, Reabilitaciya, 2019. T. 5. Ch. 2. – 488 s.
13. Kant I. Die Metaphysik der Sitten / Kant’s gesammelte Schriften. 2. Auflage (AA VI). – Berlin: Georg Reimer, 1914. – 549 S.
14. Kant I. The Metaphysics of Morals. – New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991. – 307 p.
15. Blöser С. Human Fallibility and the Need for Forgiveness // Philosophia. – 2019. – Vol. 47. – No. 1. – P. 1-19.
16. Satne P. Kantian Forgiveness: Fallibility, Guilt and the need to become a Better Person: Reply to Blöser // Philosophia. – 2020. – Vol. 48. – No. 5. – P. 1997-2019.
17. Kant I. Lekcii po etike / Kant I. Lekcii po etike. – M.: Respublika, 2000. S.  37-222.
18. Kant I. Religiya v predelah tolko razuma / Kant I. Sochineniya. V 8-mi t. T. 6. – M.: Choro, 1994. S. 5-222.
19. North J. Wrongdoing and Forgiveness // Philosophy. – 1987. – Vol. 62. – No. 242. – P. 499-508.
20. Konstan D. Before Forgiveness: The Origins of a Moral Idea. – New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010. – 192 p.
21. Stevenson L. Kant on Freewill, Grace and Forgiveness // Diametros. – 2014. – Vol. 39. – P. 125-139.
22. Kant I. Lekcii o filosofskom uchenii o religii (Redakciya K.G.L. Pyolica). – M.: Kanon+, Reabilitaciya, 2016. – 384 s.
23. Kant I. Antropologiya s pragmaticheskoj tochki zreniya / Kant I. Sochineniya. V 8-mi t. T. 7. – M.: Choro, 1994. S. 137-376.
24. Kant I. Osnovopolozheniya metafiziki nravov / Kant I. Sochineniya. V 8-mi t. T. 4. – M.: Choro, 1994. C. 153-246.
25. Herbert M. von. Erster Brief an Kant (August 1791) / Kant’s gesammelte Schriften. 2. Auflage: Briefwechsel; Bd. II: 1789-
1794 (AA XI). – Berlin: Georg Reimer, 1922. S. 273-274.
26. Langton R. Duty and Desolation // Philosophy. 1992. – Vol. 67 – No. 262. – P. 481-505.
27. Ritter B. Solace or Counsel for Death: Kant and Maria von Herbert / Women and Philosophy in Eighteenth-Century Germany. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021. P. 137-156.
28. Kant I. Pismo k Marii fon Gerbert (vesna 1792 g.) / Kant I. Sochineniya. V 8-mi t. T. 8. – M.: Choro, 1994. S. 546-549.
29. Looney A.T. Vladimir Jankélévitch: the time of forgiveness. – New York: Fordham University Press, 2015. – 382 p.
30. Yankelevich V. Proshenie / Yankelevich V. Proshenie. Ironiya. – M.: Respublika, 2004. S. 141-298.
31. Levinas E. Trudnaya svoboda: Ocherki po iudaizmu / Levinas E. Iz-brannoe: Trudnaya svoboda. – M.: ROSSPEN, 2004.
S. 319-590.
32. Lotz Ch. The events of morality and forgiveness: From Kant to Derrida // Research in Phenomenology. – 2006. – Vol. 36. – No. 1. – P. 255-273.
33. Rikyor P. Pamyat, istoriya, zabvenie. – M.: Izdatelstvo gumanitarnoj literatury, 2004. – 728 s.

I. Kant left to subsequent theology transcendental problems - the cognitive status of the concept of God, the adequacy of knowledge about Him, the role of the concept of God in the implementation of the tasks of reason, etc. By now, transcendental theology has undergone significant development, and many of its aspects have been adopted by neo-Protestantism. In a generalized form, transcendental theology appears to be a project of total rationalization and universalization of religion - religion "within the limits of reason alone". In this regard, two tasks are of interest: identifying its essential moments on the one hand and its genesis on the other. The article examines the features of modern transcendental theology as a direction of philosophical research laid down by I. Kant. They are identified based on the works of D. Bonhoeffer, B. Lonergan, K. Rahner, Sch. Ogden, M. Kowalik, and others. The features are: rationalization of all aspects of religion, understanding of dogmas as a priori ideas, reliance on universal principles of thinking and morality, agreement of religion with necessary logical and ontological truths, construction of a unified theory of interfaith normativity, etc. It is determined whether these substantive positions are inherited from the Kant's view of religion. A comparison of the highlighted points with Kant's theological ideas shows that this is largely not the case. Transcendental theology does indeed presuppose the a priori nature of religious ideas, the presence in religious doctrine of necessary ontological truths dependent on reason, broadly understood criticism, and a certain degree of autonomy of moral consciousness from religious consciousness, but in other points, including the rationality of religious principles, the possibility of proving the existence of God, and religious universalism, there is a significant discrepancy.

Keywords:

I. Kant, rationality, a priori, justification of the existence of God, universal religion, pure practical reason, ultimate goals of pure reason.

Anastasia A. Medova – Doctor of Philosophy, Associate Professor, Professor at the Department
of Philosophy and Social Sciences, Professor at the Department of Music and Art Education,
ORCID: https://orcid.org/ 0000-0002-0637-6741, e-mail: medova@kspu.ru.

1. Kant I. Kritika chistogo razuma [Critique of Pure Reason]. Moscow, Nauka, 1999, 655 р.
2. Kant I. Iz rukopisnogo naslediia (materialy k «Kritike chistogo razuma», Opus postumum) [From the manuscript heritage (materials for the Critique of Pure Reason, Opus postumum)]. Moscow, Progress-Traditsiia, 2000, 752 p.
3. McGrath Alister E. Bogoslovskaia mysl' reformatsii [Reformation thought an introduction]. Odessa, Odesskaia bibleiskaia shkola «Bogomyslie», 1994, 146 p.
4. Wolff Ch. Philosophia rationalis sive Logica, methodoscientifica pertractata et ad usum scientiarum atque vitaeaptata. Franfurt; Leipzig, Renger, 1732, 866 p.
5. Kryshtop L.E. Khristian Vol'f i Immanuil Kant o bytii Boga [Christian Wolf and Immanuil Kant on the Existence of God]. Kantian Journal, 2022, vol. 4, pp. 7-37. 
6. Höffe, O. Transcendental Theology. In: Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. Studies in German Idealism, 2009, vol. 10, pp. 301–315. 
7. Pasternack L. Kant’s Philosophy of Religion. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Summer 2022 Edition. Ed. Edward
N. Zalta, available at: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2022/entries/kant-religion/ (date of application 30.09.2024).
8. Muck O. The transcendental method. Trans. by W. D. Seidensticker. New York, Herder & Herder, 1968, 347 р.
9. Hall G. The Three Turns in Modern Theology: Transcendental, Political and Liberation Theologies. Issues in systematic theology, available at: https://resource.acu.edu.au/gehall/systematic1.htm (date of application 01.10.2024).
10. Pilipenko E.A. Predikaty Boga v diskurse transtsendental'nogo tomizma [Predicates of God in the Discourse of Transcendental Thomism]. Works of the Department of Theology of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy, 2024, no. 2 (22), available at:  https://bogoslov.ru/article/6196681?ysclid=lz9axlu4k831899771 (date of application 01.10.2024).
11. Lonergan B., S.J. Metod v teologii [Method in theology]. Moscow, Institut filosofii, teologii i istorii sviatogo Fomy, 2010, 400 p.
12. Bonhoeffer D. Act and Being: Transcendental Philosophy and Ontology in Systematic Theology. Edited by Wayne Whitson Floyd, JR. Minneapolis, Fortress Press, 1996, XI + 237 р.
13. Rahner K. Christianity and the Non-Christian Religions (Theological investigations V). Rahner K. Theological investigations. London, Darton, Longman & Todd; New York, Seabury press, 1974, pp. 115-134.
14. Ogden Sch. M. Doing Theology Today. Valley Forge, PA, Trinity Press International, 1996, XII + 272 p.
15. Kowalik M. Transcendental Theology for Non-Believers. Afr. J. Humanit. & Soc. Sci., 2022, vol. 2 (1), рр. 30-37. DOI: doi.org/10.51483/AFJHSS.2.1.2022.30-37
16. Kant I. Lektsii o filosofskom uchenii o religii (redaktsiia K. G. L. Pelitsa) [Lectures on the philosophical doctrine of religion (edited by K. G. L. Poelitz)]. Moscow, Kanon+ ROOI «Reabilitatsiia», 2016, 384 p.
17. Rahner K. Iisus Khristos. Transtsendental'naia khristologiia [Jesus Christ. Transcendental Christology]. EINAI: Philosophy. Religion. Culture, 2021, vol. 10, no. 1 (19), pp. 236-260.
18. Kant I. Religiia v predelakh tol'ko razuma [Religion Within the Limits of Reason Alone]. Sochineniia. Moscow, Choro, 1994, vol. 6, pp. 5-223.
19. Maler A.M. Transtsendental'naia teologiia Kanta [Kant's transcendental theology]. Forum of Young Kantologists. Moscow, Institut filosofii Rossiiskoi akademii nauk, 2005, pp. 88-98.
20. Ogden Sch. M. Toward Doing Theology. The Journal of Religion, 1995, vol. 75, no. 1, pp. 1-14.
21. Polomoshnov P.A. Svoboda i predopredelenie v religioznoi antropologii: islam i khristianstvo [Freedom and predestination in religious anthropology: Islam and Christianity]. Islamic Studies, 2017, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 77-83. 
22. Kant I. Sochineniia. Tom 5. Kritika sposobnosti suzhdeniia [Works. Vol. 5. Critique of the faculty of judgment]. Moscow, Choro, 1994, 414 p.
23. Kant I. Osnovy metafiziki nravstvennosti [Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals]. Sochineniia. Moscow, Choro, 1994, vol. 4, 630 p.
24. Kant I. Edinstvenno vozmozhnoe osnovanie dlia dokazatel'stva bytiia Boga [The only possible basis for proving the existence of God]. Sochineniia. Moscow, Choro, 1994, vol. 1, pp. 383-498.
25. Hendry G.S. The Transcendental Method in the Theology of Karl Barth. Scottish Journal of Theology, 1984, vol. 37(2), pp. 213-227.
26. Crowe B.D. Fichte's Transcendental Theology. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie, 2010, vol. 92, iss. 1, pp. 68–88.
27. Moloney R.S.J. The Mind of Christ in Transcendental Theology: Rahner, Lonergan and Crowe. The Heythrop Journal, 1984, vol. 25, iss. 3, pp. 288-300.
28. Ypi L. The Architectonic of Reason: Purposiveness and Systematic Unity in Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2021, 193 р.
29. Avakian S. The ‘Other’ in Karl Rahner’s Transcendental Theology and George Khodr’s Spiritual Theology: Within the Near Eastern Context. Thesis. Peter Lang, 2012, 298 р, available at:  https://beckassets.blob.core.windows.net/product/toc/11610318/ 9783631634301_toc_003.pdf (date of application 01.10.2024).
30. Ogden Sch. M. Is There Only One True Religion or Are There Many? Dallas, Southern Methodist University Press, 1992, 114 р.

Despite the temporal and conceptual distance between the doctrines of Augustine and Kant, their thinking reveals many kindred ideas. On the one hand, this allows us to classify them according to the topics of Kant's three "Critiques" and to read Augustine in a Kantian way. In the sphere of theoretical philosophy, the central point they have in common is apriorism, which in the modernity became the basis for promoting the leading role of the subject in cognition. And although Kant declared himself to have accomplished this "Copernican revolution" in philosophy, Augustine in this regard is rightfully considered to be the "first man of modernity". In practical philosophy, their closeness is noticeable in Augustine's proof of the immortality of the soul, which anticipates Kant's postulate of pure practical reason. In the field of aesthetics, the congeniality of the thinkers manifests itself in a fundamental way in that both speak of aesthetic pleasure as "disinterested pleasure", and in that both Augustine and Kant differentiate between the forms of rational (logical) and aesthetic judgments. On the other hand, however, to fathom the depth of the logical development of philosophy in its history, it is especially important to try to read Kant in an Augustinian way in the general methodological aspect. In their efforts to implement the project of metaphysics, both philosophers proceed from the (skeptical) criticism of dogmatism. But while Kant confined thinking within the boundaries of subjectivity (appearance), Augustine dialectically sublated them, showing that the subject exhausts appearance within itself and therefore possesses true (objective) knowledge. The main thing is that, through the historico-philosophical narrative of the crypto-Platonism of the New Academy, Augustine integrates skepticism into the purposeful process of the development of philosophy, contributing to a better understanding of the fact that Kant’s criticism is incorporated into the organic unity of universal philosophical logic.

Keywords:

Kant, Augustine, interpretation, congeniality, apriorism, immortality of the soul, aesthetic judgment, skepticism, criticism.

Andrey Ar. Tashchian – Candidate of Philosophical Sciences, Associate Professor,
Associate Professor at the Department of Philosophy, Theology and Religious Studies,
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9869-3620, e-mail: tashchian@kubsu.ru.

1. Fischer N. Augustinische Motive in der Philosophie Immanuel Kants (1724–1804). Augustinus Spuren und Spiegelungen seines Denkens. Bd. 2. Von Descartes bis in die Gegenwart. Hrsg. von N. Fischer. Hamburg, Felix Meiner, 2009, pp. 89-110.

2. Kant I. Gesammelte Schriften. Bd. 2. Vorkritische Schriften II. Berlin, Georg Reimer, 1912, VIII, 526 p.

3. Kant I. Gesammelte Schriften. Bd. 29. Kleinere Vorlesungen und Ergänzungen I. Berlin, de Gruyter, 1980, 742 p.

4. Kant I. Gesammelte Schriften. Bd. 8. Abhandlungen nach 1781. Berlin und Leipzig, de Gruyter, 1923, VIII, 531 p.

5. Seneca L.A. Dialogorum libri duodecim. Oxonii, e typographeo Clarendoniano, 1977, 14 p.

6. Bobko A. Augustine and Kant: two founders of modern thinking. Studia z Historii Filozofii, 2019, vol. 10, no. 3. Methodological problems in the history of philosophy, ss. 27-38. DOI: org/10.12775/szhf.2019.029

7. Fichte J.G. Die Grundzüge des gegenwärtigen Zeitalters. Leipzig, Felix Meiner, 1908, 251 p.

8. Hegel G.W.F. Werke in 20 Bde. Bd. 8. Enzyklopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften im Grundrisse: 1830. Teil 1. Die Wissenschaft der Logik: mit den mündlichen Zusätzen. Frankfurt am Main, Suhrkamp, 1989, 203 p.

9. Jaspers K. Plato, Augustin, Kant: Drei Gründer des Philosophierens. München, R. Piper & Co, 1957, 11 p.

10. Jansen B. Augustinus und Kant. Um Methode und Inhalt der Metaphysik. Philosophisches Jahrbuch, 1930, Bd. 43, pp. 18-40.

11. Knasas J.F.X. The augustinian approach to God and Kantian epistemology. Angelicum, 2006, vol. 83, no. 4, pp. 819-833.

12. Kant I. Gesammelte Schriften. Bd. 4. Kritik der reinen Vernunft. 1 Aufl. Berlin, Georg Reimer, 1911, VIII, 655 p.

13. Kant I. Gesammelte Schriften. Bd. 3. Kritik der reinen Vernunft. 2 Aufl. Berlin, Georg Reimer, 1911, X, 594 p.

14. Hegel G.W.F. Werke in 20 Bde. Bd. 20. Vorlesungen über die Geschichte der Philosophie III. Frankfurt am Main, Suhrkamp, 1986, 566 p.

15. Sell K. Aus der Geschichte des Christentums: Sechs Vorlesungen. Darmstadt: Johannes Waitz, 1888, 43 p.

16. Harnack A. Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte. Bd. 3. Freiburg, Akademische Verlagsbuchhandlung von J.C.B. Mohr
(P. Siebeck), 1890, 97 p.

17. Ahlberg A. Augustinus – den första moderna människan. Uppsala, J.A. Lindblads, 1952, 227 p.

18. Ratzinger J. Gesammelte Schriften. Bd. 1. Volk und Haus Gottes in Augustins Lehre von der Kirche. Freiburg, Basel, Wien, Herder, 2011, pp. 697-704.

19. Marrou H.-I. Saint Augustin et la fin de la culture antique. Paris, De Boccard, 1983, 691 p.

20. Marías J. Historia de la filosofía. Madrid, Revista de Occidente, 1980, 115 p.

21. Wetzel J. Augustine’s short history of philosophy. Theology and Philosophy: Faith and Reason. London, T&T Clark, 2012,
pp. 89–101.

22. Arango J.N. Huellas de San Agustín en Kant. Santa Marta, Unimagdalena, 2023, 123 p.

23. Sanctus Aurelius Augustinus. Confessionum libri XIII. Berlin, New York, de Gruyter, 2009, XXXII, 397 p.

24. Streubel Th. Das Wesen der Zeit: Zeit und Bewusstsein bei Augustinus, Kant und Husserl. Würzburg, Königshausen & Neumann, 2006, 55 p.

25. Enders M. Kritische Anmerkungen zu einer «kantischen» Augustinus-Interpretation. Münchener theologische Zeitschrift, 1995. Bd. 45, no. 3, pp. 333-342.

26. Bessner W. Augustins Bekenntnisse als Erneuerung des Philosophierens. 13 Vorlesungen zur Geschichte der Philosophie von Augustinus bis Boethius gehalten an der Universität Hamburg. Cuxhaven, Junghans, 1991, 108 p.

27. Kant I. Kritik der reinen Vernunft. Hamburg, Felix Meiner, 1967, XVI, 778 p.

28. Augustinus. De musica. Berlin, Boston, de Gruyter, 2017, VIII, 237 p.

29. Delahaye K. Die „memoria-interior“ – Lehre des heiligen Augustinus und der Begriff der „transzendentalen Apperzeption“ Kants. Versuch eines historisch-systematischen Vergleichs. Abhandlungen zur Philosophie und Psychologie der Religion, 1936. H. 38/39. Würzburg, C.J. Becker Universitäts-Druckerei, XV, 166 p.

30. Lachièze-Rey P. Saint Augustin précurseur de Kant dans la théorie de la perception. Augustinus Magister I. Paris, Études Augustiniennes, 1954, pp. 425–428.

31. Aurelius Augustinus. Contra academicos. De beata vita. De ordine. Berlin, Boston, de Gruyter, 2017, LXII, 188 p.

32. Ricœur P. Le conflit des interprétations. Essais d’herméneutique. Paris, Éditions du Seuil, 1969, 507 p.

33. Kant I. Gesammelte Schriften. Bd. 5. Kritik der praktischen Vernunft. Kritik der Urtheilskraft. Berlin, Georg Reimer, 1913, XII, 544 p.

34. Patrologiae cursus completus: series Latina. T. 42. Parisiis, 1886, 1236 col.

35. Svoboda K. L'esthétique de Saint Augustin et ses sources. Brno, Filosofická fakulta s podporou Ministerstva školství a národní osvěty, 1933, 205 p.

36. Schiller F. Sämtliche Werke. Bd. 5. München, Carl Hanser, 1962, 656 p.

37. Bychkov O.V. Aesthetic revelation: reading ancient and medieval texts after Hans Urs von Balthasar. Washington, DC, The Catholic University of America Press, 2010, 216 p.

38. Szychowski A. Una lectura estética de la aequalitas en el De musica de Agustín de Hipona. Patristica et Mediævalia, 2022, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 25-41. DOI: org/10.34096/petm.v43.n2.10949

39. Sanctus Aurelius Augustinus. Soliloquorum libri duo. De immortalitate animae. De quantitate animae. Wien, Hölder, Pichler, Tempsky, 1986, 49-53 p.

40. Kant I. Gesammelte Schriften. Bd. 6. Die Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der bloßen Vernunft. Die Metaphysik der Sitten. Berlin, Georg Reimer, 1914, X, 549 p.

The article examines the practical philosophy of the German Enlightenment thinker Christian Augustus Crusius and compares it with the ethics of Immanuel Kant. The study of Crusius' moral philosophy is necessary in connection with his probable influence on Kant's moral teaching. The research attempts to establish this influence through a textual analysis of the texts of these thinkers devoted to practical issues. The purpose of the article is to identify the main provisions in the ethics of Crusius, as well as in the precritical and critical moral philosophy of Kant, comparing Kant's reflections from different periods with the teachings of the above author in order to find the prerequisites for influence. The first part outlines the teachings of Christian Augustus Crusius described by him in the treatise A Guide to a reasonable life. The second part compares Cruzian propositions with Kant's calculations in terms of moral philosophy. In the Conclusion, the author infers that similar provisions have been found, which allow us to talk about the influence of Crusius on Kant in an ethical sense. Thus, similar views of thinkers on virtue and the importance of freedom are noted. Both philosophers talk about the need for retribution in response to morality, as well as the role of cognitive abilities in achieving virtue. In addition, the attitude of Crusius and Kant to the role of God in ethics is important. If Crusius postulates the Creator as the main figure of his moral philosophy, then Kant denies his prevailing importance for ethics. However, in both the early and later writings of the Konigsberg philosopher, we see an indication of the nevertheless enduring importance of God for the doctrine of morality, which brings his views closer to the Crusian ones. In addition, we can trace the elements of influence in the formation of the types of imperative in Kant and the distinction between intention and action in morality. 

Keywords:

Kant, Crusius, reason, freedom, ethics, morality, practical philosophy, German Enlightenment.

Anastasia V. Povecherova – Junior Researcher at the Sector of the History of Western Philosophy,
ORCID: https://orcid.org /  0000-0001-7217-7399, e-mail: anastasiapovecherova@gmail.com.

1. Crusius, Chr. A. Anweisung vernünftig zu leben. Leipzig, J.F. Gleditsch, 1767. 
2. Kharitonova A.M. Mashina i telo v transtsendental'noi kosmologii Khr. Vol'fa i. Khr. A. Kruziia [Machine and body in the transcendental cosmology of Chr. Wolff and Chr. A. Crusius]. Kantian Journal, 2013, no. 1, pp. 7–22.
3. Kryshtop L. E. Moral' i religiia v filosofii nemetskogo Prosveshcheniia: ot Khr. Tomaziia do I. Kanta [Morality and religion in the philosophy of the German Enlightenment: from Chr. Thomasius to I. Kant]. Moscow, 2020, 528 p.
4. Crusius Chr. A. Entwurf der nothwendigen Vernunft-Wahrheiten, wiefern sie den zufälligen entgegen gesetzet werden. Leipzig, 1766.
5. Kryshtop L. E. Moral'noe uchenie Khristiana Avgusta Kruziia [Moral teaching of Christian Augustus Crusius]. Ethical Thought, 2018, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 30 - 42.
6. Kant I. Osnovopolozhenie k metafizike nravov [Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals]. Sochineniia na nemetskom i russkom iazykakh [Works in German and Russian]. Ed. N. V. Motroshilovoi, B. Tushlinga. Moscow, Moskovskii filosofskii fond, 1997, vol.3, pp. 39 - 276.
7. Kant I. Issledovanie otchetlivosti printsipov estestvennoi teologii i morali [Investigation of the distinctness of the principles of natural theology and morality]. Sochineniia [Works]. Ed. A. V. Gulygi. Moscow, Choro, 1994, vol. 2, pp. 159 - 185.
8. Kant I. Kritika prakticheskogo razuma [Criticism of practical reason]. Sochineniia na nemetskom i russkom iazykakh [Works in German and Russian]. Ed. N. V. Motroshilovoi, B. Tushlinga. Moscow, Moskovskii filosofskii fond, 1997, vol. 3, pp. 277 - 694.
9. Kant I. Religiia v predelakh tol'ko razuma [Religion within the Limits of Reason Alone]. Sochineniia [Works]. Ed. A. V. Gulygi. Moscow, Choro, 1994, vol. 6, pp. 5 - 223.
10. Kant I. Metafizika nravov [Metaphysics of Morals]. [Works in German and Russian]. Ed. N. V. Motroshilovoi, B. Tushlinga. Moscow, Kanon+, vol. 5, part 2, 488 p.
11. Kant I. Nabliudeniia nad chuvstvom prekrasnogo i vozvyshennogo [Observations on the feeling of the beautiful and the sublime]. Sochineniia [Works]. Ed. A. V. Gulygi. Moscow, Choro, 1994, vol. 2, pp. 85 - 128.
12. Kruglov A. N. Problema optimizma u Kanta: vozniknovenie spora [The Problem of Optimism in Kant: The Emergence of a Dispute]. Kantian Journal, 2018, no. 37 (1), pp. 9 - 24.
13. Fetisova D. E. Zakon dostatochnogo osnovaniia v nemetskoi filosofii epokhi Prosveshcheniia [The Law of Sufficient Reason in German Philosophy of the Enlightenment]. Kantian Journal, 2013, no. 4 (46), pp. 64 - 75.
14. Ciafardone R. Über das Primat der praktischen Vernunft vor der theoretischen bei Thomasius und Crusius in Beziehung auf Kant. Studia Leibnitiana, 1982, Bd. 14, pp. 127 - 135.
15. Klemme H. Moralisches Sollen, Autonomie und Achtung: Kants Konzeption der „libertas indifferentiae“zwischen Wolff und Crusius. Recht und Frieden in der Philosophie Kants. Akten des X. Internationalen Kant-Kongress. Bd. 5. Hrsg. von V. Rohden. Berlin, 2008, pp. 215 - 227.
16. Kryshtop L. E. Bozhestvennyi zakon ili kategoricheskii imperativ: o kruzianskikh istokakh kantovskoi morali [Divine Law or Categorical Imperative: On the Crusian Origins of Kantian Morality]. Kantian Journal, 2019, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 31- 44.
17. Bolotov A. T. Zhizn' i prikliucheniia Andreia Bolotova: Opisannye samim im dlia svoikh potomkov. Tom 1: 1738-1759 [The Life and Adventures of Andrei Bolotov: Described by Himself for His Descendants. Vol. 1: 1738-1759]. Moscow, TERRA, 1993, 577 p.
18. Zhuchkov V. A. Iz istorii nemetskoi filosofii XVIII v. Predklassicheskii period. Ot vol'fovskoi shkoly do rannego Kanta [From the history of German philosophy of the 18th century. Pre-classical period. From the Wolffian school to early Kant]. Moscow, 1996, 260 p.
19. Carboncini S. Einleitung. Crusius Chr. A. Die philosophischen Hauptwerke. Bd. 4.1. Hrsg. von S. Carboncini, R. Finster. Hildesheim, 1987, pp. I - XXXVI.
20. Tonelli G. Vorwort. Crusius Chr. A. Die philosophischen Hauptwerke. Bd. 1: Crusius Chr. A. Anweisung vernünftig zu leben. Hrsg. von G. Tonelli. Hildesheim, 1969, pp. VII - LXV.
21. Finster R. Zur Kritik von Christian August Crusius an der Theorie der einfachen Substanzen bei Leibniz und Wolff. Studia Leibnitiana, 1986, Bd. 18, pp. 72 - 82.

This text opens a series of articles devoted to the role of sensuality in the synthesis of experience. The project assumes an approach to a constructivist reading of Immanuel Kant's doctrine from the history of philosophy view point. To implement the plan, it is necessary, firstly, to present an exposition of Kant's problems of the synthesis of experience. Secondly, to show the inadequacy of schematism as a way of overcoming the gap between concept and intuition. Thirdly, to explore the possibilities of bridging this gap using the doctrine of the Jewish philosopher Solomon Maimon as an example. Fourthly, to demonstrate the gradual weakening of the modern primacy of the rational over the sensual (as well as form over matter, concept over intuition, actual over potential, etc.). Fifthly, to present a constructivist reading of the problem of the synthesis of experience, which assumes a movement from sensuality to concept (I. Stengers, S. Shaviro).

The purpose of the first article is to reveal the problem of synthesis of experience in I. Kant’s and S. Maimon’s philosophies (that is, to consider the first points of the outlined plan). The film "Colors of Math" (directed by Ekaterina Eremenko) will help to realize the set goal more clearly.

The article shows that both Kant and Maimon agree with the modern primacy of the rational over the sensual, but they offer different solutions to the issue of synthesis of experience. If Kant demonstrates the need to categorize sensory data by means of schemes, then S. Maimon is inclined to total intellectualism, declaring sensuality "imperfect understanding", thereby bypassing the problem of schematism. Although Maimon can be suspected of returning to pre-critical philosophy, this does not deny the value of his teaching. In particular, the following elements of Maimon's teaching will be in demand in later philosophical projects: the elimination of the gap between concept and intuition, an original philosophical interpretation of Leibniz's concept of the differential, as well as an examination of understanding in its constant development.

Keywords:

transcendental philosophy, I. Kant, S. Maimon, synthesis of experience, schematism, philosophy of mathematics, cinema studies, Ekaterina Eremenko, documentary film.

Natalya V. Stolbova – Candidate of Sciences (Philosophy), Associate Professor
at the Philosophy and Law Department, Perm National Research Polytechnic University,
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6103-367X, e-mail: pilthekid@mail.ru.

1. Ekaterina Eremenko Films, avaible at: http://www.eefilms.de/ (accessed 28 August 2024).
2. Belokobyl'sky I. Tri tsvetnykh mira Ekateriny Eremenko: matematika, moda, kino [Three colored worlds of Ekaterina Eremenko: mathematics, fashion, cinema], Iskry, avaible at: https://iskry.life/culture/tri-cvetnyh-mira-ekateriny-eryomenko (accessed 28 August 2024).
3. Korkina E. Odin chelovek, dve strany, tri obrazovaniia i chetyre fil'ma [One person, two countries, three entities and four films]. Irkutskii reporter. 29.04.2013, avaible at: https://www.vsp.ru/2013/04/29/odin-chelovek-dve-strany-tri-obrazovaniya-i-chetyre-filma/ (accessed 28 August 2024).
4. Larina Yu. «Mnogie rezhissery imeiut vtoruiu professiiu» [“Many directors have a second profession”]. Ogonek. 15.04.2013, avaible at: https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/2165570#id857572 (accessed 28 August 2024).
5. Maimon S. Avtobiografiia [Autobiography]. Moscow, Knizhniki, 2016, 348[4] p.
6. Bergson A. Opyt o neposredstvennykh dannykh soznaniia [An Experience of the Immediate Data of Consciousness]. Sobranie sochinenii. Tom 1 [Collected Works. Vol. 1]. Moscow, 1992, pp. 50-156.
7. Stengers I. Thinking with Whitehead: a free and wild creation of concepts. Cambridge, Massachusetts, and London, England, Harvard University Press, 2011, 531 p.
8. Whitehead A.N. Process and Reality. New York, The Free Press, 1929/1978.
9. Deleuze J., Guattari F. Anti-Edip: Kapitalizm i shizofreniia [Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia]. Ekaterinburg, U-Faktoriia, 2008, 672 p.
10. Shaviro S. Vne kriteriev: Kant, Uaitkhed, Delez i estetika [Beyond Criteria: Kant, Whitehead, Deleuze and Aesthetics]. Perm', Hyle Press, 2018, 210 p.
11. Regev Y. Radikal'nyi ti-dzheing [Radical Tjing]. Perm', Hyle Press, 2021, 120 p.
12. Yakovenko B. Filosofskaia kontseptsiia Salomona Maimona [Philosophical concept of Salomon Maimon]. Voprosy filosofii i psikhologii. Moscow, Tipo-litograficheskie Tovarishchestva I. N. Kushnerev i K°, 1912. God XXIII, book 114 (IV), pp. 568-614; god XXIII, book 115 (V), pp. 619-666.
13. Eremenko E. Chuvstvennaia matematika [Sensual Mathematics], avaible at: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2293548/ (accessed 28 August 2024).
14. Kant I. Kritika chistogo razuma [Critique of Pure Reason]. Saint Petersburg, Nauka, 2008, 607 p.
15. Kant I. Prolegomeny ko vsiakoi budushchei metafizike, kotoraia mozhet poiavit'sia kak nauka [Prolegomena to any future metaphysics that may appear as a science]. Moscow; Berlin, Direkt-Media, 2020, 136 p.
16. Aristotle. O dushe [On the Soul]. Aristotel' Sobranie sochinenii. Tom 1 [Aristotle Collected Works. Vol. 1]. Moscow, Mysl', 1976, pp. 369-450.
17. Cohen G. Teoriia opyta Kanta [Kant's Theory of Experience]. Moscow, Akademicheskii proekt, 2020, 618 p.
18. Hegel G. Lektsii po istorii filosofii. Kniga 3 [Lectures on the history of philosophy. Book 3]. Sochineniia. Tom IX [Works.
Vol. IX]. Moscow; Leningrad, 1936, 528 p.
19. Schopenhauer A. Kritika kantovskoi filosofii [Critique of Kantian Philosophy]. Sobranie sochinenii. Tom 1 [Collected Works. Vol. 1]. Moscow, TERRA - knizhnyi klub; Respublika, 1999, pp. 350-451.
20. Tyutyunnikov A.A. German Kogen: ideia transtsendental'nogo metoda (chast' I) [Hermann Cohen: the idea of the transcendental method (part I)]. PNRPU. Culture. History. Philosophy. Law, 2018, no. 2, pp. 7–26. DOI: 10.15593/perm.kipf/2018.2.01
21. Maimon S. Opyt transtsendental'noi filosofii [Experience of transcendental philosophy]. Saint Petersburg, Gumanitarnaia akademiia, 2017, 499 p.
22. Bergson A. Kinematograficheskii mekhanizm myshleniia [The Cinematographic Mechanism of Thinking]. Tvorcheskaia evoliutsiia. Glava 4 [Creative Evolution. Chapter 4]. Moscow, TERRA–knizhnyi klub; KANON-press-Ts, 2001, pp. 264-348.
23. Deleuze J. Kino [Cinema]. Moscow, Ad Marginem, 2004, 626 p.
24. Negarestani R. Ingumanisticheskoe (kratko) [The Inhuman (a quick read)]. Spacemorgue, avaible at: https://spacemorgue. com/the-inhuman-a-quick-read/ (accessed 6 August 2022).

The paper is devoted to the peculiarities of the reception of Kant's ideas in the E. Husserl's phenomenological doctrine of consciousness. The proposed comparative analysis is based on the problem of association and the concept of synthesis. The evolution of Husserl's attitude to Kant's transcendental philosophy is traced. The relevance of the research is caused not only by the historical and philosophical interest in clarifying the specifics of these philosophers’ attitude to the fundamental issues of the study of human consciousness but also by applied social tasks arising from the nature of their solution. The futility of the formal terminological way to compare the meanings these thinkers assign to the term “association”, proposed by E. Holenstein, is shown. The author, relying on the research of I. Kern, an independent analysis of the first and second editions of the Critique of Pure Reason, and texts from the extensive legacy of E. Husserl, insists on carrying out a meaningful analysis that leads to the identification of Kant's significance for the development of phenomenology. The study made it possible to determine the role of Kant's transcendental teaching in the implementation of a grandiose phenomenological project, in particular in Husserl's development of the problem of association, which is of fundamental importance in his teaching about consciousness, and enabled the fundamental differences between them to be pointed out. The significance of Kant's transcendental teaching for the phenomenological development of the problem of synthesis and association consisted in the following ideas: genetic problems, an indication of the pre-predicative basis that founds consciousness; the problem of passivity; the temporality of syntheses and the synthetics of time underlying the work of consciousness; an indication of the synthetics of pre-predicative experience; a priori and transcendental necessity of synthesis. Fundamental differences between them are as follows: the doctrine of association in phenomenology is possible only within the framework of phenomenological reduction; the formalism of Kant's teaching; the pronounced emphasis in Kant's understanding of consciousness on its active component, on production, opposes Husserl's emphasis on the founding “passive consciousness”; the possibility of a separate single perception in Kant and the impossibility of it in Husserl; Kant's understanding of synthesis does not provide a basis for substantiating the intersubjectivity of consciousness (the problem of the so-called “lonely consciousness”), while Husserl's passive genesis does it.

Keywords:

Kant's transcendental philosophy, E. Husserl's phenomenology, transcendental unity of apperception, association, synthesis, appregension, reproduction, recognition, I. Kern, E. Holenstein, Viktor I. Molchanov, static phenomenology, genetic phenomenology. 

Alexander A. Gutsalov – Candidate of Philosophy, Leading Researcher, Head,
Department for Complex Problems of Cultural Studies, ORCID: https://orcid.org/ 0000-0001-7986-3543,
e-mail: gutsalov_alex@mail.ru.

1. Kern I. Husserl and Kant: eine Untersuchung über Husserls Verhältnis zu Kant und zum Neukantianismus. Den Haag, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1964, 448 p.
2. Holenstein E. Die Phenomenologie der Assoziation. Zu Struktur and Funktion eines Grundprinzips der Passiven Genesis bei E. Husserl. Den Haag, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1972, 369 p.
3. Jamaguschi J. Passiven Synthesis and Intersubjektivitat bei Edmund Husserl. The Hague; Boston; London, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1982, 164 p.
4. Rubene M. Problema proshlogo v fenomenologicheskom uchenii o vremeni E. Gusserlia [The problem of the past in the phenomenological doctrine of time of E. Husserl]. Problemy soznaniia v sovremennoi burzhuaznoi filosofii. Vil'nius, Institut filosofii, sotsiologii i prava, 1983, pp. 68-87.
5. Molchanov V. I. Vremia i soznanie. Kritiki fenomenologicheskoi filosofii [Time and consciousness. Critics of phenomenological philosophy]. Moscow, Vysshaia shkola, 1988, 143 p.
6. Molchanov V. I. Razlichenie i opyt: fenomenologiia neagressivnogo soznaniia [Distinction and experience: the phenomenology of non-aggressive consciousness]. Moscow, Modest Kolerov i Izdatel'stvo «Tri kvadrata», 2004, 328 p.
7. Molchanov V. I. Transtsendental'nyi opyt i transtsendental'naia naivnost' v Kartezianskikh meditatsiiakh Edmunda Gusserlia [Transcendental experience and transcendental naivety in the Cartesian Meditations of Edmund Husserl]. Cartesianische Meditationen. Moscow, Akademicheskii Proekt, 2020, pp. 200-224.
8. Husserl E. Analysen zur passive Sinthesis // Edmund Husserl. Gesamelte Werke. Band XI. Analysen zur passiven Synthesis. Aus Vorlesungs- und Forschungsmanuskripten 1918–1926 / Edited by M. Fleischer. Den Haag, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1966, pp. 3-224.
9. Husserl E. Kants Kopernikanische Umdrehung and der Sinn einer Kopernikanischen Wendung überhaupt. Ha VII. Erste Philosophie I (1923–24). Kritische Ideengeschichte. Herausgegeben von R. Boehm. Haag, Martinus Nijhoff, 1956, pp. 208-229.
10. Leibniz G. V. Perepiska s S. Fushe [Correspondence with S. Fouché]. Sobranie sochinenii. Moscow, Institut filosofii Akademii nauk SSSR, Izdatel'stvo «Mysl'», 1984, vol. 3, pp. 267-296.
11. Kant I. Kritika chistogo razuma [Critique of Pure Reason]. Moscow, Eksmo, 2015, 736 p.
12. Husserl E. Kartezianskie meditatsii [Cartesian Meditations]. Moscow, Akademicheskii Proekt, 2020, 229 p.
13. Husserl E. Zur Auseinandersetzung meiner transzenedentalen Phanomenologie mit Kants Transzendentalphilosophie. Beilagen XX // Edmund Husserl. Gesamelte Werke. Band VII. Erste Philosophie I (1923–24). Erster Teil. Kritische Ideengeschichte / Herausgegeben von R. Boehm. Haag, Martinus Nijhoff, 1956, pp. 381-395.
14. Heidegger M. Kant i problemy metafiziki [Kant and the Problems of Metaphysics]. Moscow, Logos, 1997, 196 p.
15. Husserl E. Kant und die Philosophie des Deutschen Idealismus. Beilage XXI // Edmund Husserl. Gesamelte Werke. Band VII. Erste Philosophie I (1923–24). Erster Teil. Kritische Ideengeschichte / Herausgegeben von R. Boehm. Haag, Martinus Nijhoff, 1956, pp. 396-405.
16. Husserl E. Krizis evropeiskikh nauk i transtsendental'naia fenomenologiia [The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology ]. Ed. Ia. A. Slinin. Moscow, Vladimir Dal', 2022, 399 p.
17. Husserl E. Ein schwieriger Punkt der Kritik Deacartes (1923). Beilage XI // Edmund Husserl. Gesamelte Werke. Band VII. Erste Philosophie I (1923–24). Erster Teil. Kritische Ideengeschichte / Herausgegeben von R. Boehm. Haag, Martinus Nijhoff, 1956, pp. 335-342.
18. Locke J. Opyt o chelovecheskom razumenii [An Essay Concerning Human Understanding]. Sochineniia. Eds. I. S. Narskii,
A. L. Subbotin. Moscow, Mysl', 1985, vol. 1, pp. 78-582.
19. Hume. D. Traktat o chelovecheskoi prirode [A Treatise on Human Nature]. Sochineniia. Moscow, Mysl', 1996, vol. 1, pp. 53-656.
20. Kant I. Kritika chistogo razuma [Critique of Pure Reason]. Sochineniia. Ed. T. I. Oizerman. Moscow, Mysl', 1964, vol. 3, pp. 69-756.
21. Husserl E. Erste Fassung des Textzusammenhangs zwischen §12 und §40 (1920/21) // Edmund Husserl. Gesamelte Werke. Band XI. Analysen zur passiven Synthesis. Aus Vorlesungs- und Forschungsmanuskripten 1918–1926. Ergänzende Texte / Edited by M. Fleischer. Haag, Martinus Nijhoff, 1966, pp. 225-290.
22. Husserl E. Ideen zu einer reinen Phanomenologie und Phanomenologischen Philosophie. Erster Buch. Allgemeine Einführung in die reine Phanomenoligie. Neu herausgegeben von K. Schuhmann. Dordrecht; Boston; London, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1995, 476 p.
 

In the correspondence between A.A. Blok and Andrei Bely, the names of I. Kant and F. Nietzsche are encountered very often and in clear opposition to each other. The Russian symbolists considered Kant to be the embodiment of classical philosophy and Nietzsche to be the creator of new values, the creator of an innovative, non-classical “philosophy of life”. Bely initially assessed Kant's philosophy as an important stage in the development of European philosophy, without whose “criticism” there would be no philosophy of Nietzsche. But then he succumbed to the mood of Blok, who saw in Kant the embodiment of all that is most negative in Western civilization – its philistine limitations and unwillingness to change and to discern the mystical depths of life. As a result, in the correspondence between Blok and Bely, a truly mythological image arises of a “frightened” Kant, hiding behind a screen and afraid of life. Blok expressed this image in his famous poem Frightened. Against Kant's philosophy with its defense of immutability, unambiguity and limitations, which hinder the revelation of life's inner potentials, Blok and Bely put forward Nietzsche's philosophy as a proclamation of life and creativity, in all their irrationality, as the main values, more important than law and truth. However, in the last years of his life, Blok suddenly moves to a more complex image of Kant. In the article The Collapse of Humanism (1919), Blok, along with his previous assessments of Kant in regard to his theory of knowledge as the main ideologist of Western civilization, calls him a “crazy mystic”, “mad artist” and “monstrous revolutionary” for his theory of space and time. Apparently, Blok saw in this theory what some modern researchers see in it: the idea of an intuitive fusion of consciousness with God and the world, and intuitive knowledge of the essence of all things. In this component, Kant's philosophy directly anticipates Nietzsche's philosophy and its mysticism.

Keywords:

A.A. Blok, Andrei Bely, I. Kant, F. Nietzsche, rationalism, Russian symbolism, space, time.

Inga Yu. Matveeva - Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor, the Department
of Literature and Art, ORCID: https://orcid.org /0000-0003-2211-2188, e-mail: inga.matveeva.spb@mail.ru

Igor I. Evlampiev - Doctor of Philosophy, Professor, Professor at the Department of Russian Philosophy
and Culture, ORCID: https://orcid.org /0000-0002-7209-2616, e-mail: yevlampiev@mail.ru

1. Soloviev V. S. Ideia sverkhcheloveka [The idea of the superman]. Mir iskusstva, 1899, vol. 1, Otd. III, pp. 87-91.
2. Blok A.A. Proza (1908-1916) [Prose (1908-1916)]. Polnoe sobranie sochinenii i pisem. Tom 8 [Complete set of works. Vol. 8]. Moscow, Nauka, 2010, 586 p.
3. Nietzsche F. Sumerki idolov, ili kak filosofstvuiut molotom [Twilight of the Idols, or How to Philosophize with a Hammer]. Polnoe sobranie sochinenii. Tom 6 [Complete set of works. Vol. 6]. Moscow, Kul'turnaia revoliutsiia, 2009, pp. 9-106.
4. Lavrov A.V. Predislovie [Preface]. Andrei Belyi, Aleksandr Blok. Perepiska. 1903-1919 [Andrei Bely, Alexander Blok. Correspondence. 1903-1919]. Moscow, Progress-Pleiada, 2001, pp. 3-12.
5. Magomedova D.M.  Perepiska kak tselostnyi tekst i istochnik siuzheta (Na materiale perepiski Bloka i Andreia Belogo, 1903-1908) [Correspondence as a holistic text and source of plot (Based on the correspondence between Blok and Andrei Bely, 1903-1908)]. Avtobiograficheskii mif v tvorchestve A. Bloka [Autobiographical myth in the works of A. Blok]. Moscow, «Martin», 1997, pp.111-130.
6. Bely A. Nachalo veka. Vospominaniia. Kniga 2 [Beginning of the Century. Memories. Book 2]. Moscow, Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1990, 687 p.
7. Bely A. Pochemu ia stal simvolistom i pochemu ia ne perestal im byt' vo vsekh fazakh moego ideinogo i khudozhestvennogo razvitiia [Why I became a symbolist and why I did not stop being one in all phases of my ideological and artistic development]. Simvolizm kak miroponimanie [Symbolism as a worldview]. Moscow, Respublika, 1994, pp. 418-493.
8. Kruglov A.N. Kant i kantovskaia filosofiia v russkoi khudozhestvennoi literature [Kant and Kantian philosophy in Russian fiction]. Moscow, Kanon+, 2012, 480 p.
9. Andrei Belyi, Aleksandr Blok. Perepiska. 1903-1919 [Andrei Bely, Alexander Blok. Correspondence. 1903-1919]. Moscow, Progress-Pleiada, 2001, 606 p.
10. Paperny V.M. Blok i Nitsshe [Blok and Nietzsche]. Uchenye zapiski Tartuskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Vypysk 91. Literaturovedenie. XXXI [Scientific Notes of Tartu State University. Issue 91. Literary criticism. XXXI]. Tartu, 1975, pp. 84-106.
11. Bely A. Krititsizm i simvolizm. Po povodu stoletiia so dnia smerti Kanta [Criticism and Symbolism. On the occasion of the centenary of Kant’s death]. Vesy. Moscow, 1904, no. 2, pp. 1-13.
12. Blok A.A. Stikhotvoreniia (1898-1904) [Poems (1898-1904)]. Polnoe sobranie sochinenii. Tom 1. Kniga 1 [Complete set of works. Vol. 1. Book 1]. Moscow, Nauka, 1997, 638 p.
13. Bely A. Simfoniia (2-ia dramaticheskaia) [Symphony (2nd dramatic)]. Sobranie sochinenii. Simfonii [Collected works. Symphonies]. Moscow, Dmitrii Sechin, 2014, pp. 55-145.
14. Blok A.A. Stikhotvoreniia (1904-1908) [Poems (1904-1908)]. Polnoe sobranie sochinenii i pisem. Tom 2. Kniga 2 [Complete works and letters. Vol. 2. Book 2]. Moscow, Nauka, 1997, 894 p.
15. Bely A. Sobranie sochinenii. Vospominaniia o Bloke [Collected works. Memories of Blok]. Moscow, Respublika, 1995, 510 p.
16. Blok A.A. Stikhotvoreniia (1907-1916) [Poems (1907-1916)]. Polnoe sobranie sochinenii i pisem. Tom 3. Kniga 3 [Complete collected works and letters. Vol. 3. Book 3].  Moscow, Nauka, 1997, 989 p.
17. Evlampiev I.I. Spor o roli lichnosti v istorii: roman F.M. Dostoevskogo «Podrostok» protiv romana L.N. Tolstogo «Voina i mir» [The debate about the role of personality in history: FM Dostoevsky's novel "The Teenager" versus L.N. Tolstoy's novel "War and Peace"]. Paradigma. Filosofsko-kul'turologicheskii al'manakh. Saint Petersburg, 2019, iss. 30, pp. 48-76.
18. Blok A.A. Stikhotvoreniia i poemy. 1917-1921 [Poems and poems. 1917-1921]. Polnoe sobranie sochinenii i pisem. Tom 5 [Complete set of works. Vol. 5]. Moscow, Nauka, 1999, 563 p.
19. Blok A.A. Proza (1903-1907) [Prose (1903-1907)]. Polnoe sobranie sochinenii i pisem. Tom 7 [Complete collected works and letters. Vol. 7]. Moscow, Nauka, 2003, 500 p.
20. Nietzsche F. Rozhdenie tragedii [The Birth of Tragedy]. Polnoe sobranie sochinenii. Tom 1. Chast` 1 [Complete Works.
Vol. 1. Part 1]. Moscow, Kul'turnaia revoliutsiia, 2012, pp. 83-91.
21. Blok A.A. Pis'ma. 1898-1921 [Letters. 1898–1921]. Sobranie sochinenii. Tom 8 [Collected Works. Vol. 8]. Moscow; Leningrad, Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1963, 171 p.
22. Blok A.A. Proza. 1918-1921 [Prose. 1918-1921]. Sobranie sochinenii. Tom 6 [Collected works. Vol. 6]. Moscow; Leningrad, Gosudarstvennoe izdatel'stvo khudozhestvennoi literatury, 1962, 556 p.
23. Matveeva I.Yu. «Vperedi - Isus Khristos»: emblema dukhovnoi revoliutsii v tvorchestve A. Bloka [“Jesus Christ Ahead”: the emblem of spiritual revolution in the works of A. Blok]. Solovyov Studies, 2024, no. 1(81), pp. 108-124.
24. Evlampiev I.I. I. Kant i traditsiia misticheskogo panteizma v evropeiskoi filosofii [Kant and the tradition of mystical pantheism in European philosophy]. RUDN Journal of Philosophy, 2024, no. 2, pp. 525-542.

This article, using the example of Latin American bioethical reflection that is only gaining momentum, will show the challenges of methodological search, difficulties in determining bioethical priorities, and balancing between utilitarianism and deontology. In the philosophy of ethics, there are different approaches to understanding moral priorities. Turning to the philosophy of Immanuel Kant allowed us to take a fresh look at the process of emergence of bioethical problems and understand the reasons for their ineffective solutions. The deontological system of I. Kant is analyzed, and the concepts of bioethics and the direction of its reflection, which bioethical knowledge gives us, are comprehended. A special place is given to Kant's critical theory for understanding the problems of Latin American bioethics from an epistemological position. The main challenges in the formation of the methodology of Latin American bioethical reflection are clarified. Application of Kant's ideas helps to understand how in Latin American bioethical thought the concepts of benefit and duty are not differentiated and often change places, and the problem of moral choice is left not in the hands of scientists or professional specialists but of ordinary people - patients. There is a clear utilitarian tendency in the Argentinian practice of implementing bioethical constructs. However, an understanding of the processes is possible through the tenets of classical German philosophy. The Kantian system allowed us to reveal the problem areas of Latin American bioethics, the main of which is that intellectuals (unlike ordinary people) find themselves practically freed from the challenges of bioethical choice. The underestimation of Kant's deontology in Latin American philosophy leads to limited methodology and a clearly narrowed range of solutions. In modern conditions, bioethics has not kept pace with the rapid development of medical science. Meanwhile, it is necessary to right now define the boundaries of what is allowed against the background of unprecedented progress in medical biotechnologies.

Keywords:

reproductive freedom, abortion, experiments on embryos, bioethics, rethinking, Immanuel Kant, deontology, utilitarianism, Latin America.

Sergey M. Druzhkin – Assistant, the Department of Philosophy and Social Sciences,
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0005-6157-1928, e-mail: solo_adelante@list.ru.

1. Ross D. Foundations of Ethics. London, Read Books Ltd, 2011, 352 p.
2. Schopenhauer A. Aforizmy zhiteiskoi mudrosti [Aphorisms of worldly wisdom]. Saint Petersburg, Aktsionernoe obshchestvo tipografii dela v Sankt Peterburge, 1910, 116 p.
3. Nefedova L.K. Fenomen detstva v osnovnykh formakh ego reprezentatsii [The phenomenon of childhood in the main forms of its representation]. Abstract of Doctor’s degree dissertation.  Omsk, 2005, 39 p.
4. Echeverria E. El matadero; La cautiva. Santafe de Bogota, Panamericana, 1996, 136 p. 
5. Alberdi H. Prestuplenie voiny [Crime of war]. Moscow, Izdatel`stvo inostrannoi literatury, 1960, 256 p.
6. Sarmiento D.F. Obras de D.F. Sarmiento. Buenos Aires, Imprenta y Litografia "Mariano Moreno", 1897, 399 p. 
7. Lopez V.F. Historia de la Republica Argentina su origen, su revolucion y su desarrollo politico hasta 1852. Buenos Aires, Impr. de G. Kraft, 1890, 786 p. 
8. Frondizi R. What is value? La Salle, Ill, Open Court, 1963, 147 p.
9. Frondizi R. Introducción a los problemas fundamentales del hombre. México, Fondo de Cultura Económica, 1997, 585 p. 
10. Bentham J. An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1907, 378 p.
11. Stolzenberg J. Kant i meditsina [Kant and Medicine]. Kantian Journal, 2014, no. 4, pp. 61-80. DOI: org/10.5922/0207-6918-2014-4-5
12. Kant I. Kritika chistogo razuma [Critique of Pure Reason]. Moscow, Nauka, 1999, 655 p.
13. Kant I. Kritika sposobnosti suzhdeniia [Critique of the faculty of judgment]. Moscow, Iskusstvo, 1994, 367 p.
14. Luna F. Infertilidad en Latinoamérica. En busca de un nuevo modelo. Revista de Bioética y Derecho, 2013, no. 28, pp. 33-47. DOI: org/10.4321/S1886-58872013000200004
15. Jiang S., Regan H., Berlinger J. China suspends scientists who claim to have produced first gene-edited babies, avaible at: https://edition.cnn.com/2018/11/29/health/china-gene-editing-he-jiankui-intl/index.html (accessed 1 May 2024).
16. Luna F. Isonomía. Revista de Teoría y Filosofía Del Derecho, 1998, no. 8, pp. 43-62.
17. Luna F. Edición genética y responsabilidad. Revista de Bioética y Derecho, 2019, no. 47, pp. 43-54.
18. Kant I. Kritika prakticheskogo razuma [Critique of Practical Reason]. Moscow, Eksmo, 2023, 288 p.
19. Kant I. Osnovy metafiziki nravstvennosti [Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morality]. Moscow, Izdatel'stvo AST, 2023, 384 p.
20. Luna F. ¿Procrear o no procrear? Sida y Derechos Reproductivos. Analisis Filosofico, 1999, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 153-172.
21. Luna F. From the Middle Ages to the 21st Century. Abortion, Assisted Reproduction Technologies and LGBT Rights in Argentina. Canadian Journal of Bioethics. Revue canadienne de Bioéthique, 2018, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 26-36. DOI: org/10.7202/1058266ar
22. Luna F. Instituto Interamericano de Derechos Humanos Reproducción asistida, género y derechos humanos en América Latina. Instituto Interamericano de Derechos Humanos. San José, C.R, IIDH, 2008, 86 p.