Search
Submit an article RU
Kantian Journal

2023 Vol. 42. №1

Back to the list Download the article
ENG
Сохранить XML для: JATS (вып.)
RUS
Сохранить XML для: JATS (вып.)
Shchedrina T.G. Pruzhinin B.I.

Semyon Frank and Yakov Golosovker: On Kantian Motives in the Works of Dostoyevsky

DOI
10.5922/0207-6918-2023-1-5
Pages
92-106
Semyon Frank Yakov Golosovker Russian philosophy Volfila Dostoyevsky Kant freedom crisis of culture

Abstract

Russian philosophy is “a sphere of conversation” in which thought is “divined”. It is a realm of search for “universal meaning” and “cultivation” of historical reality. Such a “conversation” around the work of Dostoyevsky took place in the 1920s among philosophers (including members of the Free Philosophical Association or Volfila in its abbreviated form). The theme takes on added significance at the hands of Ya. E. Golosovker and S. L. Frank whose intellectual affinity manifests itself today in the way they interpret Kantian motives in the work of Dostoyevsky. Reflecting on “the logic of imagination” Golosovker draws attention to the fact that the concrete-metaphysical method of seeing the world is not identical to the amphiboly of Kant’s reflexive concepts. He made it the central theme of his book, Dostoyevsky and Kant, immersing the philosophical component of the novel The Brothers Karamazov in the context of Kant’s antinomies. The later Frank took up the subject of Dostoyevsky’s worldview in response, as it were, to the discussion of the problem of cultural crisis at Volfila (including at meetings “In Memory of Dostoyevsky”). Following Yakov Golosovker, Andrey Bely, Aron Steinberg, Semyon Lurie and others, he continued the discussion of the crisis in its organised forms. In this context, too, Kant is a significant presence. For Frank, as for Golosovker, Dostoyevsky’s world view has a “concrete-metaphysical character”. They come to this conclusion reflecting on the problem of freedom as seen by Dostoyevsky who sought to overcome Kant’s antinomies.

Reference

Alyaev, G. E., Obolevich, T., Rezvykh, T. N. and Tsygankov, A. S., 2021. S. L. Frank o F. M. Dostoyevskom: novyye materialy [S.L. Frank about F. M. Dostoevsky: new materials]. Moscow: IF RAN. (In Rus.)

Belous, V. G., 2005a. VOL’FILA (Petrogradskaya Vol’naya Filosofskaya Assotsiatsiya): 1919—1924 [VOLFILA (Petrograd Free Philosophical Association): 1919—1924]. Book. 1. Moscow: Modest Kolerov and “Tri Kvadrata”. (In Rus.)

Belous, V. G., 2005b. VOL’FILA (Petrogradskaya Vol’naya Filosofskaya Assotsiatsiya): 1919—1924 [VOLFILA (Petrograd Free Philosophical Association): 1919—1924]. Book. 2. Moscow: Modest Kolerov and “Tri Kvadrata”. (In Rus.)

Bulgakov, S. N., 1902. Ivan Karamazov (in Dostoevsky’s Novel The Brothers Karamazov) as a Philosophical Type. Voprosy filosofii i psychologii [Issues of Philosophy and Psychology], 61(1), pp. 826-863 (In Rus.)

Frank, S. L., 1922. The Crisis of Western Culture. In: N. A. Berdyaev, Ya. M. Bukshpan, F. A. Stepun and S. L. Frank, 1922. Osvald Shpengler i Zakat Yevropy [Oswald Spengler and the Decline of Europe]. Moscow: Bereg, pp. 34-54. (In Rus.)

Frank, S. L., 1931. Dostoevsky and the Crisis of Humanism. Put’ [The Way], 27, pp. 71-78.

Frank, S. L., 1996. Regarding the Article about “Signposts” by S. V. Lurie. In: S. L. Frank, 1996. Russkoye mirovozzreniye [Russian Worldview]. Edited by A. A. Ermichev. St. Petersburg: Nauka, pp. 554-569. (In Rus.)

[Frank, S. L.], 2021a. Dostojewskys Weltanschauung. In: G. E. Alyaev, T. Obolevich, T. N. Rezvykh and A. S. Tsygankov, 2021. S. L. Frank o F. M. Dostoyevskom: novyye materialy [S. L. Frank on F. M. Dostoevsky: New Materials]. Moscow: IF RAN, pp. 120-148.

[Frank, S. L.], 2021b. Dostojewskijs Theodizee. In: G. E. Alyaev, T. Obolevich, T. N. Rezvykh and A. S. Tsygankov, 2021. S. L. Frank o F. M. Dostoyevskom: novyye materialy [S. L. Frank on F. M. Dostoevsky: New Materials]. Moscow: IF RAN, pp. 309-324.

Golosovker, Ya. E., 1963. Dostoyevskiy i Kant. Razmyshleniye chitatelya nad romanom “Brat’ya Karamazovy” i traktatom Kanta “Kritika chistogo razuma” [Dostoevsky and Kant. The Reader’s Reflection on the Novel The Brothers Karamazov and Kant’s Treatise Critique of Pure Reason]. Moscow: Nauka. (In Rus.)

Golosovker, Ya. E., 2010. Imaginative absolute. In: Ya. E. Golosovker, 2010. Izbrannoye. Logika mifa [Favorites. Myth Logic]. Moscow & St. Petersburg: Tsentr gumanitarnykh initsiativ, pp. 7-222. (In Rus.)

[Gudziy, N. K.], 1963. From the Editor. In: Ya. E. Golosovker, 1963. Dostoyevskiy i Kant. Razmyshleniye chitatelya nad romanom “Brat’ya Karamazovy” i traktatom Kanta “Kritika chistogo razuma” [Dostoevsky and Kant. The Reader’s Reflection on the Novel The Brothers Karamazov and Kant’s Treatise Critique of Pure Reason]. Moscow: Nauka, pp. 3-4. (In Rus.)

Kant, I., 1998. Critique of Pure Reason. Translated and edited by P. Guyer and A. W. Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rashkovsky, E. B., 2017. Yakov Emmanuilovich Golo­sovker: Philosophy in Search for a Person. In: E. B. Rashkovsky, ed. 2017. Yakov Emmanuilovich Golosovker. Selected by E. B. Rashkovsky and N. V. Braginskaya. Moscow: Politicheskaya entsiklopediya, pp. 7-40. (In Rus.)

Tugan-Baranovsky, M. I., 1912. Three Great Ethical Problems. Moral Worldview of Dostoevsky. In: M. I. Tugan-Baranovsky, 1912. K luchshemu budushchemu [To a Better Future]. St. Petersburg: Energy. (In Rus.)

[Ugolnikov, Yu. A.], 2017. Chronicle of the Main Events in the Life and Work of Ya. E. Golosovker. In: E. B. Rashkovsky, ed. 2017. Yakov Emmanuilovich Golosovker. Selected by E. B. Rashkovsky and N. V. Braginskaya. Moscow: Politicheskaya entsiklopediya, pp. 288-294. (In Rus.)