NONE20260606183027273Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal Universityno-reply@journals.kantiana.ruImmanuel Kant Baltic Federal UniversityKantian Journal0207-69182310-370106062026433Предисловие редактораT. G.ShchedrinaInstitute of Philosophy of Russian Academy of Sciences060620267810.5922/0207-6918-2024-3-1https://journals.kantiana.ru/kant_collection/15793/82041/Густав Шпет, Иммануил Кант и терминистская логикаM.DennesIn his book Appearance and Sense Gustav Shpet, comparing Immanuel Kant’s transcendental logic with the traditional probleтs of the philosophy of language, thought it appropriate and conceptually effective to turn to the medieval scholastic debate on universals. Later, in the Hermeneutics and Its Problems, he goes back to this discussion and notes that it was the framework in which the thirteenth-century tradition of “terminist” logic was formed. Shpet attributed the fruitfulness of this approach to his concept of the inner form of the word. Terminist logic is based on the definition and analysis of such terms as significatio, suppositio, expositio, exponibilia, and Shpet, in examining them, demonstrates the consonance of his concept with terminist logic. Proceeding from thirteenth-century logical studies, he proposes his own approach to resolving the contradictions found in Kant’s critical philosophy. Shpet believed that transcendental idealism failed to resolve the problem of the relation between intuition and concept (even though Kantian “schematism” was a search for such resolution). This inherent Kantian problem is for Shpet a take-off point to which he kept returning throughout his career. I will pay particular attention to such works as Appearance and Sense, in which Shpet broadens the problematics of Husserl’s phenomenology, and The Inner Form of the Word, in which he reinterprets Humboldt’s philosophy of language. In both cases Shpet shows that neither Husserl nor Humboldt managed to overcome the Kantian contradiction. So the reference to Kant is a starting point from which Shpet proceeds to put forward and consolidate his hypotheses. It is in thirteenth-century terminist logic that Shpet will see an original way of overcoming the Kantian contradiction and direct us toward interpreting the problems of the philosophy of language.0606202692210.5922/0207-6918-2024-3-2https://journals.kantiana.ru/kant_collection/15794/82042/Anonym, 2010. Lekcii po srednevekovoj filosofii [Lectures on Medieval Philosophy]. In: G. G. Shpet, 2010. Filosofija i nauka. Lekcionnye kursy [Philosophy and Science. Lecture courses]. Edited by T. G. Shchedrina. Moscow: ROSSPEN, pp. 353-397. (In Rus.)Chpet, G. G., 2007. La Forme interne du mot. Études et variations sur des thèmes de Humboldt. Traduction de N. Zavialoff, préface de M. Dennes. Paris: Kimé.Chpet, G. G., 2013. Le phénomène et le sens: la phénoménologie comme science fondamentale et ses problèmes. Traduction de M. Dennes, F. Teppe, préface de M. Dennes, postface de F. Teppe. Bordeaux: Maison des sciences de l’homme d’Aquitaine.Libera, A. de, 2014. La Querelle des universaux. De Platon à la fin du Moyen-Âge. Paris: Seuil.Shchedrina, T. G. Kommentarii [Commentary]. In: G. G. Shpet, 2010. Filosofija i nauka. Lekcionnye kursy [Philosophy and Science. Lecture courses]. Edited by T. G. Shchedrina. Moscow: ROSSPEN, pp. 398-483. (In Rus.)Shchedrina, T. G. and Shchedrina, I. O., 2022. Immanuel Kant in the Historical Philosophy of Gustav Shpet. Kantian Journal, 41(3), pp. 124-151. http://dx.doi.org/10.5922/0207-6918-2022-3-5Shpet, G. G., 1991. Appearance and Sense: Phenomenology as the Fundamental Science and Its Problems. Translated by T. Nemeth. Dordrecht, Boston & London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Shpet, G. G., 2005. Jazyk i smysl [Language and Sense]. In: Shpet, G. G., 2005. Mysl’ i Slovo. Izbrannye trudy [Thought and Word. Selected works]. Edited by T. G. Shchedrina. Moscow: ROSSPEN, pp. 470-657. (In Rus.)Shpet, G. G., 2007a. Esteticheskie fragmenty [Aesthetic Fragments]. In: Shpet, G. G., 2007. Iskusstvo kak vid znanija. Izbrannye trudy po filosofii kul’tury [The Art as a Kind of Knowledge. Selected Works on the Philosophy of Culture]. Edited by T. G. Shchedrina. Moscow: ROSSPEN, pp. 175-322. (In Rus.)Shpet, G. G., 2007b. Vnutrennjaja forma slova [The Inner Form of the Word]. In: Shpet, G. G., 2007. Iskusstvo kak vid znanija. Izbrannye trudy po filosofii kul’tury [The Art as a Kind of Knowledge. Selected Works on the Philosophy of Culture]. Edited by T. G. Shchedrina. Moscow: ROSSPEN, pp. 325-501. (In Rus.)Shpet, G., 2019. Hermeneutics and Its Problems. In: G. Shpet, 2019. Hermeneutics and Its Problems. With Selected Essays in Phenomenology. Edited and translated by T. Nemeth. Cham: Springer, pp. XXV-XXVII, 1-151.Шпет, Гумбольдт, Кант: формы, понятия, схемы. Термины и концепцииV.I.MolchanovRussian State University for the HumanitiesThe article examines the interpretation of the teaching of Wilhelm von Humboldt on language by Gustav Shpet together with Shpet’s perception of the influence of Kant’s philosophy on Humboldt. Special emphasis is laid on terminological analysis, the underlying thesis of this analysis being that words, terms and concepts are not the same thing: one and the same word or word combination can denote different terms, and the concept is a term in each particular doctrine. The object of critical analysis is the function of Humboldt’s term “inner form of language” and the way this term was transformed, according to Shpet, into “the concept of inner form” over time by various thinkers — Plato, Plotinus, Goethe, Humboldt and others. The difference is analysed between the terms which Humboldt, Shpet and Kant denoted by the same word “concept”. Shpet’s position on the issue of Kant’s influence on Humboldt is analysed, notably in terms of the “schematism of the pure concepts of understanding”. Steinthal’s opinion on this issue allows us to raise the hermeneutic question of what kind of Kant a particular researcher is dealing with at a particular time — from the beginning of the nineteenth century until our days. The author notes the peremptory character of some of Shpet’s claims as well as his description of Kant’s influence on Humboldt as suggestion. The author also considers Shpet’s critique of subjectivism, which robs subjectivism of creativity and confines it to the capacity to convey what has been understood and to err. Finally, Shpet’s methodology (the question of identity and difference) and the role of terminology in his own works is considered. The positing of identity as the starting point of method accords with Shpet’s conviction that terms have meaning and explanatory power. Contrary to Shpet, it is difference that is the initial experience and the key term in phenomenological and post-phenomenological philosophy.06062026234610.5922/0207-6918-2024-3-3https://journals.kantiana.ru/kant_collection/15794/82044/Brentano, F., 2022. Habilitation Theses (1866). In: I. Tănăsescu, A. Bejinariu, et al., eds. 2022. Brentano and the Positive Philosophy of Comte and Mill. Berlin & Boston: de Gruyter, pp. 433-436.Cassirer, E., 2013. The Kantian Elements in Wilhelm von Humboldt’s Philosophy of Language (1923). In: E. Cassirer, 2013. The Warburg Years (1919—1933). Essays on Language, Art, Myth, and Technology. Translated and with an Introduction by S. G. Lofts with A. Calcagno. New Haven & London: Yale University Press, pp. 101-129.Haym, R., 1856. Wilhelm von Humboldt. Lebensbild und Charakteristik. Berlin: Rudolph Gaertner.Hegel, G. W. F., 1955. Lectures on the History of Philosophy. Volume 3. Translated by E.S. Haldane and F. H. Simson. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1955.Hegel, G. W. F., 1977. Faith and Knowledge or the Reflective Philosophy of Subjectivity in the Complete Range of its Forms as Kantian, Jacobian, and Fichtean Philosophy. In: G. W. F. Hegel, 1977. Faith & Knowledge. Translated by W. Cerf and H. S. Harris. Albany: State University of New York Press, pp. 54-192.Humboldt, W. von, 1988. On Language. The Diversity of Human Language-Structure and its Influence on the Mental Development of Mankind. Translated by P. Heath. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 15-288.Lezhnev, M. N., 1900. Marks i Kant: (Kritiko-filosofskaja parallel’) [Marx and Kant: A Critical and Philosophical Parallel]. Nikolaev: P. Kovalev i N. Osipovich. (In Rus.)Schasler, M., 1847. Die Elemente der philosophischen Sprachwissenschaft Wilhelm von Humboldt’s. Berlin: Verlag der Trautwein’schen Buch- und Musicalienhandlung.[Schiller, F. and Humboldt, W. von], 1830. Briefwechsel zwischen Schiller und Wilhelm von Humboldt. Mit einer Vorerinnerung über Schiller und den Gang seiner Geistesentwicklung von W. von Humboldt. Stuttgart & Tübingen: J. G. Cotta’schen Buchhandlung.Shpet, G. G., 2005. Language and Meaning. In: G. G. Shpet, 2005. Mysl’ i slovo. Izbrannye trudy [Thought and Word. Selected Works]. Edited by T. G. Shchedrina. Moscow: Rossiiskaja Politicheskaja Enciklopedija (ROSSPEN), pp. 470-668. (In Rus.)Shpet, G. G., 2007a. The Inner Form of the Word. In: G. G. Shpet, 2007a. Iskusstvo kak vid znanija. Izbrannye trudy po filosofii kul’tury [Art as a Kind of Knowledge. Selected Works on the Philosophy of Culture]. Edited by T. G. Shchedrina. Moscow: Rossiiskaja Politicheskaja Enciklopedija (ROSSPEN), pp. 323-501. (In Rus.)Shpet, G. G., 2007b. Aesthetic Fragments. In: G. G. Shpet, 2007b. Iskusstvo kak vid znanija. Izbrannye trudy po filosofii kul’tury [Art as a Kind of Knowledge. Selected Works on the Philosophy of Culture]. Edited by T. G. Shchedrina. Moscow: ROSSPEN, pp. 175-321. (In Rus.)Steinthal, H., 1883a. Allgemeine Einleitung in Humboldts sprachphilosophische Arbeiten. In: H. Steinthal, ed. 1883. Die sprachphilosophischen Werke Wilhelm’s von Humboldt. Hälfte 1. Berlin: F. Dümmler, pp. 13-21.Steinthal, H., 1883b. Einleitung des Herausgebers zu § 6 „Zusammenwirken der Individuen und Nationen“. Humboldts Verhältnis zu Kant. In: H. Steinthal, ed. 1883. Die sprachphilosophischen Werke Wilhelm’s von Humboldt. Hälfte 1. Berlin: F. Dümmler, pp. 230-242.Zinchenko, V. P., Pruzhinin, B. I. and Shchedrina, T. G., 2010. Istoki kul’turno-istoricheskoi psihologii: filosofsko-gumanitarnyi kontekst [The Origins of Cultural and Historical Psychology in the Context of Philosophy and Humanities]. Moscow: Rossiiskaja Politicheskaja Enciklopedija (ROSSPEN). (In Rus.)Кантианская и антикантианская философия языкаI. A.MikhailovInstitute of Philosophy of Russian Academy of SciencesThis paper examines two models of language philosophy. The first is the Kantian philosophy which sees language as an instrument of conveying mental content. I have selected Immanuel Kant and Edmund Husserl from amongst its numerous representatives. In this tradition, a language expression, i.e. an expression that has meaning, is determined by the objectively ideal character of the meanings (“rules”) given through the subject’s intellectual acts. The main task is to fix with a maximum degree of accuracy what is “seen” in consciousness. This model inevitably considers words to be “markers” or “labels” which have no intrinsic power. The problem with this approach is, first, that it is impossible to determine the criteria by which this or that word should be considered adequate. Second, this approach leads to the creation of ever new philosophical languages which simultaneously challenge the tradition and yet claim to be a renewed version of it. It is shown that the fairly systematic critique of the Kant­ian approach by Johann Georg Hamann and Johann Gottfried Herder falls short of proposing an alternative philosophical system because, having a religious foundation, it does not offer a complete grounding of knowledge. In the wide range of anti-Kantian positions on the nature of language Gustav Shpet’s concept of language is singled out. It pursues the same task of creating a universal system of knowledge as Husserl’s phenomenology, but it proceeds from fundamentally different notions of philosophical knowledge. Unlike Husserl, whose thought is marked by revolutionary radicalism, for Shpet ideal knowledge is “positive”, “concrete”, “full” and “dynamic”. He considers philosophising to be dialectical and inherently dialogic. The result of philosophy meeting these ideals is the concept that our knowledge is centred on language and our experience has a sign-verbal character.06062026478010.5922/0207-6918-2024-3-4https://journals.kantiana.ru/kant_collection/15794/82046/Alexander, W. M., 1966. Johann Georg Hamann: Metacritic of Kant. Journal of the History of Ideas, 27(1), pp. 137-144.Burge, T., 1992. Philosophy of Language and Mind: 1950—1990. The Philosophical Review, 101(1), pp. 3-51.Cloeren, H. J., 1988. Language and Thought: German Approaches to Analytic Philosophy in the 18th and 19th Centuries. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Dummett, M., 1973. Frege: Philosophy of Language. London: Duckworth.Dummett, M., 1993. Origins of Analytical Philosophy. London: Duckworth.Forster, M. N., 2010. After Herder. Philosophy of Language in the German Tradition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Forster, M. N., 2012. Kant’s Philosophy of Language? Tijdschrift voor Filosofie, 3, pp. 485-511.Hamann, J. G., 1999. Metakritik über den Purismum der Vernunft. In: J. G. Hamann, 1999. Sämtliche Werke. Nachdruck der historisch-kritischen Ausgabe von J. Nadler. Volume 3: Schriften über Sprache, Mysterien. Vernunft: 1772—1788. Wuppertal; Tübingen: Brockhaus, 1999, pp. 281-289.Hamann, J. G., 2007. Metacritique on the Purism of Reason. In: J. G. Hamann, 2007. Writings On Philosophy and Language History of Philosophy. Translated by K. Haynes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 205-218.Hegel, G. W. F., 1977. Phenomenology of Spirit. Translated by A. V. Miller. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Husserl, E., 1970. The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology. An Introduction to Phenomenological Philosophy. Translated by D. Carr. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Husserl, E., 1976a. Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und phänomenologischen Philosophie. Erstes Buch: Allgemeine Einführung in die reine Phänomenologie. 1. Halbband. Text der 1.-3. Auflage. Edited by K. Schuhmann. In: Husserliana. Edmund Husserl Gesammelte Werke. Volume III/1. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Husserl, E., 1976b. Die Krisis der europäischen Wissenschaften und die transzendentale Phänomenologie. Eine Einleitung in die phänomenologische Philosophie. Edited by W. Biemel. In: Husserliana. Edmund Husserl Gesammelte Werke. Volume VI/2, verbesserte Auflage. Den Haag : Nijhoff.Husserl, E., 1983. Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy. First Book: General Introduction to a Pure Phenomenology. In: Husserliana: Edmund Husserl – Collected Works. Volume 2. Dordrecht: Nijhoff.Husserl, E., 1984. Logische Untersuchungen. Buch 2: Untersuchungen zur Phänomenologie und Theorie der Erkenntnis. T. 1. Herausgegeben von U. Panzer. In: Husserliana. Edmund Husserl Gesammelte Werke. Volume XIX/1. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Husserl, E., 1986. Aufsätze und Vorträge (1911—1921). Herausgegeben von Th. Nenon und H.-R. Sepp. In: Husserliana. Edmund Husserl Gesammelte Werke. Volume XXV. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Husserl, E., 1996. Logik und allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie. Vorlesungen 1917/18, mit ergänzenden Texten aus der ersten Fassung 1910/11. Herausgegeben von U. Panzer. In: Husserliana. Edmund Husserl Gesammelte Werke. Volume XXX. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Husserl, E., 2001a. Logical Investigations. Investigations into Phenomenology and the Theory of Knowledge. Part 1. Volume II, Part I of the German Editions. In: E. Husserl, 2001. Logical Investigations. With a new preface by M. Dummett and edited with a new Introduction by D. Moran. London: Routledge, pp. 163-313.Husserl, E., 2001b. Logical Investigations. Investigations into Phenomenology and the Theory of Knowledge, Part 3-4, Volume II. In: E. Husserl, 2001. Logical Investigations. With a new preface by M. Dummett and edited with a new Introduction by D. Moran. London: Routledge.Husserl, E., 2012. Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy. First Book: General Introduction to a Pure Phenomenology. New foreword by D. Moran, translated by W. R. Boyce Gibson. London & New York: Routledge.Husserl, E., 2019. Logic and General Theory of Science. Translated by C. O. Hill. In: Husserliana: Edmund Husserl — Collected Works, Volume XV. Berlin: Springer.Kant, I., 1992. Lectures on Logic. Translated and edited by J. M. Young. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Kant, I., 1998. Critique of Pure Reason. Translated and edited by P. Guyer and A. Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Kant, I., 1999. Correspondence. Translated and edited by A. Zweig. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Kant, I., 2002. Critique of Practical Reason. Translated by W. S. Pluhar, Introduction by S. Engstrom. Indianapolis & Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company.Kant, I., 2007a. Critique of Judgement. Translated by J. C. Meredith; revised, edited and introduced by N. Walker. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Kant, I., 2007b. Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View. Translated by R. B. Louden. In: I. Kant, 2007. Anthropology, History, and Education. Edited by G. Zöllner, R. B. Louden. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 227-429.Kant, I., 2009. Religion within the Bounds of Bare Reason, translated by W. S. Pluhar, introduction by S. R. Palmquist. Indianapolis & Cambridge: Hackett, 2009.Kusch, M., 1989. Language as Calculus vs. Language as Universal Medium. A Study in Husserl, Heidegger and Gadamer. Dordrecht & London & Boston: Kluwer.Maimon, S., 1791. Philosophisches Wörterbuch, oder Beleuchtung der wichtigsten Gegenstände der Philosophie, in alphabetischer Ordnung. Berlin: bei Johann Friedrich Unger.Mikhailov, A. A., 2009. Toward a Forgotten Polemic: Hamann versus Kant. In: M. A. Solopova and M. F. Bykova, eds. 2009. Sushchnost’ i slovo: sbornik nauchnykh statei k jubileyu professora N. V. Motroshilovoi [Essence and Word: A Collection of Scientific Papers for the Anniversary of Professor N. V. Motroshilova]. Moscow: Fenomenologiya-Germenevtika, pp. 293-304. (In Rus.)Plato, 1997. Letters. In: Plato, 1997. Complete Works, ed. by J. M. Cooper, D. S. Hutchinson. Indianapolis: Hackett, pp. 1634-1676.Schleiermacher, F. D. E., 2002. Vorlesungen über die Dialektik. Teilband 2. Edited by A. Arndt. In: F. D. E. Schleiermacher, 2002. Kritische Gesamtausgabe. Zweite Abteilung: Vorlesungen. Volume 10, Part 2. Berlin: de Gruyter.Shchedrina, T. G., 2008. Arkhiv epokhi. Tematicheskoe edinstvo russkoi filosofii [Archive of the Epoch. The Thematic Unity of Russian Philosophy]. Moscow: ROSSPEN. (In Rus.)Shchedrina, T. G., 2010. Gustav Speth as a Philosopher of Science: The Experience of Antidogmatic Teaching. In: G. G. Shpet, 2010. Filosofiya i nauka [Philosophy and Science]. Edited by T. G. Shchedrina. Moscow: ROSSPEN, pp. 5-16. (In Rus.)Shpet, G. G., 1989. Esteticheskie fragmenty [Aesthetic Fragments]. In: G. G. Shpet, 1989. Works. Moscow: Pravda, pp. 343-472. (In Rus.)Shpet, G., 1991. Appearance and Sense. Phenomenology as the Fundamental Science and Its Problems. Translated by T. Nemeth. Dordrecht & Boston & London: Kluwer.Shpet, G. G., 2005. Language and Sense. In: G. G. Shpet, 2005. Mysl’ i Slovo. Izbrannye trudy [Thought and Word. Selected works]. Edited by T.G. Shchedrina. Moscow: ROSSPEN, pp. 470-668. (In Rus.)Shpet, G. G., 2007. Aesthetic Fragments. In: G. G. Shpet, 2007. Iskusstvo kak vid znaniya. Izbrannye trudy po filosofii kul’tury [Art as a Form of Knowledge. Selected Works on Philosophy of Culture]. Edited by T. G. Shchedrina. Moscow: ROSSPEN, pp. 173-322. (In Rus.)Shpet, G. G., 2008. Ocherk razvitiya russkoi filosofii. I [An Outline of the Development of Russian Philosophy. Part 1]. Edited and commented by T. G. Shchedrina. Moscow: ROSSPEN. (In Rus.)Shpet, G. G., 2014. Istorija kak problema logiki: Kriticheskie i metodologicheskie issledovanija. Chast’ pervaja. Materialy [History as a Problem of Logic: Critical and Methodological Studies. Part One: Materials]. Edited and commented by T. G. Shchedrina. Moscow & St. Petersburg: Universitetskaja kniga. (In Rus.)Shpet, G., 2019. Philosophy and History. In: G. Shpet, 2019. Hermeneutics and Its Problems. With Selected Essays in Phenomenology. Edited and translated by T. Nemeth. Cham: Springer, pp. 269-277.Waxman, W., 2005. Kant and the Empiricists: Understanding Understanding. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Wittgenstein, L., 2009. Philosophical Investigations. Translated by G. E. M. Anscombe, P. M. S. Hacker and J. Schulte. Revised Fourth Edition by P. M. S. Hacker and J. Schulte. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Неокантианский вопрос о методе, проблема формы и значение изменчивости в философии Густава Шпета и Эрнста КассирераN. B.AfanasovInstitute of Philosophy of Russian Academy of SciencesThe Kantian legacy has had a key impact on the landscape of theoretical philosophy in the first half of the twentieth century. Philosophers both in Germany and in Russia saw Immanuel Kant’s ideas as seminal for their philosophical research. The main schools of that era were formed in discussions of the problems and the solutions which were proposed by Kant. The methodological legacy of the critical philosophy effectively became the main benchmark of the thinking of a whole generation of intellectuals. Research into the unity of “form” in the structure of human cognition was also in many ways mediated by the Kantian tradition. To prove this thesis I first look at the philosophy of Gustav Shpet who creatively interpreted the German tradition and proposed an original project of his own, and then I examine the theory of Ernst Cassirer, an outstanding representative of Neo-Kantianism who in the later period of his work proposed considering the phenomena of the humanities to be symbolic forms closest to the spontaneity of the biological. The common feature of the approaches of the two philosophers is their attempt to preserve the integrity of cognition which is destroyed by mathematisation of the common denominator (ultimate categorisation) and hierarchisation of the phenomena of human life. The alternative is the metaphor of mutational change, through which the concept of “form” acquires a new meaning. In conclusion I show that the analysis of the projects of Shpet and Cassirer has heuristic value for the historical-philosophical understanding of the fate of the Kantian philosophy and for modern philosophical culture.060620268110310.5922/0207-6918-2024-3-5https://journals.kantiana.ru/kant_collection/15794/82048/Cassirer, E., 1907. Kant und die moderne Mathematik. Kant-Studien, 12, pp. 1-40.Cassirer, E., 1922. Die Begriffsform in der Mythischen Denken. Leipzig: Teubner.Cassirer, E., 1925. Sprache und Mythos. Ein Beitrag zum Problem der Götternamen. Edited by F. Saxl. Leipzig: B. G. Teubner, pp. 1-80.Cassirer, E., 1957. The Philosophy of Symbolic Forms, Volume 3: Phenomenology of Knowledge. Translated by R. Manheim, introductory note by Charles W. Hendel. New Haven & London: Yale University Press.Cassirer, E., 2011. Zur Logik der Kulturwissenschaften. Fünf Studien. Hamburg: Felix Meiner.Cassirer, E., 2013. The Form of the Concept in Mythical Thinking. In: E. Cassirer, 2013. Warburg Years (1919—1933). Essays on Language, Art, Myth, and Technology. Translated and with an Introduction by S. G. Lofts with A. Calcagno. New Haven: Yale University Press, pp. 1-71.Cassirer, E., 2020. The Philosophy of Symbolic Forms, Volume 1: Language. Translated by S.G. Lofts. London & New York: Routledge.Cassirer, E., 2020. The Philosophy of Symbolic Forms, Volume 3: Phenomenology of Cognition. Translated by S. G. Lofts. London & New York: Routledge.Dennes, M., 2023. Why Didn’t He Leave? Gustav Shpet and the Revolution. Voprosy filosofii, 9, pp. 14-21. https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2023-9-14-21 (In Rus.)Dmitrieva, N. A., 2007. Russkoe neokantianstvo: “Marburg” v Rossii. Istoriko-filosofskie ocherki [Russian Neo-Kantianism: Marburg in Russia. Historical-philosophical Essays]. Moscow: ROSSPEN. (In Rus.)Guseynov, A. A., 2024. The Place of Critical Reason in Kant’s System of Critical Philosophy. In: A. A. Guseynov, ed. 2024. Filosofiya i praktika [Philosophy and Practice]. Moscow, Saint-Petersburg: Tsentr gumanitarnykh initsiativ, pp. 5-26. (In Rus.)Habermas, J., 1998. The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity: Twelve Lectures. Introduction by T. McCarthy, translated by F. Lawrence. Cambridge: Polity Press.Kant, I., 2007. Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Aim. Translated by A. W. Wood. In: I. Kant, 2007. Anthropology, History, and Education. Edited by G. Zöller and R. B. Louden. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 107-120.Kemling, J., 2019. [Book Review] Skowroński Krzysztof Piotr & Sami Pihlström (eds.) Pragmatist Kant: Pragmatism, Kant, and Kantianism in the Twenty-First Century. European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.4000/ejpap.1790.Knyazeva, E. N., 2019. Animals’ Signs and Man’s Symbols: Mutual Influence of J. von Uexküll’s and E. Cassirer’s Ideas. Chelovek [The Human Being], 4(30), pp. 25-40. https://doi.org/10.31857/S023620070005902-9 (In Rus.)Krouglov, A. N., 2009. Filosofiya Kanta v Rossii v kontse XVII — pervoy polovine XIX vekov [Kant’s Philosophy in Russia at the End of the 18th — in the First Half of the 19th Centuries]. Moscow: Kanon+; ROOI “Reabilitatsiya”. (In Rus.)Krouglov, A. N., 2012. Kant i kantovskaya filosofiya v russkoy khudozhestvennoy literature [Kant and Kant’s Philosophy in Russian Literature]. Moscow: Kanon+. (In Rus.)Krouglov, A. N., 2024. Filosofiya Kanta v Rossii [Kant’s Philosophy in Russia]. Kaliningrad: IKBFU Press. (In Rus.)Luft, S., 2005. Cassirer’s Philosophy of Symbolic Forms: Between Reason and Relativism. A Critical Appraisal. Idealistic Studies, 34, pp. 25-47.Motroshilova, N. V., 2006. Gustav Shpet’s Work “Appearance and Sense” as a Milestone in the Development of Russian Phenomenology. History of Philosophy Yearbook, 1, pp. 294-305. (In Rus.)Povilaitis, V. I., 2011. [Book Review] Krouglov A. N. Kant’s Philosophy in Russia at the End of the 18th Century. Kantian Journal, 3(37), pp. 107-109. (In Rus.)Shchedrina, T. G., and Shchedrina, I. O., 2023. Gustav Shpet’s “Notes on Kant”: On the Meaning of “Positive Critique”. Kantian Journal, 42(2), pp. 160-177. https://doi.org/10.5922/0207-6918-2023-4-8 (In Rus.)Shchedrina, T. G., and Pruzhinin, B. I., 2020. “Back to Aristotle”: The Dignity of Knowledge as a Problem of Epistemology. Voprosy filosofii, 1, pp. 18-26. https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2020-1-18-26 (In Rus.)Shpet, G., 1991. Appearance and Sense. Phenomenology as the Fundamental Science and Its Problems. Translated by T. Nemeth. Dordrecht & Boston & London: Kluwer.Shpet, G., 2019. Hermeneutics and Its Problems. In: G. Shpet, 2019. Hermeneutics and Its Problems. With Selected Essays in Phenomenology. Edited and translated by T. Nemeth. Cham: Springer, pp. XXV-XXVII, 1-151.Shpet, G. G., 2006. Vnutrennyaya forma slova: etyudy i variatsii na temy Gumbol’dta. [The Inner Form of a Word: Etudes and Variations on Humboldt’s Themes]. Moscow: KomKniga. (In Rus.)Shpet, G.G., 2007. Aesthetic Fragments. In: G. G. Shpet, 2007. Iskusstvo kak vid znaniya. Izbrannye trudy po filosofii kul’tury [Art as a Form of Knowledge. Selected Works on Philosophy of Culture]. Edited by T. G. Shchedrina. Moscow: ROSSPEN, pp. 173-322. (In Rus.)Shpet, G. G., 2010. Filosofiya i nauka. Lektsionnye kursu [Philosophy and Science. Lecture Courses]. Moscow: ROSSPEN. (In Rus.)Shpet, G. G., 2014. Istorija kak problema logiki: Kriticheskie i metodologicheskie issledovanija. Chast’ 1: Materialy [History as a Problem of Logic: Critical and Methodological Studies. Part 1: Materials]. Edited and commented by T. G. Shchedrina. Moscow & St. Petersburg: Universitetskaja kniga. (In Rus.)Shpet, G. G., 2016. Istoriya kak problema logiki: kriticheskie i metodologischeskie issledovanija. Chast’ vtoraya. Arkhivnye materialy. Rekonstruktsiya Nanyany Shchedrinoj [History as a Problem of Logic: Critical and Methodological Research. Part Two. Archive Materials. Reconstruction by T. G. Shchedrina]. Moscow, Saint-Petersburg: Universitetskaya kniga. (In Rus.)Sudakov, A. K., 2022. An Old Annex, Long since Unhabitable: The Critique of Practical Reason as an Offspring of Architectonic Classicism. RUDN Journal of Philosophy, 3(26), pp. 623-643. https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-2302-2022-26-3-623-643 (In Rus.)Volodin, A. V., Zilber, A. S., and Rifalsky, A. Yu., 2024. Kant and Shpet: Convergences and Divergences. An Overview of the International Scientific Conference. Voprosy filosofii, 3, pp. 213-219. https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2024-3-213-219 (In Rus.)Восхождение к «естественной человечности»: Иммануил Кант в философской антропологии Густава ШпетаT. G.ShchedrinaInstitute of Philosophy of Russian Academy of SciencesB. I.PruzhininInstitute of Philosophy of Russian Academy of SciencesThe archive of Gustav Shpet contains scattered preparatory materials for his works. Some of these handwritten rough drafts are devoted to Immanuel Kant. These jottings enable us to take a new look at possible trajectories of philosophical anthropology. The main goal of this article is to show, on the one hand, the modern relevance of Kant’s reflections on the essence of the human being and, on the other hand, the productiveness of their critical reinterpretation by Shpet. In effect, Kant’s reflections give us an insight into the sources of the current anthropological crisis when “the free man”, capable of creating himself, has finally detached himself from his nature (i.e. accomplished what Kant believed to be the foundation of anthropology). Shpet’s critique enables us to outline the contours of a positive way out of today’s critical situation. To implement this task, the authors carry out a historical-philosophical analysis of Shpet’s treatment of the question of philosophical anthropology. This is a new approach both for Shpet scholarship and for the Russian philosophical tradition, an approach that opens up a new path to overcome the crisis and, what is more, a path that is ecologically significant. This gives us all the more reason to try to find the critical points of anthropologism (easy enough if we turn to Shpet’s article “The Anthropologism of Lavrov in Light of the History of Philosophy”). It also encourages us to reinterpret in an anthropological context Shpet’s reflections on the human being and humanness (see the article “Wisdom or Reason?”). The Supplement contains the first ever publication of a historical document, a letter Shpet received from the German embassy in 1924, inviting him to Königsberg for the celebration of the 200th anniversary of Kant’s birth and a programm of the event with the names of speakers and the topics of their presentations.0606202610412110.5922/0207-6918-2024-3-6https://journals.kantiana.ru/kant_collection/15794/82050/Akhutin, A. V., 1990. Sophia and the Devil (Kant in the Face of Russian Religious Metaphysics). Voprosy filosofii, 1, pp. 51-69. (In Rus.)Anonym, 1924. Die Feier des 200 Geburtstags Immanuel Kants in seiner Vaterstadt: die Königsberger Kant-Tage 19. bis 24. April 1924 nach den Berichten der Königsberger Hartungschen Zeitung. Königsberg: Hartungsche Verlagsdruckerei.Anuchin, D. N., 1900. Beglyy vzglyad na proshloye antropologii i na yeye zadachi v Rossii [A Brief Look at the History of Anthropology and Its Tasks in Russia]. Russkiy antropologicheskiy zhurnal [Russian Anthropological Journal], 1, pp. 25-42. (In Rus.)Avtonomova, N. S, 1994. Michel Foucault and His Book The Order of Things. In: M. Foucault, 1994. Slova i veshchi [The Order of Things]. Translated [into Russian] by V. P. Vizgin and N. S. Avtonomova. St. Petersburg: A-cad, pp. 7-37. (In Rus.)Chesnov, Y. V., 2007. Telесnost’ cheloveka: filosofsko-antropologicheskoe ponimanie [The Corporeality of Man: Philosophical-Anthropological Understanding]. Moscow: IPh RAS. (In Rus.)Foucault, M., 2008. Introduction à l’Antropologie de Kant. In: E. Kant, 2008. Antropologie d’un point de vue pragmatique. Paris: Librairie Philosophique, J. Vrin, pp. 11-79.German Embassy, 1924. Letter to G. G. Shpet from the German Embassy with an Invitation to Königsberg to Participate in the Celebration of the 200th Anniversary of the Birth of I. Kant. 1924. Manuscript Department of the Russian State Library. F. 718. Box 25. Unit 11.Kant, I., 2007. Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View. Translated by R. B. Louden. In: I. Kant, 2007. Anthropology, History, and Education. Edited by G. Zöller and R. B. Louden. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 227-429.Kühnemann, E., 1904. Herder und Kant. In: Zu Kants Gedachtniss. Zwolf Festgaben zu seinem 100-jahrigen Todestage. Berlin: Reuther & Reichard, 1904, pp. 246-260.Kühnemann, E., 1924. Kant und Herder. In: Die Feier des 200 Geburtstags Immanuel Kants in seiner Vaterstadt: die Königsberger Kant-Tage 19. bis 24. April 1924 nach den Berichten der Königsberger Hartungschen Zeitung. Königsberg: Hartungsche Verlagsdruckerei, pp. 17-19.Shchedrina, T. G., and Shchedrina, I. O., 2022. Immanuel Kant in the Historical Philosophy of Gustav Shpet. Kantian Journal, 41(3), pp. 124-151. http://dx.doi.org/10.5922/0207-6918-2022-3-5Shpet, G. G., 2006. Introduction to Ethnic Psychology. In: G. G. Shpet, 2006. Philosophia Natalis. Izbrannye psihologo-pedagogicheskie trudy [Philosophy of Natalis. Selected Psychological and Pedagogical Works]. Edited by T. G. Shchedrina. Moscow: ROSSPEN, pp. 417-500. (In Rus.)Shpet, G. G., 2009. Ocherk razvitija russkoj filosofii. II. Materialy [Essay on the Development of Russian Philosophy. II. Materials]. Reconstruction by T. G. Shchedrina. Moscow: ROSSPEN. (In Rus.)Shpet, G. G., 2010. [Book Review] Zu Kants Gedachtnis. Zwölf Festgaben zu seinem 100-jährigen Todestage. Berlin, 1904. In: G. G. Shpet, 2010. Filosofskaja kritika: otzyvy, recenzii, obzory [Philosophical Criticism: Comments, Reviews, Summaries]. Edited and comp. by T. G. Shchedrina. Moscow: ROSSPEN, pp. 52-61. (In Rus.)Shpet, G. G., 2014. Istorija kak problema logiki: Kriticheskie i metodologicheskie issledovanija. Chast’ pervaja. Materialy [History as a Problem of Logic: Critical and Methodological Studies. Part One: Materials]. Edited and commented by T. G. Shchedrina. Moscow & St. Petersburg: Universitetskaja kniga. (In Rus.)Shpet, G., 2019a. Wisdom or Reason? In: G. Shpet, 2019. Hermeneutics and Its Problems. With Selected Essays in Phenomenology. Edited and translated by T. Nemeth. Cham: Springer, pp. 212-265.Shpet, G., 2019b. Philosophy and History. In: G. Shpet, 2019. Hermeneutics and Its Problems. With Selected Essays in Phenomenology. Edited and translated by T. Nemeth. Cham: Springer, pp. 269-277.