NONE20260606182700749Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal Universityno-reply@journals.kantiana.ruImmanuel Kant Baltic Federal UniversityKantian Journal0207-69182310-370106062026441Блуждание в фигурах силлогизма: О возможной когнитивной силлогистике КантаL.S.SirotkinaImmanuel Kant Baltic Federal Universityhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-4394-1516Kant’s treatise “The False Subtlety of the Four Syllogistic Figures” has logical, epistemological, and cognitive-psychological implications. These three perspectives on his conclusions are practically undifferentiated. The first part of this article discusses the logical and ontological-gnoseological content of the treatise in order to reveal the prerequisites for the cognitive interpretation of syllogisms. The second part is an attempt to explicate the treatise’s cognitive content, i.e. a systemic representation of the cognitive properties of syllogisms, as understood by Kant. Kant’s syllogism is characterised as an intellectual act aimed at eliminating opaqueness in cognition and consists of several mental procedures. The cognitive properties of syllogisms are discoverable in Kant’s general characterisation of syllogisms, as well as in the characteristic marks of individual figures. The third part is an attempt to reconstruct Kant’s cognitive syllogistics from angles which can be discerned, but are not explicitly discussed, in the treatise. This reconstruction is based on the distinction Kant draws between two modes of formulating conclusions, one of which is “in the form of judgements”. Here, formal and “ontological” syllogisms are distinguished by the type of relation that obtains between parts of the premises. An ontological syllogism, unlike the formal kind, conforms to the most stringent rules in terms of content. The procedure of making an inference, even according to a perfect figure, is described as ‘composite’, involving, as it does, the transformation of a formal syllogism into an ontological one, or the supplementing of the formal syllogism with an intermediate inference which brings the parts of the syllogism under the categories contained in the highest rules. Errors in inferences in individual cognition are attributed to the use of the “form of judgements”, which obscures the connections that must be clearly understood according to the highest rules. In conclusion, the author systematically presents the cognitive content of the treatise and outlines cognitive pathways that are generated by the ideas of “The False Subtlety” and connected with the study of the unfolding of syllogisms in cognitive reality.0606202673910.5922/0207-6918-2025-1-1https://journals.kantiana.ru/kant_collection/15859/84548/Aristotle, 2009. Prior Analytics. Book I. Translated by Gisela Striker. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Baumeister, F. Ch., 1747. Elementa philosophiae recentioris usibus iuventutis scholasticae accommodata. Leipzig: Gleditsch.Bryushinkin, V. N., 1986. Kant and Syllogistics. Some thoughts about “The False Subtlety of the Four Syllogistic Figures”. Kantian Journal, 11, pp. 29-38. (In Rus.)Bryushinkin, V. N., 2004. Kant’s Metapsychologism. Kantian Journal, 24, pp. 65-73. (In Rus.)Besler, A., 2022. Pre-Critical Kant on Traditional Logic: What is the Mistake in Syllogistic Theory? Temaşa Erciyes Üniversitesi Felsefe Bölümü Dergisi, 17, рр. 192-204. https://doi.org/10.55256/temasa.1112423Crusius, Ch. А., 1762. Weg zur Gewißheit und Zuverläßigkeit der menschlichen Erkenntniß. Leipzig: Gleditsch.Dalla Rosa, D., 2020. On Rules of Inference in Kant’s Logic. Estudos Kantianos, 8(1), pp. 85-100. https://doi.org/10.36311/2318-0501.2020.v8n1.07.p85Kant, I., 1998. Critique of Pure Reason. Translated and edited by P. Guyer and A. Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Kant, I., 1992a. Lectures on Logic. Translated and edited by J. M. Young. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Kant, I. 1992b. The False Subtlety of the Four Syllogistic Figures Demonstrated by M. Immanuel Kant. In: I. Kant, 1992. Theoretical philosophy, 1755—1790. Translated and edited by D. Walford. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 85-106.Krouglov A. N., 2021a. The Teaching of Reason by Christian Thomasius. In: A.N. Krouglov, ed. 2021. “Venskaya logika” I. Kanta [“The Vienna Logic” by I. Kant]. Moscow: Kanon+, pp. 12-30. (In Rus.)Krouglov, A. N., 2021b. Frontispieces in German Enlightenment Logic Textbooks as Programmatic Visual Aids. Logiko-filosofskie shtudii [Logico-Philosophical Studies], 19(1), pp. 12-90. https://doi.org/10.52119/LPHS.2021.54.16.002 (In Rus.)Krouglov A. N., 2021c. Christian Wolff’s Logic. In: A. N. Krouglov, ed. 2021. “Venskaya logika” I. Kanta [“The Vienna Logic” by I. Kant]. Moscow: Kanon+, pp. 12-30. (In Rus.)Lambert, J. H., 1764. Neues Organon oder Gedanken über die Erforschung und Bezeichnung des Wahren und dessen Unterscheidung vom Irrthum und Schein. Leipzig: Johann Bendler.Lemeshevsky, K. V., 2009. The Nota Notae Rule in Kant’s Syllogistic. IKBFU’s Vestnik. Series: Humanities and Social Sciences, 6, pp. 39-45. (In Rus.)Lu-Adler, Н., 2015. The False Subtlety of the Four Syllogistic Figures Demonstrated by M. Immanuel Kant. In: J. Wuerth, 2015. The Cambridge Kant Lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 543-545.Lukanin, R. K., 1984. Organon Aristotelya [Aristotle’s Organon]. Moscow: Nauka. (In Rus.)Mosser, K., 2004. Kant and the Logic of Aristotle. In: Proceedings of the 2nd Hawaii International Conference on the Arts and Humanities (Conference Paper). University of Dayton. [online] Available at: [Accessed 02 April 2024].Oizerman, T. I., 2001. Kant’s Doctrine of a Priori Knowledge. Kantian Journal, 1(22), pp. 3-29. (In Rus.)Sirotkina, L. S., 2021. Epistemological Status of a Logical Procedure: Logical vs Cognitive? Tomsk State University Journal, 60, pp. 15-24. (In Rus.)Tolley, Cl., 2006. Kant on the Nature of Logical Laws. Philosophical Topics, 34 (1-2), рр. 371-407. https://doi.org/10.5840/philtopics2006341/214Vanzo, A. 2018. Kant’s False Subtlety of the Four Syllogistic Figures in Its Intellectual Context. In: M. Sgarbi and M. Cosci, 2018. The Aftermath of Syllogism. Aristotelian Logical Argument from Avicenna to Hegel. London: Bloomsbury, pp. 157-190.Vatavu, М., 2019. Kant’s Innovative Theory of Judgement and Cognition in the False Subtlety of Syllogistic Figures. Kant-Studien, 110(4), рр. 527-553. https://doi.org/10.1515/kant-2019-4001Wolff, Ch., 1770. Logic, or Reasonable Thoughts on the Powers of the Human Understanding and Their Use and Application in the Knowledge and Search of the Truth. Translated from the German of Baron Wolfius. London: Printed for L. Hawes, W. Clarke, and R. Collins.Wilson, K. D., 1975. The Mistaken Simplicity of Kant’s Enthymematic Treatment of the Second and Third Figures. Kant-Studien, 66(4), рр. 404-417. https://doi.org/10.1515/kant-1975-0171Кант об энтузиазмеJ.StolzenbergMartin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg (MLU)https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6569-2963Kant’s theory of enthusiasm has received relatively little attention in Kant studies. This is surprising in view of the fact that Kant was preoccupied with the theme of enthusiasm throughout his life. One of the reasons may be that for Kant enthusiasm is an affect. Therefore, it cannot be used to justify ethics. On closer examination, however, a more differentiated picture emerges. In addition to pathological enthusiasm, Kant recognises an aesthetically sublime enthusiasm, and in his reflections on the reaction to the events of the French Revolution, Kant coined the concept of a true enthusiasm, related to the ideas of freedom and justice. Finally, Kant introduces the concept of the enthusiasm of good resolution. It is a preliminary stage of the feeling of respect for the moral law in moral education. It is no longer regarded as an affect, but is under the guidance of reason. The first part discusses the partly incompatible conceptions of enthusiasm. The second part examines Jean-François Lyotard’s interpretation and critique of Kant’s philosophical-historical theory of enthusiasm. In the face of the devastating catastrophes of the twentieth century, Lyotard sees no reason for the enthusiasm that Kant perceived in the people’s reaction to the French Revolution and interpreted as a prognostic sign of future history. It has been replaced by a general world-weariness. However, Lyotard’s critique of Kant is based on a historicist fallacy. The reference to historical catastrophes is not an argument against the a priori validity of the ideas of freedom and justice and against the endeavour for their realisation.06062026406710.5922/0207-6918-2025-1-2https://journals.kantiana.ru/kant_collection/15859/84549/Burger, D., 1996. Die Genese des “Widerstreits”. Entwicklungen im Werk Jean-François Lyotards. Wien: Turia und Kant.Clewis, R. R., 2018. The Feeling of Enthusiasm. In: K. Sorensen and D. Williamson, eds. 2018. Kant and the Faculty of Feeling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 184-207.Enskat, R., 2022. Aufklärung — Religion — Wissenschaft. Zur Genese und Struktur unseres neuzeitlichen Spannungsfeldes. Hamburg: Meiner.Heidegger, M., 1986. Sein und Zeit. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Heyd, M., 1995. Be Sober and Reasonable. The Critique of Enthusiasm in the Seventeenth and Early Eighteenth Centuries. New York: Brill.Kammasch, T., 2004. Politik der Ausnahme. Die “Politique philosophique” von Jean-François Lyotard und ihr Widerstreit mit Kant. Mandelbach & Cambridge : Cicero.Kant, I., 1999a. The Metaphysics of Morals. ln: I. Kant, 1999. Practical Philosophy. Translated and edited by M. J. Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 365-603.Kant, I., 1999b. Critique of Practical Reason. In: I. Kant, 1999. Practical philosophy. Translated and edited by M. J. Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 139-271.Kant, I., 2000. Critique of the Power of Judgment. Edited by P. Guyer. Translated by P. Guyer and E. Matthews. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Kant, I., 2006a. The Contest of the Faculties, Part 2. In: I. Kant, 2006. Toward Perpetual Peace and Other Writings on Politics, Peace, and History. Edited by P. Kleingeld; translated by D. L. Colclasure. New Haven & London: Yale University Press, pp. 150-163.Kant, I., 2006b. Toward Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch. In: I. Kant, 2006. Toward Perpetual Peace and Other Writings on Politics, Peace, and History. Edited and with an introduction by P. Kleingeld; translated by D. L. Colclasure. New Haven & London: Yale University Press, pp. 67-109.Kant, I., 2007a. 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.Kant, I., 2007b. Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and Sublime. Translated by P. Guyer. In: I. Kant, 2007. Anthropology, History, and Education. Edited by G. Zöller and R. B. Louden. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 18-62.Kant, I., 2007c. Essay on the Maladies of the Head. Translated by H. Wilson. In: I. Kant, 2007. Anthropology, History, and Education. Edited by G. Zöller and R. B. Louden. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 63-77.Kant, I., 2007d. Lectures on Pedagogy. 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. 434-485.Kant, I., 2011. Remarks in the Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and Sublime. In: I. Kant, 2011. Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and Sublime and Other Writings. Edited by P. Frierson and P. Guyer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 65-204.Lyotard, J. F., 1979. La Condition postmoderne. Rapport sur le savoir. Paris: Les Éditions de minuit.Lyotard, J. F., 1986. L’enthousiasme. La critique kantienne de l’histoire. Paris: Galilée.Lyotard, J. F., 1988. The Differend. Phrases in Dispute. Translated by G. Van Den Abbeele. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Lyotard, J. F., 1994. Lessons on the Analytic of the Sublime. Translated by E. Rottenberg. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Lyotard, J. F., 2009. Enthusiasm. The Kantian Critique of History. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.McBay Merritt, M., 2010. (Book Review) Robert R. Clewis: The Kantian Sublime and the Revelation of Freedom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp. xiii + 258. British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 18(3), pp. 529-532.Muglioni, J. -M., 2024. Enthusiasmus und moralischer Fortschritt im Streit der Fakultäten. In: O. Höffe, ed. 2024. Immanuel Kant: Schriften zur Geschichtsphilosophie. Berlin & Boston: de Gruyter, pp. 197-214.Newmark, C., 2008. Passion — Affekt — Gefühl. Philosophische Theorien der Emotionen zwischen Aristoteles und Kant. Hamburg: Meiner.Pleger, W., 1989. Kant und die Französische Revolution. In: H. H. Holz, G. Labica, D. Losurdo and H. J. Sandkühler, eds. 1989. Annalen der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Dialektische Philosophie — Societas Hegeliana, Volume 6: Die französische Revolution: Philosophie und Wissenschaften. Köln: Pahl-Rugenstein, pp. 245-249.Rousseau, J. -J., 1995. The Confessions. In: C. Kelly, R. D. Masters and P. G. Stillman, eds. 1995. The Collected Writings of Rousseau. Volume 5: The Confessions and Correspondence, Including the Letters to Malesherbes. Translated by C. Kelly. Hanover & London: University Press of New England, pp. 1-550.Scheerlinck, R., 2017. Enthusiasmus und Ekel. Ein posthumer Dialog zwischen Kant und Lyotard. Kant-Studien, 108(3), pp. 427-453.Schrader, W. H., 2010. Enthusiasmus. In: K. Barck, M. Fontius, F. Wolfzettel and B. Steinwachs, eds. 2010. Ästhetische Grundbegriffe. Historisches Wörterbuch in sieben Bänden, Volume 2. Stuttgart & Weimar: J. B. Metzler, pp. 223-240.Schramke, J., 2018. Das Prinzip Enthusiasmus. Wandlungen des Begriffs im Zeitalter der Aufklärung und der Französischen Revolution. Göttingen: Universitätsverlag.Seebohm, T. M., 1994. Kant und die Revolution. Jahrbuch der Albertus Universität zu Königsberg. Year 1993, Volume 28. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, pp. 141-148.Sorensen, K. D., 2002. Kant’s Taxonomy of the Emotions. Kantian Review, 6, pp. 109-128.Stolzenberg, J., 2023. Freude und Enthusiasmus. Schiller — Kant — Beethoven. Musiktheorie. Zeitschrift für Musikwissenschaft, 1, pp. 41-54.Перипетии опыта. «Опытное познание» у Канта и «явления» ГегеляH.GutschmidtSamarkand State Universityhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-8010-5384A.KrioukovSamarkand State Universityhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-6708-3598It was not until German Idealism that philosophy briefly regained the importance it had in antiquity. This is indicated precisely by the “peripeteia” in the concept of experience. When Kant and Hegel write about experience, they mean quite different things on the other. Kant’s concept of experience is law-like, invariant and rigid. Only for this reason can it form the basis for a critical reflection on the validity of knowledge. However, Hegel’s analysis of object experience “dynamises” Kant’s concept in various ways: firstly, he provides an interpretation of the process of how perception and its contents ultimately become the “play of forces” via the life of things. Secondly, Hegel works out the self-referentiality of the subject in this process of experience. Finally, Hegel shows how the experience of objects refers beyond itself to more complex forms of knowledge. In the chapter “Power and Understanding” of his Phenomenology of Spirit he undertakes a subtle differentiation of what Kant calls “objective cognition” and shows, on the one hand, which process is already necessary in order to grasp a thing even sensually. On the other hand, he analyses the different levels of experience that are already involved in the simple process of perception. The authors analyse this process as a silent dialogue between Kant and Hegel and show why Hegel’s concept of experience can claim to contribute more to the understanding of man than Kant’s.06062026688810.5922/0207-6918-2025-1-3https://journals.kantiana.ru/kant_collection/15860/84564/Adler, H., 2016. Sind Anschauungen ohne Begriff blind? In: H. Adler und S. Gross, Hg. 2016. Anschauung und Anschaulichkeit Visualisierung im Wahrnehmen, Lesen und Denken. Paderborn: Wilhelm Fink, S. 27-44.Arndt, A., Bowman, B., Gerhard, M. und Zovko, J., Hg. 2017. Hegels Antwort auf Kant I. Hegel-Jahrbuch, 2016(1).Baum, M. 2015. Kants „Möglichkeit der Erfahrung“. In: R. Enskat, Hg. 2015. Kants Theorie der Erfahrung. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter, S. 151-167.Barteczko, D., 2017. Hegels Antwort auf das kantische Verhältnis von Anschauung und Denken. Hegel-Jahrbuch, 2016(1), S. 281-285.Gentile, A., 2018, Bewusstsein, Anschauung und das Unendliche bei Fichte, Schelling und Hegel. Freiburg & München: Karl Alber.Ginsborg, H., 2006. Kant and the Problem of Experience. University of California. Philosophical Topics, 34(1-2), pp. 59-106.Harrison, R., 1988. Wie man dem transzendentalen Ich einen Sinn verleiht. In: B. Homburg, Hg. 1988. Kants transzendentale Deduktion und die Möglichkeit von Transzendentalphilosophie. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, pp. 32-50.Hegel, G. W. F., 1989. Phänomenologie des Geistes. In: G. W. F. Hegel, 1989. Werke. Band 3. Hg. von K. M. Michel und E. Moldenhauer, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Henrich, D., 1982. Kant und Hegel. Versuch der Vereinigung ihrer Grundgedanken. In: D. Henrich, 1982. Selbstverhältnisse. Stuttgart: Reclam, pp. 173-208.Henrich, D., 2008. Between Kant and Hegel. Harvard: Harvard University Press.Hösle, V., 2013. Eine kurze Geschichte der deutschen Philosophie. München: C. H. Beck.Houlgate, S., 2013. Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit. London: Bloomsbury.Kroner, R., 1961. Von Kant bis Hegel, 2. Auflage. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.Longuenesse, B., 2007. Hegel’s Critique of Metaphysics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Oizerman, T. I., 2014. Kant i Hegel: Opyt sravnitel’nogo issledovaniya [Kant and Hegel: A Comparative Study]. In: T. I. Oizerman, 2014. Izbrannye trudy [Selected Works]. Volume 4. Moscow: Nauka. (In Rus.)Pippin, R., 1989. Hegel’s Idealism. The Satisfactions of Self-Consciousness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Taylor, C., 1975. Hegel. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Van Cleve, J., 1999. Problems from Kant. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press.Плеханов как «защитник» Канта от неокантианцевT.G.RumyantsevaBelarussian State Universityhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-5893-9852The history of the reception and interpretation of Neo-Kantian ideas in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries shows the special role played by those who took a negative stand with regard to Neo-Kantianism and sought to dissociate it from and oppose it to Kant’s legacy. A prominent place among the latter was occupied by Georgy V. Plekhanov, most of whose works were fiercely polemical. Highly rating Kant’s works, in which he even found some coincidences with materialism, Plekhanov for a number of years engaged in polemics on philosophical and political issues with the German Neo-Kantians and Eduard Bernstein, who shared many of their views. Calling Neo-Kantianism, after Friedrich Engels, “a step backwards” from Kant’s philosophy, he argued that Neo-Kantians had misunderstood Kant’s philosophy and, in advocating a return to Kant’s theoretical philosophy in order to use it to refute contemporary materialism, had distorted Kant’s doctrine. Plekhanov’s so-called “defence” of Kant against Neo-Kantians should not be understood and accepted literally. Being a Marxist, Plekhanov tried to defend above all the views of Marx and Engels by revealing the flaws in the Neo-Kantian interpretation of Kant. Although he himself in some ways misinterpreted Kant, his views command some interest today because many of them played a certain role in the perception of Kant in the Soviet and post-Soviet times and were reflected in the discussions of the Kantian philosophy as a whole, especially its fundamental concept of the “thing-in-itself”.060620268910610.5922/0207-6918-2025-1-4https://journals.kantiana.ru/kant_collection/15860/84567/Belov, V. N., 2012. Russian Neo-Kantianism: History and Peculiarities of Development. Kantian Journal, 39(1), pp. 27-39. (In Rus.)Chaly, V., 2018. Kantianism and Anti-Kantianism in Russian Revolutionary Thought. Con-Textos Kantianos. International Journal of Philosophy, 8, pp. 218-241. http://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2331766Dmitrieva, N. A., 2007a. Philosophy of Humanism and Enlightenment: Criteria, Specificity, and Problems of Russian Neo-Kantianism. Filosofskie nauki, 1, pp. 101-119. (In Rus.)Dmitrieva, N. A., 2007b. Russkoe neokantianstvo: “Marburg” v Rossii [Russian Neo-Kantianism: “Marburg” in Russia]. Moscow: ROSSPEN. (In Rus.)Dynnik, M., 1939. Neo-Kantianism. In: O. Ju. Shmidt, ed. 1939. Bol’shaja sovetskaja jenciklopedija [Big Soviet Encyclopedia]. Volume 41. Moscow: OGIZ RSFSR, pp. 634-639. (In Rus.)Engels, F., 1990a. Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of Classical German Philosophy. In: K. Marx and F. Engels, 1990. Collected Works. Volume 26. Engels: 1882-1889. London: Lawrence & Wishart, pp. 353-398.Engels, F., 1990b. Introduction to the English Edition (1892) of Socialism: Utopian and Scientific. In: K. Marx and F. Engels, 1990. Collected Works. Volume 27. Engels: 1890-1895. London: Lawrence & Wishart, pp. 278-302.Kant, I., 1998. Critique of Pure Reason. Edited and translated by P. Guyer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Kant, I., 2004. Prolegomena to any Future Metaphysics that Will be Able to Come forward as Science. In: I. Kant, 2004. Theoretical Philosophy after 1781. Translated by G. Hatfield. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 29-170.Krouglov, A. N., 2024. Filosofija Kanta v Rossii. [Kant’s Philosophy in Russia]. Kaliningrad: IKBFU Press. (In Rus.)Lenin, V. I., 1976. Conspectus of Hegel’s Book The Science of Logic. In: V. I. Lenin, 1976. Collected Works. Fourth Edition. Volume 38: Philosophical Notebooks. Moscow: Progress Publishers, pp. 85-237.Livshic, G. M., 1981. Kritika idealizma i religii v trudah G. V. Plehanova [Critique of Idealism and Religion in the Works of G. V. Plekhanov]. Minsk: Vyshjejshaja shkola. (In Rus.)Marx, K. and Engels, F., 1990. The German Ideology. In: K. Marx and F. Engels, 1990. Collected Works. Volume 5. Marx and Engels: 1845—1847. London: Lawrence & Wishart, pp. 19-539.Oizerman, T. I., 2005. Opravdanie revizionizma [Justification of Revisionism]. Moscow: Kanon+ ROOI “Reabilitacija”. (In Rus.)Oizerman, T. I., 2008. Kant i Gegel’ (opyt sravnitel’nogo issledovanija) [Kant and Hegel (A Comparative Study)]. Moscow: Kanon+ ROOI “Reabilitacija”. (In Rus.)Pereira, S. R., 2019. The Real Target of Kant’s Refutation. Kantian Journal, 38(3), pp. 7-31. http://dx.doi.org/10.5922/0207-6918-2019-3-1Plekhanov, G. V., 1976a. Materialism or Kantianism. In: G. Plekhanov, 1976. Selected Philosophical Works, Volume 2. Moscow: Progress Publishers, pp. 398-414. (In Rus.)Plekhanov, G. V., 1976b. Conrad Schmidt versus Karl Marx and Frederick Engels. In: G. Plekhanov, 1976. Selected Philosophical Works, Volume 2. Moscow: Progress Publishers, pp. 379-397.Plekhanov, G. V., 1976c. On the Alleged Crisis in Marxism. In: G. Plekhanov, 1976. Selected Philosophical Works, Volume 2. Moscow: Progress Publishers, pp. 315-325.Plekhanov, G. V., 1976d. Bernstein and Materialism. In: G. Plekhanov, 1976. Selected Philosophical Works, Volume 2. Moscow: Progress Publishers, pp. 326-339.Plekhanov, G. V., 1976e. Cant against Kant. In: G. Plekhanov, 1976. Selected Philosophical Works, Volume 2. Moscow: Progress Publishers, pp. 352-378.Plekhanov, G. V., 1976f. On Mr Windelband’s Book. In: G. Plekhanov, 1976. Selected Philosophical Works, Volume 3. Moscow: Progress Publishers, pp. 419-423.Plekhanov, G. V., 1976g. On Mr Heinrich Rickert’s Book. In: G. Plekhanov, 1976. Selected Philosophical Works, Volume 3. Moscow: Progress Publishers, pp. 481-486.Rickert, H., 1911. Nauki o prirode i nauki o kul’ture [Sciences of Nature and Sciences of Culture]. Translated by S. Gessen. Saint-Petersburg: Obrazovanie. (In Rus.)Rumyantseva, T. G., 2023. I. Kant’s Philosophy as a Subject of Plekhanov’s Polemics with the Leaders of the Second International. In: G. Ch. Lyankevich and A. Ju. Dudchik, 2023. Tret’i mezhdunarodnye plehanovskie chteniya [The Third International Plekhanov Readings]. Minsk: Pravo i ekonomika, pp. 35-44. (In Rus.)Steila, D., 1991. Genesis and Development of Plekhanov’s Theory of Knowledge: A Marxist Between Anthropological Materialism and Physiology. Dordrecht: Springer Science + Business Media.Windelband, W., 1910. Filosofija v nemeckoj dukhovnoj zhizni XIX stoletija [Philosophy in the German Spiritual Life of the Twentieth Century]. Translated by M. M. Rubinstein. Moscow: Zveno. (In Rus.)Кант в русском полицейском праве: неизвестные страницыD.O.RozhinImmanuel Kant Baltic Federal Universityhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-4877-2598Outside the view of historians of Russian philosophy there are still unpublished materials that can illuminate unknown aspects of the reception of Kant’s philosophy in Russia. One piece of such material, which is published in the appendix to this article, was found in the archive of B. V. Nikolsky, where it is titled “Article by S.V. on the Occasion of the Centenary of Immanuel Kant’s Death. 1904”. It is devoted to Kant’s philosophy of law, the origins of which are traced back to the French Revolution. In addition, the author of the manuscript claims that Kant’s legal conception influenced the development of the science of police law and the reforms of Alexander II. Finally, it is interesting to note that its author describes Kant as “a nationalist in terms of personal qualities” and “a world genius in terms of his doctrine”, a doctrine whose ideas had not lost their relevance a hundred years after his death. Textological and historical-philosophical analysis has established the identity of its author. He was S. V. Vedrov, Professor of Police Law at St. Petersburg University, previously not known to be interested in Kant’s philosophy. To reconstruct Vedrov’s position on the Kantian philosophy of law in general I look at the views of his colleagues and mentors: B. V. Nikolsky, I. E. Andreyevsky and K. A. Nevolin, each of whom had in their own way exhibited an interest in Kant’s doctrine. This introduces into the history of philosophy new names and ideas previously ignored in the research of the reception of Kant’s philosophy in Russia.0606202610713110.5922/0207-6918-2025-1-5https://journals.kantiana.ru/kant_collection/15861/84616/Andreyevsky, I.E., 1857. From the Publisher. In: K. A. Nevolin, 1857. Polnoe sobranie sochinenii: v 6 t. [Nevolin K. A. Complete Collected Works: In 6 Volumes]. Volume 1. Saint-Petersburg: Tipografiya E. Praca, pp. III-XX. (In Rus.)Andreyevsky, I. E., 1866. Russkoe gosudarstvennoe pravo [Russian State Law]. Volume 1. St. Petersburg & Moscow: Izdanie M. O. Vol’fa. (In Rus.)Andreyevsky, I. E., 1874. Policejskoe pravo: v 2-h t. [Police Law: In 2 Volumes]. Volume 1. St. Petersburg: Tipografiya V. V. Pratts. (In Rus.)Baskin, Y. Ya., 1993. Kant and the Formation of the Idea of the Legal State in the First Half of the 19th Century in Germany. Kantian Journal, 1(17), pp. 61-66. (In Rus.)Bluntschli, I. C., 1867. Geschichte des allgemeinen Statsrechts und der Politik: Seit dem sechzehnten Jahrhundert bis zur Gegenwart. Second Edition. München: Literarisch- artistische Anstalt der J. G. Cotta’schen Buchhandlung.Borowski, L. E., 1804. Ueber Immanuel Kant: Darstellung des Lebens und Charakters Immanuel Kants. Volume 1. Königsberg: bey Friedrich Nicolovius.Eryomin, A. V., 2020. B. V. Nikolsky: A Forgotten Name in Science. Kriminalist, 3(32), pp. 17-23. (In Rus.)Golubinsky, F. A., 1884. Lektsii filosofii professora Moskovskoy dukhovnoy akademii F.A. Golubinskogo [Lectures of Philosophy by Professor of the Moscow Theological Academy F. A. Golubinsky]. Volume 1. Moscow: L. F. Snegirev. (In Rus.)Jachmann, R. B., 1804. Immanuel Kant geschildert in Briefen an einen Freund. Königsberg: bey Friedrich Nicolovius.Jellinek, G., 1905. Das Recht des modernen Staates. Volume 1. Second Edition. Berlin: O. Häring.Kant, I., 1996. The Metaphysics of Morals (1797). ln: I. Kant, 1996. Practical Philosophy. Translated and edited by M. J. Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 365-603.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.Kroeschell, K., 1993. Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte. Second Edition. Volume 3: Seit 1650. Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.Krouglov, A. N., 2014. Early Reception of Kant’s First Metaphysical Foundations of the Doctrine of Law in Russia (Late 18th and First Half of the 19th Centuries). In: I. Kant, 2014. Sochiniya na nemetskom i russkom yazykakh [Works in German and Russian Languages]. Volume 5, Part 1. Moscow: Kanon+; ROOI “Reabilitaciya”, pp. 827-970. (In Rus.)Krouglov, A. N., 2021. Kant as the German Theorist of the French Revolution: The Origin of a Dogma. Kantian Journal, 40(3), pp. 63-92. http://dx.doi.org/10.5922/0207-6918-2021-3-3Mohl, R. von, 1866. Die Polizei-Wissenschaft nach den Grundsätzen des Rechtsstaates. Volume 1. Tübingen: Verlag der H. Laupp’schen Buchhandlung.Nevolin, K. A., 1857. Polnoe sobranie sochinenij: v 6 t. [Complete Collected Works: In 6 Volumes]. Volume 1. St. Petersburg: Tipografiya E. Prattsa. (In Rus.)Nikolsky, B. V., 2015a. Dnevnik. 1896—1918: v 2-h t. [Diary. 1896-1918: In 2 Volumes]. Volume 1. Saint-Petersburg: Dmitry Bulanin. (In Rus.)Nikolsky, B. V., 2015b. Dnevnik. 1896—1918: v 2-h t. [Diary. 1896-1918: In 2 Volumes]. Volume 2. Saint-Petersburg: Dmitry Bulanin. (In Rus.)Polenov, B. K., 1896. Vedrov. In: Biograficheskij slovar’ professorov i prepodavatelei imperatorskogo S.-Peterburgskogo universiteta za istekshuyu tret’yu chetvert’ veka ego sushchestvovaniya. 1869—1894 [Biographical Dictionary of Professors and Teachers of the Imperial St. Petersburg University for the Past Third Quarter of a Century of Its Existence. 1869-1894]. St. Petersburg: Tip. i lit. B. M. Vol’fa, pp. 133-134. (In Rus.)Rozhin, D. O., 2021. Reception of Kant’s Epistemological Ideas in Fyodor Golubinsky’s Metaphysics. Kantian Journal, 40(1), pp. 97-123. http://dx.doi.org/10.5922/0207-6918-2021-1-3S.V., 1904. Stat’ya S. V. po povodu 100-letiya smerti Immanuila Kanta [Article by S. V. on the Occasion of the 100th Anniversary of the Death of Immanuel Kant]. In: State Archive of the Russian Federation (GARF). Coll. 588 (Boris V. Nikolsky). Inv. 1, № 1359. (In Rus.)Salikov, A. N., Zhavoronkov, A. G. and Krouglov, A. N., eds. 2024. Rannie biografii Kanta: L. E. Borovski, R. B. Yahman, E. A. Ch. Wasianski, F. T. Rink i “Kantiana” R. Reicke [Early Biographies of Kant: L. E. Borowski, R. B. Jachmann, E. A. Ch. Wasianski, F. T. Rinck, and R. Reicke’s “Kantiana”]. Translated from German by A. N. Salikov and A. G. Zhavoronkov, Commentary by A. N. Krouglov. Moscow: IKBFU Press; Centr gumanitarnyh iniciativ. (In Rus.)Sementkovsky, R., 1871. Preface of the Translator. In: R. von Mohl, 1871. Nauka policii po nachalam yuridicheskogo gosudarstva [Police Science on the Principles of the Legal State]. Volume 1. Translated form German by R. Sementkovsky. St. Petersburg: Pechatnya V. I. Golovina, pp. I-IX. (In Rus.)Sementkovsky, R., 1892. Preface to the Russian Edition. In: F.A. Lange, 1892. Rabochij vopros, ego znachenie v nastoyashchem i budushchem [The Problem of the Worker and its Meaning for the Present and Future]. Translated from German by A. B. Blyok, with preface by R. I. Sementkovsky. St. Petersburg: Tipografiya gazety “Novosti”, pp. I-VI. (In Rus.)Shimbiryova, O. A., 2019. The 1917 Revolution through the View of a Monarchist: Reading the Diary of B. V. Nikolsky. Istoricheskij zhurnal: nauchnye issledovaniya [Historical Journal: Scientific Research], 4, pp. 118-125. http://dx.doi.org/10.7256/2454-0609.2019.4.30229 (In Rus.)Stogov, D. I., 2020. B. V. Nikolsky and B. A. Sadovskoi about Emperor Alexander III. Russian-Byzantine Herald, 1(3), pp. 270-285. http://dx.doi.org/10.24411/2588-0276-2020-10016 (In Rus.)Vedrov, S. V., 1891. Ivan Efimovich Andreevsky (Nekrolog) [Ivan Efimovich Andreevsky (Obituary)]. St. Petersburg: Tip. Doma prizreniya malolet. bednyh. (In Rus.)Vedrov, S. V., 1904. (Book Revew) Policejskoe pravo. [Sochinenie] professora Imperatorskogo S.-Peterburgskogo universiteta V. F. Deryuzhinskogo. (Posobie dlya studentov. SPb., 1903 g.) [Review of the book Police Law. Work by Professor of the Imperial St. Petersburg University V. F. Deryuzhinsky. (Manual for Students. St. Petersburg, 1903)]. St. Petersburg: Tipo-lit. M. P. Frolovoy. (In Rus.)Vvedensky, A. I. and Rozhin, D. O., 2024. “The Great Rationalist”: Alexey Vvedensky on Kant in the Context of Russian Kantiana. Kantian Journal, 43(1), pp. 149-180. http://dx.doi.org/10.5922/0207-6918-2024-1-7Wasianski, E. A. Ch., 1804. Immanuel Kant in seinen letzten Lebensjahren. Ein Beytrag zur Kenntniß seines Charakters und häuslichen Lebens aus dem täglichen Umgange mit ihm. Königsberg: bey Friedrich Nicolovius.Zhavoronkov, A. G., 2015. Kant, Nietzsche and the French Revolution. History of Philosophy Yearbook, 30, pp. 174-190. (In Rus.)Наследие И. Канта и философия будущего. Обзор V Международной летней школы для исследователей, молодых ученых и студентовA.StartsevaMoscow Pedagogical State University (MPGU)Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal Universityhttps://orcid.org/0009-0004-6881-7620The following is a review of the Fifth International Summer School for Young Scholars and Students, held on the eve of the tercentenary of Kant’s birth, and devoted to the question of the relevance of his philosophical ideas for understanding and solving the problems that confront humankind in the twenty-first century. The event was organized by the Academia Kantiana of the Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University, with the support of the RF Ministry of Science and Higher Education and the Petersburg Dialog Forum, in Kaliningrad on 14—20 August 2023. The School engaged with the following themes: Kant and the philosophy of consciousness, Kant’s philosophy of law, Kant’s philosophy of religion, and Kant’s political philosophy. The programme included eight lectures, as well as thematic seminars; their content is reviewed below. As part of the conference of young scholars, 60 studies were presented in poster format. Discussion centred around questions of the interpretation of Kant’s legacy in the context of contemporary challenges and philosophical trends. The Summer School covered a wide range of topics, from epistemology and metaphysics, to ethics, political philosophy, literature, and more.0606202613214610.5922/0207-6918-2025-1-6https://journals.kantiana.ru/kant_collection/15862/84625/Chaly, V. A., 2023. Reclaiming the “Cultural Mandate”: The Idea of Sustainable Development in the Kantian Perspective. Kantian Journal, 42(2), pp. 68-94. http://dx.doi:10.5922/0207-6918-2023-2-4Kant, I., 2006. Toward Perpetual Peace. In: I. Kant, 2006. Toward Perpetual Peace and Other Writings on Politics, Peace, and History. Edited and with an Introduction by P. Kleingeld, translated by D. L. Colclasure. New Haven & London: Yale University Press, pp. 67-109.Krouglov, A. N., 2024. The Kantian Concept of Human Dignity Today. Kantian Journal, 43(1), pp. 47-75. http://dx.doi.org/10.5922/0207-6918-2024-1-3Kryshtop, L. E., 2023. Kant’s Ethicotheology and His Concept of the Highest Good. Philosophy of Religion: Analytic Researches, 7(1), pp. 99-120. https://doi.org/10.21146/2587-683X-2023-7-1-99-120 (In Rus.)Riedel, F. J., 1767. Theorie der schönen Künste und Wissenschaften: ein Auszug aus den Werken verschiedener Schriftsteller. Jena: Christian Henrich Cuno.Riedel, F. J., 1774. Theorie der schönen Künste und Wissenschaften: Neue Auflage. Wien & Jena: Christian Henrich Cuno.Vasilyev, V. V., 2024. Kantian Motifs in Colin McGinn’s Mysterianism. In: V. E. Semenov, ed. 2024. Immanuel Kant i filosofiya soznaniya [Immanuel Kant and the Philosophy of Consciousness]. Kaliningrad: IKBFU Press, pp. 400-424. (In Rus.)