NONE20260608022912767Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal Universityno-reply@journals.kantiana.ruImmanuel Kant Baltic Federal UniversityKantian Journal0207-69182310-37010608202611L.KalinnikovThis article concludes the analysis of systematicity of the Critique of Pure Reason — the work that underlies the entire system created by the great Königsberg philosopher. The author considers the role of transcendental dialectic (it accounts for more than half of the book) in Kant’s methodology of science and the system of criticism. In the context of traditional epistemological theories, it was an entirely new instalment supplementing these theories and understanding knowledge as a continuous process undergoing scientific revolutions. Constructing synthetic a priori judgements requires leaving the extant knowledge for the realm of possible experience, where reason is faced with antinomies. The author provides a critical examination of Karl Jaspers’ ideas about the cognising abilities of transcendental dialectical reason. It is stressed that transcendental dialectic ensures the system integrity of Kant’s philosophy, making it possible to construct a transcendental philosophy going beyond both vulgar mechanistic empiricism and transcendental dogmatism.06082026111. Kant, I. 1964, Kritika chistogo razuma [Critique of Pure Reason] in: Kant, I. Sobranie sochineniy v 6 t. [Works in 6 volumes], Moscow, vol. 3.2. Kant, I. 1966, O voprose, predlozhennom na premiyu korolevskoy berlinskoy akademii nauk v 1791 godu: kakie deystvitelnyie uspehi sdelala metafizika v Germanii so vremeni Leybnitsa i Volfa? [What Real Progress Has Metaphysics Made in Germany Since the Time of Leibniz and Wolff?] in: Kant, I. Sobranie sochineniy v 6 t. [Works in 6 volumes], vol. 6, Moscow.3. Kant, I. 1965, Prolegomeny… [Prolegomena…], in Kant, I. Sobranie sochineniy v 6 t. [Works in 6 volumes], Moscow, vol. 5.4. Jaspers, K. 2014, Kant: zhizn', trudy, vlijanie. [Kant], M., 2014.O.MukhutdinovThe category of power is one of ontological predicates discussed by Kant in lectures on metaphysics. This concept expresses relation of substance to its attributes and plays an important role in Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit. Law is a simple form of unity incorporating an idea of the play of powers, whereas power is a category that makes it possible to understand the supersensible as a realm of laws. This interpretation is inherent in the system of not only theoretical but also practical reason. Freedom is the ‘substance’ of human existence. The unity of freedom is an idea, whose unity is presented in the diversity of actions in the sensible world. A condition for cognising freedom is the categorical imperative. Apparently, applying the moral law formula may lead to contradictions. One of these contradictions is contained in the famous question regarding the alleged right to lie out of love of humanity. Kant's theory of impossibility of total delusion makes it possible, on the one hand, to prove that Kant is right to insist on inadmissibility of lying. On the other, in controversial situations, polemics focus on the necessity to conceal information to save a human life rather than lies proper. The idea of ‘inverted world’ is not a formal abstraction but the principle behind the movement of historical life. A phenomenological analysis of the polemic between Kant and Constant shows that the problem of alleged right to lie out of love of humanity is a result of an incorrectly posed question.06082026111. Fink E. 1977. Hegel. Phänomenologische Interpretation der «Phänomenologie des Geistes». Frankfurt a. M.: Vittorio Klostermann.2. Gadamer H.-G. 1987. Die verkehrte Welt In: Gadamer H.-G. Gesammelte Werke. Bd. III. Neuere Philosophie I: Hegel, Husserl, Heidegger. Tübingen, Mohr.3. Hegel, G. 1992. Fenomenologija duha [Phenomenology of spirit]. Saint-Petersburg, Nauka.4. Heidegger M. 1994. Vom Wesen der menschlichen Freiheit. In: Heidegger M. GA, Bd. 31. Frankfurt a. M.: Vittorio Klostermann.5. Heidegger M. 1997. Hegels «Phänomenologie des Geistes». In: Heidegger M. GA, Bd. 32. Frankfurt a. M.: Vittorio Klostermann.6. Hinske N. 2007. Mezhdu Prosveshcheniem i kritikoj razuma [Between Enlightment and Critique of Reason]. M., Kul'turnaja revoljutsija.7. Husserl E. 1950. Vorlesungen über Ethik und Wertlehre 1908—1914. In: Hua XXVIII. Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.8. Husserl E. 1962. Die Krisis der europäischen Wissenschaften und die transzendentale Phänomenologie. In: Hua VI. Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.9. Kant I. 1821. Vorlesungen über die Metaphysik. Erfurt.10. Kant, I. 1964. Kritika chistogo razuma [Critique of Pure Reason]. In: Kant, I. Soch. v 6 t. [Works in 6 volumes]. Vol. 3, Moscow.11. Kant, I. 1965a. Kritika prakticheskogo razuma [Critique of Practical Reason]. In: Kant, I. Soch. v 6 t. [Works in 6 volumes] Vol. 4 (1), Moscow.12. Kant, I. 1965б. Osnovopolozhenija metafiziki nravstvennosti [Groundwork of the Metaphysics of moral]. In: Kant, I. Soch. v 6 t. [Works in 6 volumes] Vol. 4 (1), Moscow.13. Kant, I. 1966. Kritika sposobnosti suzhdenija [Critique of Judgment]. In: Kant, I. Soch. v 6 t. [Works in 6 volumes]. Vol. 5, Moscow.14. Kant, I. 1980. O mnimom prave lgat' iz chelovelokjubija [On alleged right to lie from philanthropy]. In: Traktaty i pis'ma [Treatises and letters], Moscow, Nauka.15. Kant, I. 2000. Iz rukopisnogo nasledija [From manuscript heritage]. Moscow, Progress- Traditsija.A.ZilberKant’s treatises on political problems form a loosely structured text corpus. However, due to its passionate polemic, it can be rewritten in the form of dialogues. The most dramatic instalment is the authoritative treatise Toward Perpetual Peace, which is full of memorable phrases that used to excite the very first readers. Kant’s opponents are both concrete authors — either living or dead contemporaries (Garve, Mendesohn, Frederick the Great) — and generalised characters representing entire classes. The two opposing parties are Kant and his favourite philosophers (Saint-Pierre and Rousseau) against the ‘government’ and ‘lawyers’. Kant’s philosophy of law, which is believed to rest on a metaphysical foundation, is constructed using a minimum of anthropological premises, which is often viewed as a virtue. However, Kant’s political teaching is closely connected with moral anthropology, which is considered as another virtue. Justifying their actions with empirical observations, politicians violate legal rules. Thus, they are subject to the same propensities that they find so frightening in the population. The philosopher, although agreeing with the grim opinion of human nature, tries to dissuade politicians and instil moderate optimism in them. The article collates and systemises politicians’ and lawyers’ ideas of humans, the world, and politics. According to Kant’s philosophy of law, the model of an ideal society can be pictured as a mechanism. However, his philosophy of history and politics claims the opposite, inclining towards organicism. The methodological framework for argumentation analysis is V. Bryushinkin’s ‘cognitive approach’. The author identifies the historical and ideational sources of decision-making criteria, which Kant assigns to his opponents. The article summarises relevant findings reported by H. Williams, G. Cavallar, R. Brandt, and others.06082026111. Arendt, H. 2011, O politicheskoj filosofii Kanta: Kurs lekcij. Lekcija 8 [Lectures on Kant's Political Philosophy. Lecture 8], in: Kantovskij sbornik [Kant’s Compendium]. 2011. No. 2 (36). S. 90—94.2. Bryushinkin, V. N. 2009, Kognitivnyj podhod k argumentacii [The Cognitive Approach to Argumentation], in: Racio. ru. [Ratio. ru] 2009. No. 2. С. 2—22.3. Zilber, A. S. 2016, Naskol'ko transcendental'ny Kantovy principy publichnogo prava? [How transcendental are Kant’s principles of public law?], in: Kantovskij sbornik [Kant’s Compendium]. 2016. No. 1 (55). S. 34—51.4. Kant, I. 1994а, Antropologija s pragmaticheskoj tochki zrenija [Anthropology from a Pragmatical Point of View], in: Kant, I. Soch.: v 8 t. T. 7. [Writings: in 8 vol. Vol. 7] М.5. Kant, I. 1994б, Idee zu einer allgemeinen Geschichte in weltbürgerlicher Absicht, in: Kant, I. Werke. Zweisprachige deutsch-russische Ausgabe. Bd. 1. М.6. Kant, I. 1994в, Zum ewigen Frieden, in: Kant, I. Werke. Zweisprachige deutschrussische Ausgabe. Bd. 1. М.7. Kant, I. 2014, Die Metaphysik der Sitten. Erster Teil, in: Kant, I. Werke. Zweisprachige deutsch-russische Ausgabe. Bd. 5. Tl. 1. М.8. Kant, I. 1994г, Über den Gemeinspruch: Das mag in der Theorie richtig sein, taugt aber nichts für die Praxis, in: Kant, I. Werke. Zweisprachige deutsch-russische Ausgabe. Bd. 1. М.9. Kant, I. 1994д, O neudachah vseh filosofskih popytok teodicei [On the Miscarriage of all Philosophical Trials in Theodicy], in: Kant, I. Soch.: v 8 t. T. 8. [Writings: in 8 vol. Vol. 8] М.10. Kant, I. 1994е, Beantwortung der Frage: Was ist Aufklärung? in: Kant, I. Werke. Zweisprachige deutsch-russische Ausgabe. Bd. 1. М.11. Kant, I. 1994ж, Religija v predelah tol'ko razuma [Religion within the Limits of Reason Alone], in: Kant, I. Soch.: v 8 t. T. 6. [Writings: in 8 vol. Vol. 6] М.12. Kant, I. 1999, Spor fakul'tetov [The Contest of the Faculties]. Kaliningrad.13. Machiavelli, N. 1990, Gosudar' [The Prince]. М.14. Novikov, G. N. 1996, Teorii mezhdunarodnyh otnoshenij [Theories of International Relations]. Irkutsk.15. Penn, W. 1963, Opyt o nastojashhem i budushhem mire v Evrope putem sozdanija evropejskogo Kongressa, Parlamenta ili Palaty gosudarstv [An Essay towards the Present and Future Peace of Europe by the Establishment of a European Dyet, Parliament or Estates], in:. Traktaty o vechnom mire. Sost. I. S. Andreeva i A. V. Gulyga [Treatises about perpetual peace. Ed. by I. S. Andreeva and A. V. Gulyga]. М.16. Rousseau, J.-J. 1963, Suzhdenie o vechnom mire [Judgment on Perpetual Peace], in: Traktaty o vechnom mire. Sost. I. S. Andreeva i A. V. Gulyga [Treatises about perpetual peace. Ed. by I. S. Andreeva and A. V. Gulyga]. М.17. Salikov, А. N. 2008, Recepcija kantovskogo ponjatija Sensus communis v teorii sposobnosti suzhdenija Hanny Arendt [Reception of the Kants Concept Sensus communis in Hannah Arendt's Theory of Judgment], in: Kantovskij sbornik [Kant’s Compendium]. 2008. No. 1 (27). S. 31—40.18. Sologubov, А. М. 2005, Modeli mira i metafory v argumentacii [World Models and Metaphors in Argumentation], in: Vestnik RGU im. I. Kanta [Herald of the I. Kant Russian State University]. 2005. No. 3. S. 27—34.19. Sologubov, А. М. 2004, Model' mira i poslednie osnovanija argumentacii [Model of the World and Last Foundations of Argumentation], in: Modeli mira. Pod red. V. N. Brjushinkina [World Models. Ed. by V. N. Bryushinkin]. Kaliningrad. S. 109—118.20. Sologubov, А. М. 2006, Sistemnaja model' argumentacii v prakticheskoj filosofii I. Kanta: Diss. na soisk. uch. step. kand. filos. nauk [The System Model of Argumentation Accordingto the Kant’s Practical Philosophy. Doctoral diss.]. Kaliningrad.21. Khizanishvili, D. V. 2014, Osobennosti kognitivnogo podhoda k argumentacii: aspekty modelirovanija [Pecularities of the Cognitive Approach to Argumentation: Aspects of the Modelling], in: Izvestiya UrFU. Ser. 3. [Herald of the Ural Federal University] 2014. No. 4 (134). S. 155—163.22. Chaly, V. А. 2014, Kant mezhdu liberalizmom i konservatizmom [Kant Between Liberalism and Conservatism], in: Kantovskij sbornik [Kant’s Compendium]. 2014. No. 4 (50).S. 54—60.23. Albus, V. 2001, Weltbild und Metapher. Untersuchungen zur Philosophie im 18. Jahrhundert. Würzburg, 2001.24. Borries, K. 1928, Kant als Politiker. Leipzig.25. Brandt, R. 1997, Antwort auf Bernd Ludwig: Will die Natur unwiderstehlich die Republik? in: Kant-Studien. Jg. 88. S. 229—237.26. Brandt, R. 2003, Universität zwischen Selbst- und Fremdbestimmung. Kants «Streit der Fakultäten». Berlin.27. Buhr, M., Dietzsch, S. (Hrsg.) 1984, Immanuel Kant. Zum ewigen Frieden. Ein philosophischer Entwurf. Texte zur Rezeption 1796—1800. Leipzig.28. Busch, W. 1979, Die Entstehung der kritischen Rechtsphilosophie Kants: 1762—1780. Berlin.29. Cavallar, G. 2005, Lauter «Leidige Tröster»? Kants Urteil über die Völkerrechtslehren von Grotius, Pufendorf und Vattel, in: Allgemeine Zeitschrift für Philosophie. Jg. 30. S. 271—291.30. Cavallar, G. 1992, Pax Kantiana. Wien.31. Eberl, O., Niesen, P. (Hrsg.) 2011, Immanuel Kant. „Zum ewigen Frieden“ und Auszüge aus der Rechtslehre. Kommentar von Oliver Eberl und Peter Niesen. Berlin.32. Garve, C. 1967, Drei Texte über Theorie und Praxis, in: Kant — Gentz — Rehberg. Über Theorie und Praxis. Hrsg. D. Henrich. FaM.33. Gentz, F. 1967, Nachtrag zu dem Räsonnement von Herrn Professor Kant…, in: Kant — Gentz — Rehberg. Über Theorie und Praxis. Hrsg. D. Henrich. FaM.34. Klenner, H. (Hrsg.) 1988, Kant I. Rechtslehre: Schriften zur Rechtsphilosophie. Berlin.35. Lesser, A. H. 2014, Kant or Machiavelli? in: Kritikos. Vol. 11, January — March 2014. URL: intertheory. org/kant-machiavelli-ahlesser. htm (accessed on 26.01.2016)36. Ludwig, B. 1995, Moralische Politiker und Teuflische Bürger…, in: Proceedings of the Eight International Kant Congress. Vol. I, Part 1. Milwaukee. P. 71—88.37. Ludwig, B. 1997, Will die Natur unwiderstehlich die Republik? Einige Reflexionen anläßlich einer rätselhaften Textpassage in Kants Friedensschrift, in: Kant-Studien. Jg. 88. S. 218—228.38. Pinzani, A. 2011, Botanische Anthropologie und physikalische Staatslehre. Zum Fünften und Sechsten Satz der Idee, in: Höffe O. (Hrsg.) Immanuel Kant. Schriften zur Geschichtsphilosophie. Berlin.39. Rehberg, A. W. 1967, Über das Verhältnis der Theorie zur Praxis, in: Kant — Gentz — Rehberg. Über Theorie und Praxis. Hrsg. D. Henrich. FaM.40. Stangneth, B. 2005, Die Religion als Übergang zur Weltpolitik, in: Kants „Ethisches Gemeinwesen“. Hrsg. M. Städtler. Berlin.41. Williams, H. 1983, Kant’s Political Philosophy. Oxford.V. Kh.GilmanovThis article analyses the science of spectres addressed in J. Derrida’s book Spectres of Marx. The methodological approach employed is Julia Kristeva’s ‘semiological adventure’, which is based on considering language as a heterogeneous structure in the realm of interactions between the ‘semiotic’ understood as a pre-linguistic condition of instinctive drives and the ‘symbolic’ manifested in socially oriented identification and discursive practices. The problem of play at the interface of its interactions is examined in the context of a danger of an ‘offensive of spectres’ against the reality, which can turn the latter in a ‘simulated hyperreality’. The author stresses Kant’s moral rigour in the context of game theory, which is interpreted as an indirect warning against ‘chimeras of imagination’ capable of transporting ‘spectres’ into actual ontology. It is stated that such transportation is reflected in the characteristics of artistic imagination and its poetic keys opening the ‘doors of perception’ that are closed to the other forms of social consciousness/unconsciousness. The article analyses E. T. A. Hoffmann’s novel The Sandman, which is interpreted as a romantic warning against symbolic plays with spectres generated by the mechanisation of thinking and being.06082026111. Bobkov, I. M. 2007, Kristeva Julia. Novejshij filosofskij slovar. Postmodernizm [The newest philosophical dictionary. Postmodernism]. Minsk, p. 245—248.2. Botnikova, A. B. 2003, Nemetzkij romantizm: dialog chudozhestvenych form [German Romanticism: The Dialogue of Literary Forms], Voronezh.3. Hoffmann, E. T. A. 1967, Zhytejskije vozrenija kota Murra. Povesti i raskazy [The Life and Opinions of the Tomcat Murr. Tales and Stories]. Moskwa.4. Greshnykh, V. I. 2001, Misterija ducha. Chudozhestvenaja proza nemetzkogo romantizma [The Mystery-play of Spirit. Fictional Prose of the German Romantics]. Kaliningrad.5. Kant, I. 1994, Osnovopolozhenija metafiziki nravov [Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals], Kant I. Sochinenija v 8 tomah [Works in 8 volumes]. Moscow, 1994. T. 4.6. Kant, I. 1994, Kritika sposobnosti suzhdenija [Сritique of Judgement], Kant I. Sochinenija v 8 tomah [Works in 8 volumes]. Moscow, 1994. T. 5.7. Kristeva, J. 2004, Izbrannyje trudy: Razrushenije poetiki [Selected Works: The Destruction of Poetics]. Moscow.8. Pauli, W. 1975, Fizicheskije ocherki [Physical Essays]. Moscow.9. Shakespeare, W. 1998, Hamlet. Sobranije sochinenij v 8 tomah [Selected works in 8 volumes]. Moscow, 1998. T. 8.10. Shiller, F. 1955—1957, Sobranije sochinenij v 7 tomah [Selected works in 7 volumes]. Moscow, 1957. T. 6.11. Schroedinger, E. 1976, Izbrannyje Trudy po kvantovoj mehanike [Selected Works on Quantum Mechanics]. Moscow.12. Einstein, A. 1965—1967, Sobranije nauchnyh trudov v 4 tomah [The Collection of Scientific Works in 4 volumes]. Moscow, 1967. T. 4.13. Goethe, J. W. 1904, Werke. Weimarer Ausgabe. Weimar, 1904. Abt. 1, Bd. 42, I.14. Kristeva, J. 1974, Le revolution du langage poetique. Paris: Seuil.15. Schiller, F. 2004, Sämtliche Werke in 5 Bänden. München, 2004, Bd. 5.M.ZagirnyakThis paper is devoted to investigation of destination of religion in the process of forming of the concept of law in determined cultural circumstances. This study is actualizes the essential link between comprehension of content of domain of law and concept of subjectivity. Nikolay Alexeev overcomes concept of subjectivity represented in philosophy of early modern period of European history, (primarily in the rationalistic tradition of Rene Descartes). The crucial significant in his concept of law is got neo-kantian axiology of Wilhelm Windelband and Heinrich Rickert. Following to neo-kantian thinkers Alexeev indicates, that genesis of culture is measured because a priori values are exist. Therefore individual is not a creator of these values per se. Value became the basis of Alexeev’s philosophy of law. Furthermore he elaborated axiological model of law onto religious foundation. Religion — is a tool for initiating condition of values and there setting in political domain. Paper argued how religion conducts genesis of law. In that sense religion evaluated like a link between morality and law. Essential item of philosophy of law of Nikolay Alexeev — is a superiority of Christianity in the midst of couple of religions in solution of problem in development of law. Author shows the historical role of Christianity in revealing of the idea of law per se.06082026111. Alexeev, N. N. 1918, Vvedenie v izuchenie prava [Introduction to the study of law], Moscow, 188 p.2. Alexeev, N. N. 1919a, Obshhee uchenie o prave. Kurs lekcij, prochitannyh v Tavricheskom Universitete v 1918—19 godu. [The general theory of law. The course of lectures in Tavrichesky University in 1918—19.], Simferopol, 162 p.3. Alexeev, N. N. 1919b, Ocherki po obshhej teorii gosudarstva. Osnovnye predposylki i gipotezy gosudarstvennoj nauki [Essays on the general theory of the state. Basic assumptions and hypotheses of the state of science]. Moscow, 209 p.4. Alexeev, N. N. 1929, Evrazijstvo i marksizm [Eurasianism and Marxism] // Evrazijskij Sbornik Kn. VI [Eurasian Miscellany. Vol. VI], Prague, p. 7—17.5. Alexeev, N. N. 1930, Religija, pravo i nravstvennost' [Religion, law, and morality], Paris, 106 p.6. Alexeev, N. N. 1955, Ideja gosudarstva: Ocherki po istorii politicheskoj mysli [The idea of the State: Essays on the history of political thought] New York, 412 p.7. Alexeev, N. N. 1998a, Na putiakh k budushchei Rossii [On the way to the future Russia], Russkii narod i gosudarstvo [Russian nation and the state], Moscow, p. 282—371.8. Alexeev, N. N. 1998b, Sovremennoe polozhenie nauki o gosudarstve i ee blizhajshie zadachi [The current situation and immediate objectives of the science of the state], Russkii narod i gosudarstvo [Russian nation and the state], Moscow, p. 386—624.9. Benoist, A. 2015, Po tu storonu prav cheloveka. V zashhitu svobod [On the other side of human rights. In defense of liberties], Moscow, 144 p.10. Bykova, M. F. 1996, Misterija logiki i tajna sub’ektivnosti. O zamysle fenomenologii i logiki u Gegelja [The Mystery of logic and secret of subjectivity. About Hegel’s conception of phenomenology and logic], Moscow, 238 p.11. Carraud, V., 2012, Vopros kto? Ego i Dasein [The question Who? Ego and Dasein], Subektivnost' i identichnost': kollekt. monogr. [Subjectivity And Identity: joint study], Moscow, p. 80—100.12. Renaut, A. 2002, Jera individa. K istorii sub’ektivnosti [The era of the individual. To the history of of subjectivity], Saint Petersburg, 470 p.13. Saul, J. 2007, Ubljudki Vol'tera. Diktatura razuma na Zapade [Voltaire's Bastards: The Dictatorship of Reason in the West], Moscow, 895 p.14. Pantykina, M. I. 2010, A. Rajnah i N. N. Alekseev: dva proekta fenomenologii prava [A. Reinach and N. N. Alekseev: Two Projects of Phenomenology of the Law], Vestnik Gumanitarnogo instituta TGU [Gazette of Institute of Humanities of Togliatti State University], no. 1, Togliatti, p. 7—13.15. Spengler, O. 1998, Zakat Evropy. Ocherki morfologii mirovoj istorii. T. 1. Geshtal't i dejstvitel'nost' [The Decline of the West: Outlines of a Morphology of world history. Vol. 1. Gestalt and reality], Moscow, 663 p.16. Griffiths J. 1986 What Is Legal Pluralism, Journal of Legal Pluralism, no. 24, p. 1—55, available at:https://books.google.fr/books?id=6lABLiMHqPcC&dq=isbn:3825844927&hl=ru (accessed 29 September 2015).17. Moore, S. F. 1978, Law as Process: An Anthropological Approach, London; Boston: Routledge & K. Paul, available at: https://books.google.fr/books?id=6lABLiMHqPcC&dq=isbn:3825844927&hl=ru (accessed 29 September 2015).L.KryshtopNatural Law Notes of Feyerabend is one of the most important sources by the research of ethical and juridical views of Kant. Dating back to 1784 they distinctly demonstrate that the basic principles of Kant’s philosophy of right are not a late production of the philosopher, but they have been formed already in the middle of 80’s of 18th century. Therewith we can use this lectures notes for the studies of Kant’s moral philosophy too, because of their closeness to the Foundations of Metaphysics of Morals, what can help us to understand some not clear aspects of Kant’s ethical thought. One of such questions is the question of moral motivation, and namely how we can not only know, what we have to do according to the moral law, but also actually want do it? As in his published writings Kant concludes in the Introduction of Natural Law Notes that human will itself can not be in complete agreement with the moral law, because objective motive (that is the moral law alone) for this will isn’t identical with subjective ones (that are maxims of action). That is why it must be forced to follow the moral law and its commandments are for it imperatives. But in order not to distort autonomy of will, this force should come from the will itself. Such a force according to Kant is possible, if the will would force itself to action with an idea of an complete good will (what means such a will which is always in accordance with the moral law), which is inherent in God alone. With the article is enclosed the translation of a small fragment of Introduction to the Natural Law Feyerabend.06082026111. Kant, I. 1994a, Antropologija s pragmaticheskoj tochki zrenija [Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View], Sobranije sochinienij v 8 tt. [Works in 8 vol.], Moscow, Vol. 7.2. Kant, I. 1994b, Vseobzhhaja jestestvennaja istorija i teorija neba [Universal Natural History and Theory of the Heavens], Sobranije sochinienij v 8 tt. [Works in 8 vol.], Moscow, Vol. 1.3. Kant, I. 1994c, Jedinstvenno vozmozhnoje osnovanije dla lokazatelstva bytija Boga [The Only Possible Argument in Support of a Demonstration of the Existence of God], Sobranije sochinienij v 8 tt. [Works in 8 vol.], Moscow, Vol. 1.4. Kant, I. 2016, Jestestvennoje pravo Fajerabjenda. Vvedenije [Natural Law of Feyerabend. Introduction], Kantovskij sbornik [Kant review], Vol. 35, № 3. Р. 75—81.5. Kant, I. 1994d, K vjechnomu miru [Perpetual Peace], Sobranije sochinienij v 8 tt. [Works in 8 vol.], Moscow, Vol. 7.6. Kant, I. 1994e, Kritika sposobnosti suzhdenija [Critique of judgement], Sobranije sochinienij v 8 tt. [Works in 8 vol.], Moscow, Vol. 5.7. Kant, I. 1997, Osnovopolozhenije k metafizike nravov [Foundations of Metaphysics of Morals], Sochinenija v 4-ch tt. na russkom I nemeckom jazyke [Works in 4 vol. In Russian and German], Moscow, Vol. 3.8. Kryshtop, L. E. 2013, Postulaty prakticheskogo razuma: ot pjervoj “Kritiki” ko vtoroj [Postulates of practical reason: from the first “Critique” to the second], Voprosy filosofii [Questions of Philosophy], no. 6, p. 129—139.9. Hinske, N. 2014, Nezamechennyj kommentarij Kanta 1784 goda k “Osnovopolozheniju k metafiziki nravov” (1785) [An Annoticed Kant’s Commentary to the “Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals” (1785) from 1784], Istoriki-filosofskij jezhegodnik [History of Philosophy Yearbook], p. 31—38.10. Arnold, E. 1893, Möglichst vollständiges Verzeichniss aller von Kant gehaltenen oder auch nur angekündigten Vorlesungen nebst darauf bezüglichen Notizen und Bemerkungen, Altpreussische Monatsschrift, Bd. 30, Königsberg.11. Bordoni, G. S. 2016 a, Introduzione, Kant I. Lezioni sul Diritto Naturale (Naturrecht Feyerabend), a cura di N. Hinske, G. S. Bordoni. Milano, p. 9—50.12. Bordoni, G. S. 2016 b, Note al Testo, Kant I. Lezioni sul Diritto Naturale (Naturrecht Feyerabend), a cura di N. Hinske, G. S. Bordoni. Milano, p. 233—282.13. Brandt, R. 1982, Das Erlaubnisgesetz, oder: Vernunft und Geschichte in Kants Rechtslehre, Rechtsphilosophie der Aufklärung. Symposium Wolfenbüttel, Berlin, S. 233—285.14. Brandt, R. 1982, Immanuel Kant — was bleibt?, Hamburg.15. Delfosse, H. P., Hinske, N., Bordoni, G. S. 2010, Kant-Index, Bd. 30, Stellenindex und Konkordanz zum „Naturrecht Feyerabend“, Tl. 1, Einleitung des „Naturrechts Feyerabend“, Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt.16. Günter, O. 1909, Katalog der Handschriften der Danziger Stadtbibliothek, Bd. 3. Danzig.17. Erler, G. 1911—1912, Die Matrikel der Universität Königsberg i. Pr., Bd. 2, Leipzig.18. Hirsch, Ph.-A. 2012, Kants Einleitung in die Rechtslehre von 1784. Immanuel Kants Rechtsbegriff in der Moralvorlesung „Mrongovius II“ und der Naturrechtsvorlesung „Feyerabend“ von 1784 sowie in der „Metaphysik der Sitten“ von 1797, Göttingen.19. Kuehn, M. 2010, Kant’s Metaphysics of Morals: its history and significance of its deferral, Kant’s “Metaphysics of Morals”. A Critical Guide, ed. by L. Denis, New York, p. 9—27.20. Wildberger, H. 1972, Jesaja, Biblischer Kommentar. Altes Testament. Bd. X. Tl. 1. Neukirchen-Vluyn.I. (translated from German L. Krystop)Kant0608202611A. (translated from German by V. Gilmanov)Schweitzer0608202611V.Konev0608202611V.BelovL.Tetyuev0608202611