NONE20260530211419009Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal Universityno-reply@journals.kantiana.ruImmanuel Kant Baltic Federal UniversityKantian Journal0207-69182310-370105302026431«Философы всегда будут восхищаться Кантом…»N. A.DmitrievaImmanuel Kant Baltic Federal University (IKBFU)Moscow Pedagogical State University (MPGU)The topics of this issue, devoted to the tercentenary of Immanuel Kant’s birth, focus on his practical philosophy, most notably on the problems of free will in the light of the debates at the end of the eighteenth century; on the concept of human dignity and its reflection in daily life and in the main legal documents of the Russian Federation; on the possibility of deriving positive duties from the categorical imperative; and on the relevance of Kantian ethics to modern-day realities. The issue of the reception of Kant’s philosophy in Russia is also discussed, using as an example the article by Russian religious philosopher Alexey Vvedensky in the historical context of Kant’s early reception and subsequent fate in the twentieth century.0530202671610.5922/0207-6918-2024-1-1https://journals.kantiana.ru/kant_collection/5554/48337/Dmitrieva, N., 2022. Kants Bedeutung für die intellektuelle Kultur Russlands. In: V. Gerhardt, M. Weber and M. Schepelmann, eds. 2022. Immanuel Kant 1724—2024. Ein europäischer Denker. Oldenburg: De Gruyter, pp. 253-262.Hase, K. von, ed. 1849. Literarischer Nachlass der Frau Caroline von Wolzogen. Volume 2. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel.Hessen, S. I., 2001. Kant’s Pedagogics. In: S. I. Hessen, 2001. Pedagogicheskie sochineniya [Pedagogical Works]. Saransk: Krasnyi Oktyabr, pp. 341-353. (In Rus.)Imhof, S. and Noller, J., eds. 2021. Kants Freiheitsbegriff (1786—1800): Dokumentation einer Debatte. Hamburg: Felix Meiner.Kant, I., 1940. Sochineniya. 1747—1777. In Two Volumes. Translated by B. A. Fokht, ed. by B. Yu. Slivker, Institute of Philosophy at the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. Volume 2: 1759—1777. Moscow: Gosudarstvennoe sotsialno-ekonomicheskoe izdatelstvo. (In Rus.)Kant, I., 1998. Critique of Pure Reason. Edited and translated by P. Guyer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.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.Kaploun, V., 2021. The Origins of Russian Political Modernity: Did Radishchev “Crib” His Enlightenment Project from Kant? (And If So, Why Didn’t He Cite the Source?). Logos, 31(5), pp. 27-57.Karamsin, N., 1803. Travels from Moscow, through Prussia, Germany, Switzerland, France, and England. Volume 1. Translated from the German [by A.A. Feldborg]. London: Printed for J. Badcock… by G. Sidney...Korsakov, S. N., 2012. Political Persecution in the Institute of Philosophy in 1930s and 1940s. Philosophy Journal, 1(8), 120-170. (In Rus.)Krouglov, A. N., 2012. Kant i kantovskya filosofiya v russkoi khudozhestvennoi literature [Kant and Kant’s Philosophy in Russian Fiction Literature]. Moscow: “Kanon+” ROII “Reabilitatsiya”. (In Rus.)Krouglov, A. N., 2024. Filosofiya Kanta v Rossii [Kant’s Philosophy in Russia]. Kaliningrad: IKBFU Press, 2024. (In Rus.)Lapshin, I. I., 2015. Kant and Modern Philosophy. (The 200th Anniversary of the Birth of Immanuel Kant). Preparation of Remarks and the Accompanying Article by A. V. Shitov. Review of the Russian Christian Academy for the Humanities, 16(3), pp. 268-278. (In Rus.)Noller, J. and Walsh, J., eds. 2022. Kant’s Early Critics on Freedom of the Will. Cambridge, UK; N.Y.: Cambridge University Press.Radishchev, A., 2020. Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow. Translated by A. Kahn and I. Reyfman. New York: Columbia University Press.Sergius [Hessen, S. I.], 1924. Immanuel Kant (On the Bicentenary of the Birth — 24 [sic!] April 1724). Rul’ [Steering Wheel] (Berlin), 24 Apr., 1029, pp. 4-5. (In Rus.)Thalheimer, A., 1924. 200th Anniversary of Kant’s Birth in Germany. Translated from German by Ya. Vitkind. Pod znamenem marksizma [Under the Banner of Marxism], 4-5, pp. 20-36. (In Rus.)Thalheimer, A., 1924b. Kants 200-jähriger Geburtstag in Deutschland. Arbeiter-Literatur (Wien), 1(9), pp. 458-477.Свобода воли в ранней рецепции кантовской философииM.BaumUniversity of WuppertalKant’s solution for the problem of freedom of the will rests on his transcendental idealism and its differentiation of appearances and things in themselves. Human beings, with their bodies and observable inner and outer activities, are objects of perception (empirical intuition) and therefore appearances. These are only the appearances of their noumenal selves. Human beings are determined by laws of nature in all their perceivable alterations which include all their actions, but their noumenal selves, not being in time, are not determined by the necessity of causal laws of nature, but can be determined by the moral law of their pure practical reason which they give to themselves. The actions of the will, observable volitions and external actions, can therefore, at the same time, be under the necessitating law of nature, i.e. be unfree, and, as appearances of the self-determination of their noumenal will (by fulfilling the demands of the moral law), be free. Two professors of Jena University, Ulrich and Schmid, accept part of Kant’s transcendental idealism but contend that the many transgressions of the moral law in human acting must have their noumenal reason in the agent’s intelligible character or in the intelligible substrate of nature. This theory is called “intelligible fatalism”.05302026174610.5922/0207-6918-2024-1-2https://journals.kantiana.ru/kant_collection/5554/48339/Creuzer, L., 1793. Skeptische Betrachtungen über die Freiheit des Willens mit Hinsicht auf die neuesten Theorien über dieselbe. Giessen: G. F. Heyer.Ehlers, M., 1782. Ueber die Lehre von der menschlichen Freiheit und über die Mittel, zu einer hohen Stufe moralischer Freiheit zu gelangen. Dessau: in der Buchhandlung der Gelehrten.Imhof, S. und Noller, J., Hg. 2021. Kants Freiheitsbegriff (1786-1800): Dokumentation einer Debatte. Hamburg: F. Meiner.Lambert, J. H., 1782. Deutscher gelehrter Briefwechsel. Erster Band. Herausgegeben von J. Bernoulli. Berlin: bei dem Herausgeber; Dessau: in der Buchhandlung der Gelehrten.Priestley, J., 1777. The Doctrine of Philosophical Necessity Illustrated. London: J. Johnson.Schmid, C. Ch. E., 1790. Versuch einer Moralphilosophie. Jena: im Verlag der Crökerschen Handlung.Schmid, C. Ch. E., 1792. Versuch einer Moralphilosophie. Zweyte, vermehrte Ausgabe. Jena: im Verlag der Crökerschen Handlung.Schmid, C. Ch. E., 1793. Vorrede. In: L. Creuzer, 1793. Skeptische Betrachtungen über die Freiheit des Willens mit Hinsicht auf die neuesten Theorien über dieselbe. Giessen: G. F. Heyer, S. V-XVI.Schulz, J. H., 1783. Versuch einer Anleitung zur Sittenlehre für alle Menschen ohne Unterschied der Religionen. Berlin: Ch.L. Stahlbaum.Sg. [Pistorius, H. A.], 1991. [Rez.] Prolegomena zu einer jeden künftigen Metaphysik, die als- Wissenschaft wird auftreten können. Von Immanuel Kant. Riga bey Hartknoch. 1783. 8. 222 Seiten. In: A. Landau, Hg. 1991. Rezensionen zur Kantischen Philosophie 1781—1787. Bebra: A. Landau, S. 85-108.Spinoza, B. de, 1977. Abhandlung über die Verbesserung des Verstandes. Abhandlung vom Staate. Übersetzung, Anmerkungen und Register von C. Gebhardt. Hamburg: F. Meiner.Ulrich, I. A. H., 1785. Institutiones logicae et metaphysicae. Ienae: Sumtibus viduae Croekerianae.Ulrich, J. A. H., 1788. Eleutheriologie, oder über Freyheit und Nothwendigkeit. Jena: in der Crökerschen Buchhandlung.Vaihinger, H., 1892. Commentar zu Kants Kritik der reinen Vernunft. Zweiter Band. Stuttgart, Berlin & Leipzig: Union Deutsche Verlagsgesellschaft.О кантовском понятии человеческого достоинства сегодняA. N.KrouglovRussian State University for the HumanitiesAlthough Kant was born three hundred years ago, his practical philosophy is still relevant and helpful for understanding difficult and crucial issues of today. One example is the strange transformation the concept of human dignity has undergone in post-Soviet Russia — in everyday language, in ideological doctrines, and in legal documents. While in ordinary life dignity is increasingly reduced to access to material benefits, in its legal sense — above all in the 1993 Constitution of the Russian Federation — anti-communist ideology has turned it into the “right” to enjoy comfortable living conditions, being almost totally divorced from duties and from morality. Such interpretations of human dignity lead to a dead end, creating problems for its perception and for its relationship to other constitutional provisions — problems that are impossible to resolve in the framework of such an interpretation of right. By turning to Kant, one of the pillars of the modern egalitarian universalist conception of human dignity, we can trace the idea of personal dignity back to its origin as an absolute inner value which, unlike external material benefits, has no equivalent, and involves self-legislation, restriction of freedom, and the fulfilling of moral duty.05302026477510.5922/0207-6918-2024-1-3https://journals.kantiana.ru/kant_collection/5554/48342/Achenwall, G., 1763. Juris naturalis pars posterior complectens jus familiae, jus publicum et jus gentium in usum auditorum. Göttingen: Bossiegel.Anon., 1751. Von der hohen Würde des Menschen. Der Mensch: eine moralische Wochenschrift (edited by G. F. Meier and S.G. Lange, Halle a.S.), Thl. 1, St. 3, pp. 17-24.Anon., 1777. On the Dignity of Human Being, in Relationship to God and the World. Utrennij svet, ezhemesyachnoe izdanie [Morning Light, monthly edition] (St. Petersburg), Pars 1, December, pp. 285-297. (In Rus.)Baglay, M. V., 2007. Konstitucionnoe pravo Rossijskoj Federacii: uchebnik dlya vuzov [Constitutional Law of the Russian Federation: textbook for High Schools]. Moscow: Norma. (In Rus.)Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany, 1949. Translated by C. Tomuschat, D. P. Currie, D. P. Kommers and R. Kerr, 2022. Available at: (Accessed 9 January 2024).Brandt, R., 2010. Die Würde des Menschen. In: R. Brandt, 2010. Immanuel Kant — was bleibt? Hamburg: Meiner, pp. 215-237.Chetvernin, V. A., 2003. Russian Constitutional Concept of Legal Understanding. Konstitutsionnoye pravo: vostochnoyevropeyskoye obozreniye, 4, pp. 28-36. (In Rus.)Constitution of the Russian Federation, 1993. Available at: (Accessed 9 January 2024).Deklaraciya o pravah i dostoinstve cheloveka X Vsemirnogo russkogo narodnogo sobora [Declaration on Human Rights and Dignity of the X World Russian People’s Council], 2006. Available at: (Accessed 9 January 2024). (In Rus.)Dmitriev, Yu. A., 2008. On the Legal Significance of the Preamble to the Russian Constitution. State and Law, 12, pp. 35-38. (In Rus.)Hegel, G. W. F., 2008. Outlines of the Philosophy of Right. Translated by T. M. Knox; revised, edited, and introduced by S. Houlgate. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Hegel, G. W. F., 2009. Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts. In: G. W. F. Hegel. Gesammelte Werke. Hg. von der Rheinisch-Westfälischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Bd. 14,1. Hamburg: Meiner, pp. 5-282.Hesse, K., 1999. Grundzüge des Verfassungsrechts der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. 20th Edition. Heidelberg: C. F. Müller.Hinske, N. 2023. Würde als Schlüsselbegriff der Philosophie Kants. In: N. Hinske, 2023. Vernunft, Wissen, Glaube. Wege zu einem neuen Berständnis Immanuel Kants. Edited by C. Böhr. Wiesbaden: Springer, pp. 203-216.Hobbes, Th., 2011. Leviathan. Parts I and II Revised Edition. Edited by A. P. Martinich and B. Battiste. Peterborough: Broadview editions.Hübner, K., 1985. Die Wahrheit des Mythos. Münich: C. H. Beck.Isensee, J. and Kirchhof, P., eds. 1987-1992. Handbuch des Staatsrechts der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Heidelberg: C.F. Müller.Kant, I., 1992. The Vienna Logic. In: I. Kant, 1992. Lectures on Logic. Translated and edited By J. M. Young. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 251-377.Kant, I., 1996a. 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., 1996b. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (1785). ln: I. Kant, 1996. Practical Philosophy. Translated and edited by M. J. Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 43-108.Kant, I. 1996c. Critique of Practical Reason (1788). In: I. Kant, 1996. Practical Philosophy. Translated and edited by M. J. Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 139-271.Kant, I., 2010. Naturrecht Feyerabend. Abhandlung. Neue, anhand des Manuskriptes revidierte Fassung. In: N. Hinske, H. P. Delfosse, G. Sadun Bordoni, eds. 2010. Kant-Index. Volume 30.1: Stellenindex und Konkordanz zum “Naturrecht Feyerabend”. Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt: frommann-holzboog, pp. 3-15.Kant, I. 2016. Natural Right Course Lecture Notes by Feyerabend. In: I. Kant, 2016. Lectures and Drafts on Political Philosophy. Edited by F. Rauscher, translated by F. Rauscher and K. R. Westphal. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 73-180.Kirill, Metropolitan, 2006. Prava cheloveka i nravstvennaya otvetstvennost’ [Human Rights and Moral Responsibility]. Available at: http://www.patriarchia.ru/db/text/102261.html (Accessed 9 January 2024). (In Rus.)Klemme, H. F., 2011. Das rechtsstaatliche Folterverbot aus der Perspektive der Philosophie Kants. In: K. Altenhain and N. Willenberg, eds. 2011. Die Geschichte der Folter seit ihrer Abschaffung. Göttingen: V&R Unipress, pp. 39-53.Klemme, H. F., 2013. Menschenwürde und Menschenrecht. Variationen eines Kantischen Themas in systematischer Absicht. In: F. Brosow and T. R. Rosenhagen, eds. 2013. Moderne Theorien Praktischer Normativität. Zur Wirklichkeit und Wirkungsweise des praktischen Sollens. Münster: Mentis, pp. 213-229.Kovler, A. I., 2019. The Constitution of Russia as a Comparative Project (To the History of the Constitution of the Russian Federation). Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law, 1, pp. 8-14. (In Rus.)Kozlova, E. I. and Kutafin, O. E., 2001. Konstitucionnoe pravo Rossii. Uchebnik [Russian Constitutional Law. Textbook]. Moscow: Yurist. (In Rus.)Konstituciya RF [Constitution of the Russian Federation], 1993. Available at: (Accessed 9 Januar 2024). (In Rus.)Kurkin, B. A., 2008. Ideology of Human Rights and Its Interpretation in Modern Domestic Legal Theory. Law. Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 2, pp. 110-117. (In Rus.)Kurkin, B. A. and Iskevich, I.S., 2017. Human Rights: Two Looks at the Phenomenon. Law: history and modernity, 1, pp. 18-26. (In Rus.)Lukasheva, E. A., ed. 2011. Prava cheloveka: uchebnik [Human Rights: A Textbook]. Moscow: Norma. (In Rus.)Merkel, R., 2001. Rechte für Embryonen? Die Menschenwürde lässt sich nicht allein auf die biologische Zugehörigkeit zur Menschheit gründen. In: C. Geyer, ed. 2001. Biopolitik. Die Positionen. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, pp. 51-64.Mezhdunarodnyj pakt o grazhdanskih i politicheskih pravah [International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights], 1966/1976. Available at: https://www.un.org/ru/documents/decl_conv/conventions/pactpol.shtml (Accessed 9 January 2024). (In Rus.)Mohr, G., 2009. „nur weil er verbrochen hat“ — Menschenwürde und Vergeltung in Kants Strafrechtsphilosophie. In: H. F. Klemme, 2009. Kant und die Zukunft der europäischen Aufklärung. Berlin: de Gruyter, pp. 469-499.Morozov, V., 1962. Dignity. In: F. V. Konstantinov, ed. 1962. Filosofskaya enciklopediya [Philosophical Encyclopedy], Volume 2. Moscow: Sovetskaya enciklopediya, pp. 58-60. (In Rus.)Nersesyants, V. S., 2005. Filosofiya prava. Uchebnik dlya vuzov [Philosophy of Right. Textbook for High Schools]. Moscow: Norma. (In Rus.)Niederberger, A. 2018. Braucht die Kantische Rechtsphilosophie die Menschenwürde? In: R. Mosayebi, ed. 2018. Kant und Menschenrechte. Berlin: De Gruyter, pp. 81-100.Putin, V. V., 2000. Poslanie Prezidenta Federal’nomu Sobraniyu. 15 yanvarya 2020 g. [Message from the President to the Federal Assembly. January 15, 2020]. Available at: (Accessed 9 January 2024). (In Rus.)Sánchez, N., 2013. Bemerkungen zur Kants Auffassung der menschlichen Würde. Studia Philosophica Kantiana, 2, pp. 27-47.Sensen, O., 2009. Kant’s Conception of Human Dignity. Kant-Studien, 100, pp. 309-331.Simankov, V. I., 2010. Iz razyskanij o zhurnale “Pribavlenie k Moskovskim vedomostyam” (1783—1784) ili ob avtorstve sochinenij, pripisyvavshihsya N.I. Novikovu, I. G. Shvarcu i F.V. Karzhavinu [From Research on the Journal “Addendum to the Moscow Vedomosti” (1783—1784), or On the Authorship of Works Attributed to N. I. Novikov, I. G. Shvarts and F. V. Karzhavin]. Kharkov: s.n. (In Rus.)Slovar’ Akademii Rossijskoj [Dictionary of the Russian Academy], 1794. Volume 5. St. Petersburg: Pri Imperatorskoj akademii nauk. (In Rus.)Tolstoy, L. N., 1904. Critique of Dogmatic Theology. In: L. N. Tolstoy, 1904. My Confession. Critique of Dogmatic Theology. Boston: D. Estes & Co, pp. 93-451.Topornin, B. N., ed. 1994. Gosudarstvennoe pravo Germanii. Sokrashchennyj perevod nemeckogo semitomnogo izdaniya [German State Law. Abridged Translation of the German Seven-Volume Edition], 2 Volumes. Moscow: IGiP RAN Press. (In Rus.)Zor’kin, V. D., ed. 2011. Kommentarij k Konstitucii Rossijskoj Federacii [Commentary to the Constitution of the Russian Federation]. Moscow: Norma. (In Rus.)Кант и «морская болезнь» современностиV. A.ChalyLomonosov Moscow State UniversityImmanuel Kant Baltic Federal University (IKBFU)On the eve of the tercentenary of Kant’s birth, just as it was a hundred years ago, Kantianism is simultaneously on the receiving end of the blows of history and attacks by rival philosophical parties, both progressivist and reactionary. The radical wings of both parties perceive modernity as a depressing, nauseating period which must be broken with by moving toward the past or toward the future. One of the most original and profound diagnoses of this attitude was offered by Hans Jonas, who discerned in radical doctrines of a hundred years ago a similarity with the gnosticism of antiquity. Jonas’s diagnosis has not lost its relevance. That is why the central question addressed in this study is as follows: what prescription does the Kantian programme offer for modernity’s “gnostic dizziness?” I maintain that Kant’s critical turn is still an effective strategy by means of which to compensate for the sudden stresses and “gnostic impulses” provoked by the modern worldview revolution, bringing back an “orientation in thinking” which reorients the world process and individual activity. The imperative to always see and respect humanity in a particular individual warns against the “category mistake” committed by modern radicals who ascribe agency (subjectivity) to non-­human abstractions which cannot possess this property. In theory, Kant grounds the view that humanity should resign itself to the fact of its perspective being limited and local. Kantian practical philosophy provides the traveler with a map of regulative ideas and a “moral compass”, along with an explanation of disruptive factors, offering a working explanation of the situation and its possible outcomes. Kant’s “Copernican revolution” brings human beings back into focus and imagination to order, allowing for the hope that new challenges will be successfully met.053020267610210.5922/0207-6918-2024-1-4https://journals.kantiana.ru/kant_collection/5554/48343/Anon., 1885. Bismarck’s Iron Ring. The New York Times. November 25, sec. Archives. Available at: [Accessed 11 December 2023].Anon., 1886. Bismarck’s Ring. Colonist. January 12. Available at: [Accessed 11 December 2023].Bennett, M. R. and Hacker, P. M. S., 2021. Philosophical Foundations of Neuroscience. Oxford: John Wiley & Sons.Bernasconi, R., 2002. Kant as an Unfamiliar Source of Racism. In: J. K. Ward and T. L. Lott, eds. 2002. Philosophers on Race: Critical Essays. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 145-166 https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470753514.ch8.Blumenberg, H., 2011. Paradigms for a Metaphorology. Ithaca, N. Y.: Cornell University Press.Callon, M., 2001. Actor Network Theory. In: N. J. Smelser and P. B. Baltes, ed. 2001. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. Oxford: Pergamon, pp. 62-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-043076-7/03168-5.Chaly, V., 2020. Immanuel Kant — Racist and Colonialist? Kantian Journal, 39(2), pp. 94-98. https://dx.doi.org/10.5922/0207-6918-2020-2-5.Chaly, V., 2021. Kant’s Menschheit and Its Interpretations. Con-Textos Kantianos. International Journal of Philosophy, 14, pp. 327-343. https://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5776039.Chaly, V., 2022. Towards Kantian Moral Fallibilism: Underdetermination in Deliberation under the First Formula of Categorical Imperative. Moscow University Bulletin. Series 7. Philosophy, 1, pp. 105-114. (In Rus.)Chaly, V. 2023. Kant and ‘tabula Russia’. Con-Textos Kantianos. International Journal of Philosophy, 18, pp. 153-162. https://doi.org/10.5209/kant.91754.Chepurin, K. and Dubilet, A., 2019. Russia’s Atopic Nothingness: Ungrounding the World-Historical Whole with Pyotr Chaadaev. Angelaki, 24(6), pp. 135-151. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969725x.2019.1684705.Copernicus, N., 1995. On the Revolutions of Heavenly Spheres. New York: Prometheus Books.Culianu, I.P., 1992. The Tree of Gnosis: Gnostic Mythology from Early Christianity to Modern Nihilism. San Francisco: Harper San Francisco.Eze, E., 1997. The Color of Reason: The Idea of ‘Race’ in Kant’s Anthropology. In: E.C. Eze, ed. 1997. Postcolonial African Philosophy: A Critical Reader. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, pp. 103-140.Fisette, J. R., 2022. At the Bar of Conscience: A Kantian Argument for Slavery Reparations. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 48(5), pp. 674-702. https://doi.org/10.1177/01914537211001916.Fogelin, R. J. and Duggan, T. J., 1987. Fallacies. Argumentation, 1(3), pp. 255-262. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00136777.Gippius, Z. N., 2002. Zhivye litsa [Living Names]. In: Z. Gippius Z. Sobr. soch v 15 t. [Collected Works in 15 Volumes]: Volume 6. Moscow: Russkaja kniga, pp. 5-102. (In Rus.)Guerrie, V. I., 1871. Otnoshenija Lejbnica k Rossii i Petru Velikomu po neizdannym bumagam Lejbnica v Gannoverskoj biblioteke [Leibniz’s relations to Russia and Peter the Great according to Leibniz’s unpublished papers in the Hanover Library]. Sankt-Peterburg: Pechatnya V. I. Golovina. (In Rus.)Herskowitz, D. M., 2022. Reading Heidegger against the Grain: Hans Jonas on Existentialism, Gnosticism, and Modern Science. Modern Intellectual History, 19(2), pp. 527-550. https://doi.org/10.1017/S147924432100010X.Hotam, Y., 2007. Gnosis and Modernity — a Postwar German Intellectual Debate on Secularisation, Religion and ‘Overcoming’ the Past. Totalitarian Movements and Political Religions, 8(3/4), pp. 591-608.James, W., 1988. The Meaning of Truth. In: W. James, 1988. Writings 1902-1910. New York, N. Y.: Library of America, pp. 824-978.Jonas, H., 1934. Gnosis und spätantiker Geist. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Jonas, H., 1952. Gnosticism and Modern Nihilism. Social Research, 19(4), pp. 430-452.Jonas, H., 2001. The Gnostic Religion: The Message of the Alien God & the Beginnings of Christianity. Third Edition. Beacon Press.Kant, I., 1996a. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. In: I. Kant, 1996. Practical Philosophy. Edited by and translated by M. J. Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 37-108.Kant, I., 1996b. Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason. In: I. Kant, 1996. Religion and Natural Theology. Edited by and translated by A. Wood, G. Di Giovanni. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 39-216.Kant, I., 1996c. Toward Perpetual Peace. In: I. Kant, 1996. Practical Philosophy. Edited by and translated by M. J. Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 311-351.Kant, I., 1998. Critique of Pure Reason. Edited by and translated by P. Guyer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.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., 2002a. On a Recently Prominent Tone of Superiority in Philosophy. In: I. Kant, 2002. Theoretical Philosophy after 1781. Edited by A. Wood and P. Guyer, translated by P. Heath. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 429-445.Kant, I., 2002b. Proclamation of the Imminent Conclusion of a Treaty of Perpetual Peace in Philosophy. In: I. Kant, 2002. Theoretical Philosophy after 1781. Edited by and translated by P. Heath and H. Allison. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 451-460.Kant, I., 2007a. Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View. In: I. Kant, 2007. Anthropology, History, and Education. Edited by and translated by R.B. Louden and G. Zöllner. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 227-429.Kant, I., 2007b. Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Aim. In: I. Kant, 2007. Anthropology, History, and Education. Edited by G. Zöllner and R. B. Louden., translated by A. W. Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 107-120.Kant, I., 2007c. Review of J. G. Herder’s Ideas for the Philosophy of the History of Humanity. Parts 1 and 2. In: I. Kant, 2007. Anthropology, History, and Education. Edited by G. Zöllner and R. B. Louden., translated by A. W. Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 121-142.Kleingeld, P., 2007. Kant’s Second Thoughts on Race. The Philosophical Quarterly, 57(229). pp. 573-592.Kozyrev, A.P., 2007. Solov’jov i gnostiki [Solovyov and the Gnostics]. Moscow: Izdatel’ Savin S.A. (In Rus.)Latour, B., 2005. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Leibniz, G. W., Guerie, V. I. 1873. Sbornik pisem i memorialov Lejbnica, otnosjashhihsja k Rossii i Petru Velikomu [A Collection of Leibniz’s Letters and Memorials Related to Russia and Peter the Great]. Saint Petersburg: Tip. Imp. Akad. nauk. (In Rus.)Lu-Adler, H., 2023. Kant, Race, and Racism: Views from Somewhere. New York, N. Y.: Oxford University Press.Lübbe, H., 2013. Im Zug der Zeit. Verkürzter Aufenthalt in der Gegenwart. Second Edition. Berlin & Heidelberg: Springer.Lukacs, G., 1972. History and Class Consciousness: Studies in Marxist Dialectics. New Haven: MIT Press.Magidor, O., 2022. Category Mistakes. In: E. N. Zalta and U. Nodelman, 2022. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2022 Edition). Available at: [Accessed 11 December 2023].O’Regan, C., 2001. Gnostic Return in Modernity. Albany, N.Y.: SUNY Press.O’Regan, C., 2002. Gnostic Apocalypse: Jacob Boehme’s Haunted Narrative. Albany, N. Y.: SUNY Press.Plekhanov, G. V., 1956. The Role of the Individual in History. In: G. V. Plekhanov, 1956. Izbrannye filosofskie proizvedeniya: v 5 tomakh. [Selected Philosophical Works in Five Volumes]. Volume 2. Moscow: Gospolitizdat, pp. 300-334. (In Rus.)Podhajecka, M., 2022. Revising the History of ‘Nitchevo’ with Text Archives. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia, 57, pp. 279-313. https://doi.org/10.14746/stap.2022.57.12.Putnam, H., 1981. Reason, Truth and History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511625398.Styfhals, W., 2019. No Spiritual Investment in the World: Gnosticism and Postwar German Philosophy. Ithaca, N. Y.: Cornell University Press.Whitehead, A.N., 1948. Science and the Modern World: Lowell Lectures, 1925. New York, N. Y.: New American Library.Zhavoronkov, A. G., 2021. Reason as a Privilege of Europeans? Kant and the Problem of Racism. Tomsk State University Journal of Philosophy, Sociology and Political Science, 60, pp. 89-96. https://www.doi.org/10.17223/1998863X/60/9. (In Rus.)Кант и этика COVIDO.SensenTulane UniversityDespite the popularity of many of Kant’s ethical notions, such as autonomy, dignity and respect for persons, there is a perception, even among Kant scholars themselves, that one cannot reliably derive concrete duties from Kant’s moral philosophy. Against this, I shall argue that — properly understood — Kant’s ethics is of prime importance even today. I shall argue that Kant’s preferred procedure is actually the way we develop new ethical rules during the recent Coronavirus pandemic. In order to demonstrate this, I shall first reflect on how we came up with ethical rules such as keeping six feet of distance, wearing a mask, or restricting the number of people who can occupy a room at the same time. I shall then give the reasons why I do not follow the standard interpretations of how one derives concrete duties from Kant’s main formulation of the Categorical Imperative or the Formula of Humanity. Finally, I shall present the textual evidence that Kant proposes a method like the one we use today during a pandemic, and argue that this alternative interpretation can deal much better with the main objections that are commonly levelled against the standard interpretation of Kant’s procedure to derive concrete duties from the Categorical Imperative.0530202610312710.5922/0207-6918-2024-1-5https://journals.kantiana.ru/kant_collection/5554/48345/Allison, H., 2011. Kant’s Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Altman, M.C., 2022. Kant in the Time of Covid. Kantian Journal, 41(1), pp. 89-117.Bacin, S. and Sensen, O., eds. 2018. The Emergence of Autonomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Beauchamp, T. and Childress, J., 1994. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. Fourth Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Bentham, J., 1970. An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Edited by J.H. Burns and L.H. Hart. London: The Athlone Press.Dürig, G. and Maunz, T., eds. 1958. Grundgesetz. Kommentar. Volume 1: Texte, Art. 1-5. München: Beck.Gillessen, J., 2014. Was, wenn jeder ...? Freiburg i.Br. & München: Alber.Griffin, J., 2008. On Human Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Harsanyi, J., 1982. Morality and the Theory of Rational Behavior. In: A. Sen and B. Williams, eds. 1982. Utilitarianism and Beyond. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 39-62.Hegel, G. W. F., 1991. Elements of the Philosophy of Right. Edited by A. W. Wood, translated by H. B. Nisbet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Herman, B., 1993. The Practice of Moral Judgment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Hӧffe, O., 1979. Ethik und Politik. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Hruschka, J., 1992. Universalization and Related Principles. Archives for Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy, 78, pp. 289-300.Kant, I., 1992. M. Immanuel Kant’s Announcement of the Programme of His Lectures for The Winter Semester 1765-1766. In: I. Kant, 1993. Theoretical Philosophy, 1755-1770. Edited and translated by D. Walford and R. Meerbote. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 287-300.Kant, I., 1996a. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. In: I. Kant, 1996. Practical Philosophy. Edited and translated by M. Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 43-108.Kant, I., 1996b. Critique of Practical Reason. In: I. Kant, 1996. Practical Philosophy. Edited and translated by M. Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 139-271.Kant, I., 1996c. The Metaphysics of Morals. In: I. Kant, 1996. Practical Philosophy. Edited and translated by M. Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 365-603.Kant, I., 1996d. On a Supposed Right to Lie from Philanthropy. In: I. Kant, 1996. Practical Philosophy. Edited and translated by M. Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 605-615.Kant, I., 1997a. Moral Philosophy: Collins’s Lecture Notes. In: I. Kant, 1997. Lectures on Ethics. Edited by P. Heath and J.B. Schneewind; translated by P. Heath. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 37-222.Kant, I., 1997b. Kant’s Practical Philosophy: Herder’s Lecture Notes (Selections). In: I. Kant, 1997. Lectures on Ethics. Edited by P. Heath and J. B. Schneewind; translated by P. Heath. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1-36.Kant, I., 1997c. Kant on the Metaphysics of Morals: Vigilantius’s Lecture Notes. In: I. Kant, 1997. Lectures on Ethics. Edited by P. Heath and J. B. Schneewind; translated by P. Heath. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 249-452.Kant, I., 1997d. Morality According to Prof. Kant: Mrongovius’s Second Set of Lecture Notes (Selections). In: I. Kant, 1997. Lectures on Ethics. Edited by P. Heath and J. B. Schneewind; translated by P. Heath. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 223-248.Kant, I., 1998. Critique of Pure Reason. Edited and translated by P. Guyer and A. W. Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Kant, I., 2001. Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason. In: I. Kant, 2001. Religion and Rational Theology. Edited and translated by A. W. Wood and G. di Giovanni. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 39-216.Kant, I., 2005. Selections from the Notes on the Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and Sublime. In: I. Kant, 2005. Notes and Fragments. Edited by P. Guyer; translated by C. Bowman, P. Guyer and F. Rauscher. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1-24.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. Zӧller and R. Louden. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 227-429.Kerstein, S., 2013. How to Treat Persons. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Kleingeld, P., 2017. Contradiction and Kant’s Formula of Universal Law. Kant-Studien, 108, pp. 89-115.Kleingeld, P., 2020. How to Use Someone ‘Merely as a Means’. Kantian Review, 25, pp. 389-414.Korsgaard, C., 1996. Creating the Kingdom of Ends. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Mieth, C. and J. Rosenthal, 2022. Blind Spots in the Formula of Humanity: What Does it Mean not to Treat Someone as an End? In: C. Horn and R. dos Santos, eds. 2022. Kant’s Theory of Value. Berlin: de Gruyter, pp. 89-104.O’Neill, O., 1989. Constructions of Reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Parfit, D., 2011. On What Matters. Volume 1. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Rawls, J., 2000. Lectures on the History of Moral Philosophy. Edited by B. Herman. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Sensen, O., 2021. How to Treat Someone with Respect. In: R. Dean and O. Sensen, eds. 2021. Respect. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 99-117.Sensen, O., 2022. Universal Law and Poverty Relief. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 26, pp. 177-190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-022-10281-0.Shafer-Landau, R., 2003. Moral Realism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Sticker, M., 2023. Poverty, Exploitation, Mere Things and Mere Means. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 26, pp. 191-207. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-021-10238-9.Timmermann, J., 2007. Kant’s Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Tittel, G. A., 1786. Über Herrn Kant’s Moralreform. Frankfurt am Main & Leipzig: Pfähler.Wood, A., 1999. Kant’s Ethical Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.О новой попытке вывести позитивные обязанности из формулы универсального закона КантаS.KahnIndiana University — Purdue University (IUPUI)According to the positive duties objection, it is not possible to derive positive duties from Kant’s Formula of Universal Law (FUL). However, in his recent “Deriving Positive Duties from Kant’s Formula of Universal Law”, Guus Duindam tries to answer this objection. More specifically, Duindam tries to show how both a duty of benevolence and a duty of self-perfection can be derived from the FUL. I critically examine Duindam’s arguments. I maintain that Duindam’s argument for the positive duty of benevolence is ambiguous and that this ambiguity exposes him to a fatal dilemma: on one horn, Duindam faces the same objection that he concedes to be effective against other attempts to answer the positive duties objection; on the other horn, the procedure he recommends cannot be based on the FUL (because it does not evaluate actions on the basis of their corresponding maxims). In addition, I maintain that Duindam’s benevolence argument rests on a procedure that is, in general, intractable and, in this particular case, foredoomed (because it can be shown that there are no positive duties of the kind he tries to derive). From there, I turn to Duindam’s argument for the positive duty of self-perfection. I explain that Duindam’s derivation of the duty of self-perfection, even if successful, does not answer the positive duties objection. This is because Duindam never appeals to the FUL in his derivation of the duty of self-perfection (the derivation is based, rather, on instrumental reasoning from the second-order end to accomplish our first-order ends). I elaborate on this by comparing and contrasting Duindam’s argument with Oliver Sensen’s interpretation of how to apply the FUL in the latter’s recent “Universal Law and Poverty Relief”.0530202612814810.5922/0207-6918-2024-1-6https://journals.kantiana.ru/kant_collection/5555/48347/Baron, M., 1995. Kantian Ethics Almost Without Apology. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Duindam, G., 2023. Deriving Positive Duties from Kant’s Formula of Universal Law. History of Philosophy Quarterly, 40(3), pp.191-201. https://doi.org/10.5406/21521026.40.3.01.Herman, B., 1993. The Practice of Moral Judgment. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Herman, B., 2007. Moral Literacy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Herman, B., 2021. The Moral Habitat. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Kahn, S., 2014. Can Positive Duties be Derived from Kant’s Formula of Universal Law. Kantian Review, 19(1), pp. 93-108. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1369415413000319.Kahn, S., 2017. Positive Duties, Maxim Realism and the Deliberative Field. Philosophical Inquiry, 41(4), pp. 2-34. https://doi.org/10.5840/philinquiry201741421.Kahn, S., 2019. Defending the Traditional Interpretations of Kant’s Formula of a Law of Nature. Theoria, 66(158). pp. 76-102. https://doi.org/10.3167/th.2019.6615804.Kahn, S., 2020. Positive Duties, Kant’s Universalizability Tests, and Contradictions. Southwest Philosophy Review, 36(1), pp. 113-120. https://doi.org/10.5840/swphilreview202036113Kahn, S., 2021a. Obligatory Actions, Obligatory Maxims. Kantian Review, 26(1), pp. 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1111/papq.12422.Kahn, S., 2021b. On the Expressive Limits of Kant’s Universalizability Tests. Kant-Studien, 112(2), pp. 299-304. https://doi.org/10.1515/kant-2021-0016.Kahn, S., 2022a. Nary an Obligatory Maxim from Kant’s Universalizability Tests. Zeitschrift für Ethik und Moralphilosophie, 5(1), pp. 15-35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42048-022-00115-0.Kahn, S., 2022b. Why Positive Duties Cannot be Derived from Kant’s Formula of Universal Law. Philosophia, 50, pp. 1189-1206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-021-00429-0.Kant, I., 1998. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Edited by M. Gregor and J. Timmermann. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Sensen, O., 2023. Universal Law and Poverty Relief. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 26, pp. 177-190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-022-10281-0.Stohr, K., 2011. Kantian Beneficence and the Problem of Obligatory Help. Journal of Moral Philosophy, 8(1), pp. 45-67. https://doi.org/10.1163/174552411X549372.Wood, A., 1999. Kant’s Ethical Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.«Великий рационалист»: Алексей Введенский о Канте в контексте русской кантианыA. I.VvedenskyImmanuel Kant Baltic Federal University (IKBFU)D. O.RozhinImmanuel Kant Baltic Federal University (IKBFU)In 1904, the last January issue of the newspaper “Moskoskiye vedomosti” carried an article by Alexey I. Vvedensky, philosopher and theologian, Professor of the Moscow Theological Academy, entitled “The Great Rationalist. On the Centenary of Kant’s Death”. Although the publication could hardly be called unique for its time, as many Russian philosophers and journalists commented on this date, the article merits attention because of the way it represents Kant, and the fact that it sheds light on Vvedensky’s attitudes toward Kantian philosophy. Alexey Vvedensky is to this day a little-known figure in the history of Russian philosophy, such that I thought it would be helpful to preface the publication with a review of the landmarks in the Russian philosopher’s intellectual biography. I go on to demonstrate the ambivalent character of Vvedensky’s attitudes toward Kant’s philosophy. To this end, I show that the Russian philosopher, on one hand, calls for a “return to the universally acclaimed Kant”, whose genius he unreservedly recognises; and on the other hand, he argues that Kant should not only be studied and profoundly reflected on, but also overcome because his rationalism “has desiccated the thought of the new cultured humanity”.0530202614918010.5922/0207-6918-2024-1-7https://journals.kantiana.ru/kant_collection/5556/48349/Abramov, A. I. and Vanchugov, V. V., 2010. Vvedensky Aleksey Ivanovich. In: V. S. Stepin, ed. Novaia filosofskaia ėntsiklopediia [New Philosophical Encyclopedia]: in 4 vol. Volume 1. Moscow: Mysl’, pp. 372-373. (In Rus.)Anon., 1874. A Few Words About P. D. Yurkevich. Moskovskie vedomosti, 278, pp. 2-3. (In Rus.)Anon., 1898. Zhurnaly sobranij Soveta Imperatorskoj Moskovskoj duhovnoj akademii 1897 g. [Journals of the Meetings of the Council of the Imperial Moscow Theological Academy in 1897]. Sergiev Posad: 2-ya tipografiya A. I. Snegirevoi. (In Rus.)Anon., 1905. Immanuel Kant. Niva, 4, pp. 76-77. (Portrait and drawing on p. 75). (In Rus.)Anon., 1912. From Academic Life (25th Anniversary of Professor A. I. Vvedensky). Bogoslovskiy vestnik [Theological Bulletin], 1(2), pp. 394-454 (3rd pagin.). (In Rus.)Arnold, T., 2022. Plato’s Ideas in Lotze’s Light — On Husserl’s Reading of Lotze’s Logik. Husserl Studies, 39(1), pp. 85-99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10743-022-09319-z.Baum, M., 2019. Kants praktischer Platonismus. Kantian Journal, 38(4), pp. 7-33. http://dx.doi.org/10.5922/0207- 6918-2019-4-1.Dmitrieva, N. A., 2014. The “Perpetual Peace” of Immanuel Kant at the Turn of the Centuries and During the First World War. Prepodavatel XXI vek, 2/1, pp. 46-61. (In Rus.)Ern, V. F., 1910. Berkeley as the Founder of Modern Immanentism. Voprosy filosofii i psihologii [Issues of Philosophy and Psychology], 103, pp. 413-436. (In Rus.)Ern, V. F., 1912. Critique of the Kantian Concept of Truth. In: Filosofskij sbornik. L’vu Mihajlovichu Lopatinu k tridcatiletiyu nauchno-pedagogicheskoj deyatel’nosti. Ot Moskovskogo psihologicheskogo obshchestva. 1881-1911 [Philosophical Collection. To Lev Mikhailovich Lopatin for Thirty Years of Scientific and Pedagogical Activity. From the Moscow Psychological Society]. Moscow: Tipo-lit. t-va I. N. Kushnereva, pp. 49-61. (In Rus.)Ern, V. F., 1991a. From Kant to Krupp. In: V. F. Ern, 1991. Sochineniya [Works]. Moscow: Pravda, pp. 308-318. (In Rus.)Ern, V. F., 1991b. The Essence of German Phenomenalism. In: V. F. Ern, 1991. Sochineniya [Works]. Moscow: Pravda, pp. 319-328. (In Rus.)Florensky, P. A., 1909. Cosmological Antinomies of I. Kant: [Test Lecture]. Bogoslovskiy vestnik [Theological Bulletin], 1(4), pp. 596-625 (3rd pagin.). (In Rus.)Flyaksberger, V. A., 1904. Kant’s Philosophy. Zapiski Obshchestva istorii, filologii i prava pri Varshavskom universitete [Proceedings of the Society of History, Philology and Law at the University of Warsaw], 3, pp. 107-150. (In Rus.)Fouillée, A., 1904a. Nietzsche’s Religion in a Critical Presentation by Alfred Fouillée (Translation from French by D. Vvedensky). Vera i razum [Faith and Reason], 1, pp. 36-48. (In Rus.) (2nd pagin.). (In Rus.)Fouillée, A., 1904b. Nietzsche’s Religion in a Critical Presentation by Alfred Fouillée (Translation from French by D. Vvedensky) (Ending). Vera i razum [Faith and Reason], 4, pp. 148-170. (In Rus.) (2nd pagin.). (In Rus.)Fouillée, A., 1905. Nietzsche i immoralizm [Nietzsche and Immoralism]. St. Petersburg : izd-e Obshchestvennoy pol’zy. (In Rus.)Fouillée, A., 2006. Nietzsche i immoralizm [Nietzsche and Immoralism], translation from French by A. I. Vvedensky. Moscow: URSS, Lenand. (In Rus.)Howell, R., 2017. Analytical Work on Kant-Idealism, Things-in-Themselves and the Object of Knowledge. Kantian Journal, 36(4), pp. 31-50. http://dx.doi.org/10.5922/0207-6918-2017-4-3. (In Rus.)Kalinnikov, L. A., 1997. Russian Thought Between Plato and Kant: P. D. Yurkevich. Kantian Journal, 20(1), pp. 75-96. (In Rus.)Kant, I., 1992. The Jäsche Logic. In: I. Kant, 1992. Lectures on Logic. Translated and edited by J. M. Young. Cambridge.Kant, I., 1905. Physical Monadology (Translated from German by P. A. Florensky). Bogoslovskiy vestnik [Theological Bulletin], 3(9), pp. 95-127 (3rd pagin.). (In Rus.)Kant, I., 1997. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Translated and edited by M. J. Gregor, Introduction by C. M. Korsgaard. 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., 2002. Critique of Practical Reason. Translated by W. S. Pluhar, Introduction by S. Engstrom. Indianapolis & Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company Inc.Lebedev, V., 1874. Memories of P. D. Yurkevich. Moskovskie vedomosti, 292, p. 4. (In Rus.)Lotze, H., 1912. Logik: Drei Bücher vom Denken, vom Untersuchen und vom Erkennen. Leipzig: Meiner.Mirtov, D. P., 1905. Moral Autonomy According to Kant and Nietzsche: a Speech Intended to be Delivered on the Day of the Annual Academic Act. Christian Reading, 3, pp. 313-337. (In Rus.)Natorp, P., 1921. Platos Ideenlehre: eine Einführung in den Idealismus. Leipzig: Meiner.Nemeth, T., 2023. Philosophy in Imperial Russia’s Theological Academies. Berlin & Boston: Walter de Gruyter.Pavlov, A. T., 2007. P.D. Yurkevich at Moscow University. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 7: Filosofiya [Bulletin of Moscow University. Series 7: Philosophy], 3, pp. 97-108. (In Rus.)Rohlf, M., 2023. Immanuel Kant. In: E. N. Zalta and U. Nodelman, eds. 2023. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Available at: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant/ (Accessed 23 November 2023).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/10.5922/0207-6918-2021-1-3.Rozhin, D. O., 2023. Between Kant and Trendelenburg: On the Genealogy of Kudryavtsev-Platonov’s Theory of Cognition. Kantian Journal, 42(4), pp. 35-68. http://dx.doi.org/10.5922/0207-6918-2023-4-3.S. 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), F. 588 (Boris V. Nikolsky). Inv. 1, № 1359. (In Rus.)Shpet, G. G., 1914. The Philosophical Legacy of P. D. Yurkevich. (On the Fortieth Anniversary of His Death). Voprosy filosofii i psihologii [Issues of Philosophy and Psychology], 125(5), pp. 653-727. (In Rus.)Smirnov, I. K., 1914. Moscow Theological Academy in 1854-58. From the Memoirs of Iv. Kuzm. Smirnov. In: U Troicy v Akademii. 1814 — 1914 gg. [At the Trinity in the Academy. 1814—1914]. Moscow: Izd. byvsh. vospitannikov Mosk. duhov. akad., pp. 131-140. (In Rus.)Solovyov, V. S., 1900. Three Characteristics. — M. M. Troickij. — N. Ya. Grot. — P.D. Yurkevich. Vestnik Evropy [Bulletin of Europe], 1, pp. 319-335. (In Rus.)Vvedensky, Alexey I., 1891. Basic Epistemological Principles of Post-Kantian Philosophy. Historical-critical Essay. Vera i razum [Faith and Reason], 19, pp. 305-326 (2nd pagin.). (In Rus.)Vvedensky, Alexey I., 1892. Fouillée and the Metaphysics of the Future. Voprosy filosofii i psihologii [Issues of Philosophy and Psychology], 11, pp. 1-30. (In Rus.)Vvedensky, Alexey I., 1893a. On the Tasks of Modern Philosophy, in Connection with the Question of the Possibility and Direction of Original Russian Philosophy. Voprosy filosofii i psihologii [Issues of Philosophy and Psychology], 20, pp. 125-157. (In Rus.)Vvedensky, Alexey I., 1893b. Essay on Modern French Philosophy. Philosophy in Modern France. Vera i razum [Faith and Reason], 10, pp. 429-470 (2nd pagin.). (In Rus.)Vvedensky, Alexey I., 1894. Philosophy of the Future in Germany. Bogoslovskij vestnik [Theological Bulletin], 1(1), pp. 77-99 (1st pagin.). (In Rus.)Vvedensky, Alexey I., 1895a. [Book Review:] Windelband. History of New Philosophy: Kant’s Philosophy, translated from German by N. Platonova. St. Petersburg 1895. Pages IV+202. Bogoslovskij vestnik [Theological Bulletin], 4(10), pp. 119-125 (3rd pagin.). (In Rus.)Vvedensky, Alexey I., 1895b. Kant’s Doctrine of Space: (Explanation and Criticism). Bogoslovskij vestnik [Theological Bulletin], 2(6), pp. 390-404 (3rd pagin.). (In Rus.)Vvedensky, Alexey I., 1904. Great Rationalist. On the Centenary of Kant’s Death. (1704 — January 31 — 1804). Moskovskie vedomosti [Moscow News], 31, pp. 3-4. (In Rus.)Vvedensky, Alexey I., 1909. Socializm, kak nravstvennaya i teoreticheskaya zadacha [Socialism as a Moral and Theoretical Task]. Second Edition. Moscow: “Russkaya Pechatnya”. (In Rus.)Vvedensky, Alexey I., 2015. Zapadnaya dejstvitel’nost’ i russkie idealy: Pis’ma iz-za granicy [Western Reality and Russian Ideals: Letters from Abroad]. Moscow: LENAND. (In Rus.)Windelband, W., 1880. Die Geschichte der Neueren Philosophie. Volume 2: Von Kant bis Hegel und Herbart. Leipzig: Breitkopf und Härtel.Windelband, W., 1895. Filosofiya Kanta (Iz istorii novoj filosofii Windelbanda) [Philosophy of Kant (From the History of the New Philosophy of Windelband)]. Translated from German by N. Platonova. St. Petersburg : Tip. I. N. Skorohodova. (In Rus.)Yermishin, O. T., 2009. Vvedensky Aleksey Ivanovich. In: Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus’ Kirill, ed. 2009. Pravoslavnaya enciklopediya [Orthodox Encyclopedia]. Available at: https://www.pravenc.ru/text/149991.html (Accessed 23 November 2023) (In Rus.)Yungerov, P. A., ed. 2007. Kniga Bytiya. Opyt perelozheniya na russkij yazyk [Book of Genesis. Experience of Transposition into Russian]. Translated by P. A. Yungerov, reprinted by N. Divakov. Moscow: Izdanie KB MDA i Fonda “Serafim”. Available at: Azbuka very (Accessed 23 November 2023) (In Rus.)Yurkevich, P. D., 1860. From the Science of the Human Spirit. Trudy Kievskoj duhovnoj akademii [Proceedings of the Kyiv Theological Academy], 4, pp. 367-511. (In Rus.)Yurkevich, P. D., 1865. Reason According to the Teachings of Plato and Experience According to the Teachings of Kant. Speech by Ordinary Professor P. D. Yurkevich. Moskovskie Universitetskie Izvestiya [Moscow University News], 5, pp. 321-392. (In Rus.)Zen’kovsky, V. V., 1908. Plato in the Interpretation by P. Natorp. Voprosy filosofii i psihologii [Issues of Philosophy and Psychology], 95, pp. 588-619 (2nd pagin.). (In Rus.)Žust, M. M., 2002. À la recherche de la vérité vivante. Roma: Lipa Srl.