The First Edition of “The Justification of Good” (1897): Contemporaries’ Response. Part 4

B.V. Mezhuev
{"title":"The First Edition of “The Justification of Good” (1897): Contemporaries’ Response. Part 4","authors":"B.V. Mezhuev","doi":"10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.006-022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article continues the systematic review and analysis of newspaper and magazine responses to the first edition of the main work of V. Solovyov on moral philosophy “Justification of Good” (1897). The fourth part of this series of articles examines critical attacks on this book by representatives of the left, presumably Populist camp of the Russian press and public thought. It describes in detail critical responses of such authors as the regular columnist of the newspaper “Novosti”, literary critic Evgeny A. Solovyov, an anonymous review published in the journal “Russian Thought”, the reviews by the positivist philosopher Pavel V. Mokievsky in “Russkoe bogatstvo” and by the religious idealist Akim L. Volynsky in the “Severnyi vestnik”. It is noted that the main tone of criticism from the left was the assertion that the philosopher took the position of a conformist acceptance of the state and the church in their existing forms. Based on the consideration of all the above responses, the article concludes that none of the aforementioned critics tried to understand the essence of V. Solovyov's views. For most of the left-wing critics, any correlation of philosophy with religion, at least in its traditional forms, was unacceptable. It is argued that certain objections of V. Solovyov's critics on the left against his concept of moral philosophy were not without persuasiveness, which the philosopher had to take into account in the second edition of his work.","PeriodicalId":445879,"journal":{"name":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","volume":"30 40","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.006-022","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article continues the systematic review and analysis of newspaper and magazine responses to the first edition of the main work of V. Solovyov on moral philosophy “Justification of Good” (1897). The fourth part of this series of articles examines critical attacks on this book by representatives of the left, presumably Populist camp of the Russian press and public thought. It describes in detail critical responses of such authors as the regular columnist of the newspaper “Novosti”, literary critic Evgeny A. Solovyov, an anonymous review published in the journal “Russian Thought”, the reviews by the positivist philosopher Pavel V. Mokievsky in “Russkoe bogatstvo” and by the religious idealist Akim L. Volynsky in the “Severnyi vestnik”. It is noted that the main tone of criticism from the left was the assertion that the philosopher took the position of a conformist acceptance of the state and the church in their existing forms. Based on the consideration of all the above responses, the article concludes that none of the aforementioned critics tried to understand the essence of V. Solovyov's views. For most of the left-wing critics, any correlation of philosophy with religion, at least in its traditional forms, was unacceptable. It is argued that certain objections of V. Solovyov's critics on the left against his concept of moral philosophy were not without persuasiveness, which the philosopher had to take into account in the second edition of his work.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
善的正当性》(1897 年)第一版:同时代人的回应。第四部分
文章继续系统回顾和分析了报纸和杂志对弗-索洛维约夫道德哲学主要著作《善的正当性》(1897 年)第一版的反应。本系列文章的第四部分探讨了俄罗斯新闻界和公众思想界左派(大概是民粹主义阵营)代表对该书的批判性攻击。文章详细描述了《新消息报》固定专栏作家、文学评论家叶夫根尼-索洛维约夫(Evgeny A. Solovyov)等作者的批评回应、发表在《俄罗斯思想》杂志上的匿名评论、实证主义哲学家帕维尔-V-莫基耶夫斯基(Pavel V. Mokievsky)在《Russkoe bogatstvo》上发表的评论以及宗教理想主义者阿基姆-L-沃林斯基(Akim L. Volynsky)在《Severnyi vestnik》上发表的评论。值得注意的是,左派批评的主要基调是断言哲学家的立场是顺从地接受现有形式的国家和教会。基于对上述所有回应的思考,文章得出结论,上述批评者都没有试图理解弗-索洛维约夫观点的实质。对大多数左翼批评家来说,哲学与宗教的任何关联,至少是传统形式的关联,都是不可接受的。本文认为,左翼批评家对弗-索洛维约夫道德哲学概念的某些反对意见并非没有说服力,哲学家在其著作的第二版中必须考虑到这些反对意见。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The First Edition of “The Justification of Good” (1897): Contemporaries’ Response. Part 4 The image of Philostratus in the works of K.K. Vaginov: experience of deconstruction “Real Deed of an Artist” and Philosophy of Art: Solovyev – Fyodorov – Chekrygin V.Y. Bryusov, N.F. Fedorov and the Fedorovians of the 1900s-1920s: The Question of Meaning and Goals of Art. Article one. What were Bryusov and Fedorov Arguing about in the House of Yu.P. Bartenev V.I. Lamansky. Historical letters on the attitude of Russian people to their tribesmen. The letter VI
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1