title: “Critical positivism” versus “new idealism” in Russia at the beginning of 20th century
metadata.name: dc.contributor.author
metadata.value: Soboleva, Maja
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.accessioned
metadata.value: 2018-04-05T10:48:28Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.available
metadata.value: 2018-04-05T10:48:28Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.issued
metadata.value: 2018-03
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.citation
metadata.value: Soboleva M. E. “Critical positivism” versus “new idealism” in Russia at the beginning of 20th century. Vestnik SPbSU. Philosophy and Conflict Studies, 2018, vol. 34, issue 1, pp. 46–56.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.identifier.other
metadata.value: 10.21638/11701/spbu17.2018.105
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.uri
metadata.value: http://hdl.handle.net/11701/9350
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.description.abstract
metadata.value: The paper focuses on the situation in Russian philosophy at the beginning of the 20th century.
  Of special interest is the discussion between the so called “critical positivism” and the
  “new idealism”. The former is represented by A. A. Bogdanov, P. S. Juškevič, V. A. Bazarov and
  Ja.A. Berman; the latter is represented by N. A. Berdjaev, S. N. Bulgakov, P. A. Florenskij and
  others. In a first step, I reconstruct this discussion on the basis of the collected works “Problems
  of idealism” (1902) and “Landmarks” (1909) from the side of the idealists, and “Essays of
  realist world view” (1904), “Essays on Marxist Philosophy” (1908), and “Essays on philosophy
  of collectivism” (1909) published by the positivists. I argue that this discussion took on the
  character of the struggle of worldviews: it was a struggle of the traditional Russian paradigm
  of philosophical thinking against the new type of philosophizing which was oriented towards
  the natural sciences. After that, I briefly characterize the theoretical and practical programs of
  “critical positivism”. Its main theoretical principle is “realism”, and its core practical principle
  is “idealism”. However, both the concept of “realism” and the concept of “idealism” received
  a completely new interpretation. Bogdanov’s “empiriomonism”, Juškevič’s “empiriosymbolism”
  and Bazarov’s philosophy, which developed the ideas of empiriocritiscism, can be seen
  as different modifications of the realizing these key principles. I promote the view that we can
  consider the so called “third” wave of Russian positivism (Bogdanov, Juškevič, Bazarov) as
  “neopositivism”, because, within this currency, the transformation from scientific philosophy
  to theory of science took place. The vivid illustration of this transformation can be seen in
  Bogdanov’s general theory of organization or “Tectology”.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.language.iso
metadata.value: en
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.publisher
metadata.value: St Petersburg State University
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.relation.ispartofseries
metadata.value: Vestnik of St Petersburg University. Philosophy and Conflict Studies;Volume 34; Issue 1
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: idealism
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: positivism
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: critical realism
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: ineopositivism
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: empiriomonism
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: empiriosymbolism
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.title
metadata.value: “Critical positivism” versus “new idealism” in Russia at the beginning of 20th century
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.type
metadata.value: Article
metadata.lang: en_GB
resources.filename: 05-Soboleva.pdf
resources.url: https://dspace.spbu.ru/bitstream/11701/9350/1/05-Soboleva.pdf
resources.format: Adobe PDF
resources.size: 617,98 kB