Статья 'Конструируем критическую философию И.Канта как «философскую реформацию» и «критику культурного разума»' - журнал 'Философская мысль' - NotaBene.ru
по
Journal Menu
> Issues > Rubrics > About journal > Authors > About the journal > Requirements for publication > Editorial collegium > Peer-review process > Policy of publication. Aims & Scope. > Article retraction > Ethics > Online First Pre-Publication > Copyright & Licensing Policy > Digital archiving policy > Open Access Policy > Open access publishing costs > Article Identification Policy > Plagiarism check policy > Editorial board
Journals in science databases
About the Journal

MAIN PAGE > Back to contents
Philosophical Thought
Reference:

Constructing Critical Philosophy of Immanuel Kant as the 'Philosophical Reformation' and 'Critics of Cultural Mind'

Belyaev Vadim Alekseevich

PhD in Philosophy

Temporarily unemployed

125364, Russia, g. Moscow, pr-d Parusnyi, 9, kv.63

vbelyaev@yandex.ru
Другие публикации этого автора
 

 

DOI:

10.7256/2306-0174.2014.3.11222

Review date:

15-02-2014


Publish date:

1-3-2014


Abstract: What is "philosophical reformation"? And what such "criticism of cultural reason"? "Philosophical reformation" I will call that integrated action which Kant makes the critical philosophy. "Criticism of cultural reason" I will call that integrated action which is made by the new European culture, a modernist style. I will consider a modernist style as the sociocultural project. I will call this project "criticism of cultural reason". (I will hold "Criticism of cultural reason" as already ready conceptual design which essence was developed by me in a number of monographs.) The content of the concepts "philosophical reformation" and "criticism of cultural reason" will reveal on the course of conversation on critical philosophy of Kant. I will conditionally divide its philosophy into criticism theoretical and to critic of practical reason. I will begin with the analysis of criticism of practical reason, assuming that it has to play the central role for all Kant criticism. Through this analysis I will leave to opportunity to express Kant criticism in general through "criticism of cultural reason", I will show restrictions which arise here. Then I will show how the Kant criticism is expressed through "philosophical reformation". I will consider "Philosophical reformation" as option of the Christian Reformation. I will finish with demonstration of that Kant "philosophical reformation", being paradigmalny expression of strategy of Education, is at the same time and one of limit options of a set of "reformations" of which the modernist style consists. I will show that, on the other hand, Kant "reformation" and other "reformations" of a modernist style, are special cases of "criticism of cultural reason" which begins with the answer to an era of religious wars after the Reformation and is way of creation of peaceful co-existence of subjects cultures in isn't removable the pluralistic world.


This article written in Russian. You can find full text of article in Russian here .

References
1.
Belyaev V.A. Kritika interkul'turnogo razuma: analiz tsennostnoi struktury novoevropeiskogo mira. M.: Knizhnyi dom «LIBROKOM», 2012; K rekonstruktsii novoevropeiskoi ratsional'nosti: proekty pokoreniya cheloveka protiv proekta pokoreniya prirody. M.: KRASAND, 2011; Interkul'tura i filosofiya. M.: LENAND, 2014; Belyaev V.A. K idee interkul'tury // NB: Filosofskie issledovaniya. — 2013.-№ 5.-S.309-346. DOI: 10.7256/2306-0174.2013.5.443. URL: http://e-notabene.ru/fr/article_443.html; Belyaev V.A. Kritika religioznogo razuma Yu.Khabermasa kak chast' kritiki kul'turnogo razuma // NB: Filosofskie issledovaniya. — 2014.-№ 1.-S.20-64. DOI: 10.7256/2306-0174.2014.1.10709. URL: http://e-notabene.ru/fr/article_10709.html.
2.
Kant I. Sochineniya v shesti tomakh. T. 4. Ch. 1. M., 1966, S. 221-222.
3.
Tam zhe. S. 222-224.
4.
Tam zhe. S. 226.
5.
Tam zhe. S. 240-241.
6.
Kant I. Sochineniya v shesti tomakh. T. 6. M., 1966, S. 55.
7.
Tam zhe. S. 56.
8.
Tam zhe. S. 56-58.
9.
Kant I. Sochineniya v shesti tomakh. T. 4. Ch. 1. M., 1966, S. 499.
10.
Tam zhe. S. 260.
Link to this article

You can simply select and copy link from below text field.


Other our sites:
Official Website of NOTA BENE / Aurora Group s.r.o.
"History Illustrated" Website