Authors
- Kucherenko Alexander V. Candidate of Philosophical Sciences, Associate Professor
Annotation
The relevance of the study of this problem is due to the existence in Kantology, up to the present time, of the unsolved task of creating a holistic view of Kant’s internally
consistent worldview system, which includes the entire set of its constituent parts without any exception. In Kantology, it is customary to divide the work of a philosopher into two periods, subcritical and critical, dividing them among themselves in principle, which is, of course, largely fair. However, it is quite definitely possible to assert the direct continuity of successive periods, if we keep in mind Kant’s increased interest in the various properties of the mind in the precritical period of his work, since he invariably turned to them in the course of reasoning about certain changeable objects of his attention. Eventually, in the precritical period, the mind becomes a kind of center around which its thought revolves. Based on the totality of Kant’s works in the precritical period, this article presents the characteristics of the mind, as if casually
scattered by him in different places. The purpose of the study was to identify and comprehend Kant’s heavy burden of problems related to reason, which he would then begin to solve, devoting the remaining years of his life to this occupation.
How to link insert
Kucherenko, A. V. (2024). I. KANT’S INTEREST IN THE TOTALITY OF THE PROPERTIES OF THE MIND IN THE PRECRITICAL PERIOD Bulletin of the Moscow City Pedagogical University. Series "Pedagogy and Psychology", № 2 (50), 23. https://doi.org/10.25688/2078-9238.2024.50.2.2
References
1.
1. Kalinnikov, L. A. (2023). Razgovor o filosofii I. Kanta. Chast’ 1 (k 80-letnemu yubileyu L. A. Kalinnikova) [A conversation about the philosophy of I. Kant. Part 1]. In: Philoso FAQ – YouTube. (In Russian). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imoeJwdVojo&list=PL48Q51pndTVmUbv2jlLXV6Ert3dnUd3dU&index=1
2.
2. Kant, I. (1963). Sochineniya [Writings], 6 (1). Moscow: Mysl. 543 p. (In Russian).
3.
3. Kant, I. (1964). Sochineniya [Writings], 6 (2). Moscow: Mysl. 611 p. (In Russian).
4.
4. Perov, Yu. V., Sergeev, K. A., & Slinin, Ya. A. (2000). Antropologicheskoe izmerenie v transcendental’noj filosofii Kanta Yu. V. Perov, K. A. Sergeev, Ya. A. Slinin. Ocherki istorii klassicheskogo nemeckogo idealizma) [The Anthropological dimension in Kant’s Transcendental Philosophy] (pp. 268–341). St. Petersburg: Nauka. (In Russian).
5.
5. Natorp, P. (2006). Izbrannye raboty [Selected works]. Moscow: Territoriya budushchego. 384 p. (In Russian).
6.
6. Spinoza, B. (1957). Traktat ob usovershenstvovanii razuma. [A treatise on the improvement of the mind] In: Izbrannye proizvedeniya. Tom 1. [Selected works. Vol. 1] (pp. 317–358). Moscow: Politicheskaya literatura.
7.
7. Hajdegger, M. (1997). Kant i problema metafiziki [Kant and the problem of metaphysics]. Moscow: Logos. 227 p. (In Russian).