"This personification of wisdom with golden hair and a radiant aura echoes both the eternal feminine and the world soul. Rooted in Christian and Jewish mysticism, Eastern Orthodox iconography, Greek philosophy, and European romanticism, the Sophiology that suffuses Solovyov's philosophical and artistic works is both intellectually sophisticated and profoundly inspiring. Judith Deutsch Kornblatt brings together key texts from Solovyov's writings about Sophia: poetry, fiction, drama, and philosophy, all extensively annotated and some available in English for the first time (...) (with assistance from the translators Boris Jakim and Laury Magnus)."--Amazon website. (shrink)

Less known in the anglophone world than Berdyaev (who was a pupil of his), or Martin Buber, Vladimir Solovyov (1853-1900), philosopher, mystic, poet, has nevertheless a contribution of the first importance to offer to Western scholarship. He came from a rich and not yet fully understood tradition; his erudition was stupendous. Like his predecessors he was extremely sensitive to such problems as the religious meaning of history, of creativity, of culture. It is important to emphasize a general link (...) between Solovyov and preceding currents of Russian thought, for his Christian philosophy in a sense embraces them all. Dostoyevsky and Leo Tolstoy sat at his feet. Godmanhood is the problem of restoring all mankind; it is a concept of salvation as a process of becoming divine. The differences between the Orthodox, Roman, and Anglo-Catholic and many of the Protestant Churches are not found in relation to the great dogmas or articles of the creed. Solovyov has a vital and unique message to Christians of all denominations; he offers a basis for reunion rarely suggested in Western Christianity. (shrink)

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work. This work is in the public domain (...) in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant. (shrink)

In The Burning Bush, Glazov conducts a profoundly original inquiry into Vladimir Solovyov's attitude toward Judaism. Solovyov (1853-1900) was one of the most remarkable figures of the 19th century: He was the most important Russian speculative thinker of that century, publishing major works on theoretical philosophy, the philosophy of religion, and ethics; he also produced sensitive literary criticism and incisive essays on current political, social, and ecclesiastical questions. The eminent theologian Hans Urs von Balthasar designated Solovyov (...) as the greatest artist of conceptual order and organization--after Thomas Aquinas--in the entire history of thought, a thinker who borrows from all systems after purging them of their negations. Solovyov was also the first major Russian thinker to enter into ecumenical dialogue with Jewish scholars and theologians, and Glazov's main concern is (1) to translate as completely as possible all of Solovyov's writings on Judaism and to annotate these texts by identifying persons, places, and citations, especially in the Biblical and rabbinic literature; and (2) to synthesize the information gleaned from these writings with key recollections of Solovyov's attitudes toward Jews and Judaism by his immediate family, friends, and early biographers. Glazov collects, translates, and comments on all the relevant primary texts: writings, letters, pamphlets, protests, political documents, and prayers which relate to Solovyov's work on Jewish matters. (shrink)

"Русская цивилизация" - серия самых выдающихся книг великих русских мыслителей, отражающих главные вехи в развитии русского национального мировоззрения.

-- t. 2. 1875-1877 -- t. 3. 1877-1881 -- t. 4. 1878-1882.

t. 1. Filosofskai︠a︡ publit︠s︡istika -- t. 2. Chtenii︠a︡ o bogochelovechestve ; Filosofskai︠a︡ publit︠s︡istika.

General historical introduction (concerning the law of historical development) -- Concerning the three types of philosophy -- Principles of organic logic : characterization -- Of integral knowledge point of departure and method of organic logic -- Principles of organic logic (continuation) : concept of the absolute : basic definitions according to the categories of the existent, essence, and being -- Principles of organic logic (continuation) : relative categories that define idea as an entity.

This article discusses the connection between the ideas of Fyodor M. Dostoevsky and Vladimir S. Solovyov on the need for cultural and moral transformation of those who would claim to participate in...

The aim of this paper is to offer an overview of the long-lasting friendship between Georges Florovsky and St. Justin Popović, as well as their common project to build an Orthodox theological synthesis on the basis of the patristic tradition. The paper focuses on three periods from Florovsky’s and Popović’s lives, from late 1910 to early 1920, from the late 1920s to late 1930s, and finally into the 1940s. I argue that in the first period both authors developed their theological (...) visions relying on Solovyov and Florensky, on the one hand, and in opposition to the ecclesial nationalism of the Slavophiles and conservative Orthodox hierarchs, on the other hand. Further, I investigate how during the late 1920s and 1930s both authors searched for an Orthodox synthesis mostly in dialogue with their Orthodox predecessors, especially Solovyov, Florensky, and Bulgakov, as well as the modern western philosophical tradition. The focus will shift then to the 1940s, which was characterized by frequent meetings between Florovsky and Popović in Belgrade, Yugoslavia. I argue that in this period the Church Fathers became for both authors the golden standard for Orthodox theology, and the idea of the Neopatristic synthesis developed in full scale. (shrink)

The widespread assessment of the early period of Semyon L. Frank’s work as being influenced by German Neo-Kantianism is in need of a critical scrutiny. There are several reasons why the Russian philosopher’s interest in Neo-Kantianism merits a closer look. First, two systemic theories belonging to different trends exerted a decisive influence on Russian philosophy in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries: German Neo-Kantianism and Vladimir Solovyov’s school of all-unity. Second, Frank himself and the German Neo-Kantians considered (...) Nicholas of Cusa to be one of their forerunners and pointed out the importance of his mathematical ideas for their mathematical studies. Thirdly and lastly, Frank paid particular attention, especially in his formative period as a philosopher, to the leading trend in the early twentieth century, namely German Neo-Kantianism, which led some students of his work to believe that German Neo-Kantianism played the decisive role in Frank’s abandonment of Marxism in favour of religious ontology. Frank’s fundamental disagreement with German Neo-Kantianism was expressed in his work The Object of Knowledge in which he criticised the Neo-Kantian concepts of number and time. Although Frank rightly points out the one-sidedness of the Neo-Kantian definition of number, most notably in the works of the Marburg philosopher Paul Natorp, on the whole his criticism of the Neo-Kantian concept of number and time as being different from his own is not entirely convincing. In my opinion, Frank’s attempt to explain the abstract concept of number through a still more abstract concept of all-unity was not crowned with success because he ignored the experience of Christian theology and the Trinity dogma as well as the profound thoughts of the Rev. Pavel Florensky on this topic. (shrink)

One of the trademarks of Nicolai Hartmann’s ontology is his theory of levels of reality. Hartmann drew from many sources to develop his version of the theory. His essay “Die Anfänge des Schichtungsgedankens in der alten Philosophie” testifies of the fact that he drew from Plato, Aristotle, and Plotinus. But this text was written relatively late in Hartmann’s career, which suggests that his interest in the theories of levels of the ancients may have been retrospective. In “Nicolai Hartmann und seine (...) Zeitgenossen,” Martin Morgenstern puts the emphasis on contemporaries of Hartmann: Émile Boutroux, Max Scheler, Heinrich Rickert, Karl Jaspers, and Arnold Gehlen. But there is another plausible source for Hartmann’s conception of levels that has so far remained overlooked in the literature. Hartmann studied with and was influenced by Nikolai Lossky. Lossky has a theory of levels that he adopted from Vladimir Solovyov. Solovyov presents his theory of levels, among other places, in Oпpaвдaнie дoбpa, where he says that the five principal stages of the cosmogonic process of ascension toward universal perfection, which are given in experience, are the mineral or inorganic realm, the vegetal realm, the animal realm, the realm of natural humanity, and the realm of spiritual or divine humanity. This theory appears to bear significant similarities with the theory of levels of reality that Hartmann will develop a few decades later. Solovyov was widely read in Russia and it would be unlikely that Hartmann was not at least minimally acquainted with his work. Chances are that Hartmann came into contact with it in some details. An intellectual lineage could thus likely be traced from Hartmann back to Solovyov. In this paper, I document and discuss this possible lineage. (shrink)

Vladimir Solovyov’s aesthetic theory has been the subject of much research. However, aesthetic views of the philosopher’s contemporaries are analyzed less frequently. The purpose of this article is to consider the views of Yuri Govorukha-Otrok on the aesthetic ideas of Solovyov in relation to the issues of national identity. Despite the discrepancy in the interpretation of such concepts as “culture,” “national idea,” or “truth” the very fact of the polemics between the philosopher and the literary critic proves (...) the continuity of the religious and the philosophical dimensions of literary criticism. This study analyzes Govorukha-Otrok’s critical papers of Solovyov’s work, allowing for the possibility to compare integral ideological and philosophical systems in order to understand the influence of Govorukha-Otrok’s views on the whole body of Solovyov’s ideas. (shrink)

In the history of Russian philosophy, V. S. Solovyov is known as one of the prominent spokesmen of theological idealism. Lenin more than once pointed to the need to combat the ideas of this philosopher . He quite properly regarded them as the theoretical foundation of the ideology of "liberal renegacy.".

Russian philosophy of the 19th century was developing in close contact with European philosophy. The strongest influence on Russian thought was exerted by classical German philosophy. One significant example is the teaching of Vladimir Solovyov, an outstanding 19th century thinker. Solovyov owes several principles of his teaching to Friedrich Schelling, from whom he assimilated his cardinal concept of all-embracing being; also to Schelling we can trace Solovyov’s conviction that the will constitutes the determining principle of being (...) as well as his conception of the suffering and developing God. Finally, it was largely through Schelling’s influence that Solovyov shaped his cosmogonic theory associated with his sophiology, based on the thesis of the falling away from God of His ‘Alter Ego’, His ‘Prototype’. According to Solovyov, ‘the Second God’, or Sophia-Wisdom, is God-Made-Man, the Absolute coming into being, whose life underlies the substance of historical process. (shrink)

The correlation between the philosophies of Vladimir Solovyov and Lev Shestov is a rich research theme. Despite the fact that Solovyov has been strongly criticised by Shestov, recent studies show that the two philosophers have much in common. The aim of this article is to analyse the correlation between the two main concepts propounded by Solovyov and Shestov: All-Unity and self-will. This article argues that both concepts are actually expressions of ultimate freedom, which is achieved when (...) one is saved from primordial sin. Although the two philosophers refer to primordial sin using different terms and suggest different ways of achieving salvation, they are actually moving in the same direction. In other words, Solovyov and Shestov speak about the same concept but emphasise different aspects of it. Solovyov describes the state of freedom in terms of ontology, while Shestov uses epistemological (gnoseological) terminology for the same purpose. Thus, the two doctrines move in the same direction but in different ways. (shrink)

Any more or less serious attempt to deal with even one aspect of the complex and generally still inadequately studied philosophical system of so outstanding a thinker as the famous Russian idealist philosopher Vladimir Sergeevich Solovyov necessarily requires preliminary consideration and evaluation of the philosophic significance of his work as a whole.