Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Nikolaj Ěernyševskij and Soviet philosophy

  • Published:
Studies in Soviet Thought Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. V. G. Baskakov,Mirovozzrenie Černyševskogo [Černyševskij's World-View], Moscow 1956, p. 9. This book is the longest (756 pages) and most detailed account of Černyševskij's intellectual and political career, and it surpasses all other works in glorification of his philosophical achievements. Essentially similar statements, however, almost all employing the word ‘summit’ (veršina), may be found in any number of contemporary Soviet works. See, for example, M. Grigoryan,N. G. Chernyshevsky's World Outlook, Moscow 1954, p. 61; I. Ja. Ščipanov (ed.),Protiv sovremennyx fal'sifikatorov istorii russkoj filosofii [Against the Contemporary Falsifiers of the History of Russian Philosophy], Moscow 1960, p. 257. In Soviet usage the ‘pre-Marxist period’ in Russia is taken to extend into the 1870's; the first volume ofDas Kapital was published in Russian translation in 1872. Though Marx and Černyševskij were contemporaries, Černyševskij gives no indication that he knew Marx's work. Marx, on the other hand, who had taken up the study of the Russian language in order to read Černyševskij and other Russian radicals, knew and admired Černyševskij's economic writings.

  2. A. A. Ždanov,Doklad o žurnalax “Zvezda” i “Leningrad” [Report on the Journals “Star” and “Leningrad”], Moscow 1952, p. 18. The first Russian Marxist to emphasize the philosophical proximity of Černyševskij to Marx was Juri Steklov, who argued that Černyševskij's materialist thinking followed the same course as Marx's but was not as rigorous or systematic; see Ju. M. Steklov,N. G. Černyševskij, ego žizn' i dejatel'nost' [N. G. Černyševskij, His Life and Activity], St. Petersburg 1909, pp. 125, 175–176. Lenin did not go this far, though he praised Černyševskij for formulating “an integral philosophical materialism”; see V. I. Lenin,Materialism and Empirio-Criticism, Moscow n.d., p. 377. In the early Soviet period evaluations of Černyševskij were similarly tempered, but as early as 1939 views prefiguring Ždanov's pronouncement were being suggested; see, for example, I. Novič,Žizn' Černyševskogo [The Life of Černyševskij], Moscow 1939, pp. 6, 11.

  3. Bol'šaja sovetskaja enciklopedija [Great Soviet Encyclopedia], Vol. XLVII, Moscow 1957, p. 207.

  4. Ščipanov,op. cit., p. 262.

  5. M. T. Iovčuk, ‘N. G. Černyševskij — velikij russkij učënyj i revoljucioner’ [N. G. Černyševskij — Great Russian Scholar and Revolutionary],Kommunist [Communist], 1953, 11, 93, 97.

    Google Scholar 

  6. M. Rozental',Filosofskie vzgljady N. G. Černyševskogo [Philosophical Views of N. G. Černyševskij], Moscow 1948, p. 307.

  7. I. S. Kon, ‘Etičeskie vozzrenija N. G. Černyševskogo’ [Ethical Views of N. G. Černyševskij],Voprosy filosofii [Questions of Philosophy], 1950, 2, 149.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Grigoryan,op. cit., ‘ pp. 14, 39, 65.

    Google Scholar 

  9. V. G. Evsjukov,Problema sčast'ja v etike N. G. Černyševskogo [The Problem of Happiness in the Ethics of N. G. Černyševskij], Novosibirsk 1964, p. 15.

  10. Ščipanov,op. cit., p. 264.

  11. F. V. Konstantinov,et al. (eds.),Osnovy marksistskoj filosfii [Principles of Marxist Philosophy], Moscow 1960, pp. 78, 80.

  12. N. G. Černyševskij,Polnoe sobranie sočinenij [Complete Works], ed. V. Ja. Kirpotinet al., 16 vols., Moscow 1939–1953. Cited hereafter asWorks.

  13. N. G. Černyševskij,Izbrannye filosofskie sočinenija [Selected Philosophical Works], ed. M. M. Grigor'jan, 3 vols., Moscow 1950–1951. Cited hereafter asPhilosophical Works.

  14. Kon,op. cit., p. 157.

  15. A. A. Aznaurov,Etičeskie učenie N. G. Černyševskogo [The Ethical Doctrine of N. G. Černyševskij], Moscow, 1960, p. 61.

  16. Works, Vol. XIV, p. 48. Cf. Grigoryan,op. cit., p. 73.

  17. Grigoryan,op. cit., p. 74.

  18. Philosophical Works, Vol. III, p. 244.

  19. Ščipanov,op. cit., p. 248.

  20. Loc. cit.

  21. Baskakov,op.cit., p. 17.

  22. Grigoryan,op. cit., pp. 20–21; Baskakov,op. cit., p. 338. See also, for example, Kon,op. cit., p. 149; A. Galaktionov and P. Nikandrov,Istorija russkoj filosofii [A History of Russian Philosophy], Moscow 1961, p. 317.

  23. Works, Vol. I, p. 381.

  24. Philosophical Works, Vol. I, pp. 574, 578.

  25. See, for example, Baskakov,op. cit., p. 338; N. M. Černyševskaja,Letopis' žizni i dejatel'nosti N. G. Černyševskogo [Chronicle of the Life and Activity of N. G. Černyševskij], Moscow 1953, p. 16; V. Ja. Zevin,Političeskie vzgljady i političeskaja programma N. G. Černyševskogo [The Political Views and the Political Program of N. G. Černyševskij], Moscow 1953, pp. 39–40.

  26. Works, Vol. XIV, pp. 44–45, 50–51.

  27. Ibid., p. 198.

  28. Ibid., p. 216.

  29. Philosophical Works, Vol. I, p. 204.

  30. Ibid., Vol. III, p. 168.

  31. Works, Vol. XV, p. 23.

  32. Aznaurov,op. cit., p. 26.

  33. Evsjukov,op. cit., p. 6.

  34. Ščipanov,op. cit., p. 245.

  35. Aznaurov,op. cit., p. 56. See also Kon,op. cit., p. 155.

  36. J. S. Mill,Utilitarianism, New York 1957, p. 10.

  37. Philosophical Works, Vol. III, p. 246.

  38. N. G. Chernyshevsky,What Is to Be Done?, transl. Benjamin J. Tucker, revised and abridged by Ludmilla B. Turkevich, New York 1961, p. 82.

  39. Philosophical Works, Vol. III, p. 247.

  40. Ibid., p. 249.

  41. Ibid., p. 251.

  42. Mill,op. cit., pp. 15–16.

  43. Philosophical Works, Vol. III, p. 246.

  44. Ibid., p. 244. As is evident from these passages, the epithet ‘rational egoism’ for Černyševskij's ethical theory is somewhat misleading.

  45. Kon,op. cit., p. 154. See also Evsjukov,op. cit., p. 6.

  46. Rozental',op. cit., p. 259.

  47. Aznaurov,op. cit., p. 33.

  48. V. I. Lenin,Polnoe sobranie sočinenij [Complete Works] 5th ed., 55 vol., Moscow 1958–1965, Vol. XXV, p. 94.

  49. See, for example, Rozental',op. cit., p. 172; M. A. Dynniket al. (eds.),Istorija filosofii [History of Philosophy], Vol. II, Moscow 1957, pp. 339, 364; M. M. Rozental' and P. F. Judin (eds.),Filosofskij slovar' [Philosophical Dictionary], Moscow 1963, p. 501; Ščipanov,op. cit., p. 246; Baskakov,op. cit., p. 8. Aznaurov specifically connects the statement with Černyševskij's ethics (op. cit., p. 22).

  50. Quoted in Baskakov,op. cit., p. 742.

  51. Works, Vol. XI, p. 672.

  52. Philosophical Works, Vol. III, p. 163. For use of this passage by Soviet scholars see, for example, Dynnik,op. cit., pp. 341–342; Ščipanov,op. cit., pp. 249–250; Galaktionov and Nikandrov,op. cit., pp. 325–326.

  53. Philosophical Works, Vol. III, pp. 163–164.

  54. Rozental',Filosofskie vzgljady N. G. Černyševskogo, p. 174. Cf. Grigoryan,op. cit., p. 33.

  55. Works, Vol. X, p. 893. Cf. p. 894.

  56. Works, Vol. XVI, p. 550.

  57. Ibid., p. 891.

  58. See, for example, Rozental',op. cit., p. 173; Aznaurov,op. cit., pp. 32–34; Dynnik,op. cit., Vol. II, pp. 349, 365.

  59. Philosophical Works, Vol. III, p. 243.

  60. Ibid., p. 244.

  61. Evsjukov,op. cit., p. 12.

  62. Dynnik,op. cit., Vol. II, p. 364.

  63. Aznaurov,op. cit., p. 54. Italics mine. Cf. V. M. Kločkov, ‘Sxodstvo i različija v etičeskix vzgljadax L. Fejerbaxa i N. G. Černyševskogo' [Similarity and Differences in the Ethical Theories of L. Feuerbach and N. G. Černyševskij],Voprosy filosofii [Questions of Philosophy], 1957, 6, 51.

  64. See, for example, Kon,op. cit., p. 153; Rozental',op. cit., p. 259;Bol'šaja sovetskaja enciklopedija, Vol. XLVII, p. 208.

  65. See James P. Scanlan, ‘J. S. Mill and the Definition of Freedom’,Ethics, 1958, 3, 194–206.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Philosophical Works, Vol. I, p. 171.

  67. Ibid., p. 141.

  68. Ibid., p. 179.

  69. Ibid., p. 693.

  70. Works, Vol. III, p. 229.

  71. Philosophical Works, Vol. I, p. 171.

  72. Ibid., Vol. II, p. 224.

  73. What Is to Be Done?, p. 144.

  74. Ibid., p. 201.

  75. Lenin,op. cit., Vol. XVIII, p. 381.

  76. Novič,op. cit., pp. 83–84. Cf. Dynnik,op. cit., Vol. II, p. 335; Aznaurov,op. cit., p. 15.

  77. Dynnik,op. cit., Vol. II, p. 335. Cf. Aznaurov,op. cit., p. 15.

  78. Galaktionov and Nikandrov,op. cit., p. 325. See also, for example, Rozental',op. cit., pp. 47–48;Bol'šaja sovetskaja enciklopedija, Vol. XLVII, p. 205; Dynnik,op. cit., Vol. II, pp. 348–349; Evsjukov,op. cit., p. 3; Konstantinov,op. cit., p. 82.

  79. Works, Vol. I, p. 66.

  80. Ibid., p. 248.

  81. Ibid., p. 297.

  82. Ibid., p. 358.

  83. Philosophical Works, Vol. III, pp. 251–252.

  84. Works, Vol. I, p. 153.

Download references

Authors
  1. James P. Scanlan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Earlier versions of this paper were read before the Department of the History of Philosophy of the Peoples of the U.S.S.R., Moscow State University, on March 12, 1965; and before the Soviet Studies Colloquium of Cornell University on March 8, 1966.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Scanlan, J.P. Nikolaj Ěernyševskij and Soviet philosophy. Studies in Soviet Thought 7, 1–27 (1967). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00832188

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00832188

Keywords

Search

Navigation