Neo-Kantianism, Russian

1. Overview of the movement

Russian Neo-Kantianism was neither a unified nor a fully self-conscious movement. Largely as the result of being sent to Germany for further graduate study many young Russian-born scholars returned to their homeland imbued with the dominant trend of their host institution. Like their German counterparts (see Neo-Kantianism) the Russians themselves often shared little more than a conviction that genuine philosophy must begin, though not necessarily end, with Kant. Also similarly to their German counterparts, the Russian Neo-Kantians were not above quarrelling. Yet with their attention fixed on the scene abroad, particularly in Germany, and with their individual, narrow concerns they usually ignored one another, never developing anything similar to the trenchant mutual critiques we find in the competing German Neo-Kantian schools. Although several Russians showed an impulse to systematization, none, with the possible exception of their last representative (Veideman), ever produced a unified work systematically addressing all major philosophical issues. Nor did the Russian Neo-Kantians pen methodic commentaries on any of the three Kantian ’Critiques’ despite one notable excursus into Kant-philology by their leading representative. Partly because they were few in number, but probably more importantly because of the sheer political difficulty of establishing a periodical during the Tsarist era, the Neo-Kantians in Russia had no journal of their own, let alone one for each separate group as in Germany. Even the Russian edition of Logos, which was securely in the hands of a young generation of Neo-Kantians, proclaimed itself open to all philosophical directions. The events of 1917 did much to hasten the demise of Neo-Kantianism, although by then its younger members were rapidly moving towards a neo-Hegelian stance.