Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

32 results

Page 1 of 2

  • 5 - Socialism, utopia, and myth
  • from i - CHANGING POLITICAL, ECONOMIC, AND SOCIAL LANDSCAPE
  • Edited by Deborah A. Martinsen, Columbia University, New York, Olga Maiorova, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
  • Book: Dostoevsky in Context
  • Published online: 18 December 2015
  • Print publication: 05 January 2016, pp 39-47
  • View extract

    Summary

    In Dostoevsky's long reflection on the social organization of human life, the idea of socialism and the dream of utopia – an ideal society – were often at the surface and never far apart.

    The two first came together for the young Dostoevsky in the 1830s, when as a student in the Academy of Engineers in St. Petersburg, he (like most young Russian intellectuals of the day) eagerly followed what news he could get of life and thought in Western Europe. Most publications from the West were either prohibited or censored by tsarist authorities, but among the least affected were works of fiction in their original languages. Thus it was through the novels of contemporary French writers – above all, George Sand – that Dostoevsky first became acquainted with the socialist theories of Saint-Simon, Fourier, and Leroux, whose plans for harmonious egalitarian communities formed the heart of what came to be called “utopian socialism” – the view, broadly, that the ideal society is one in which all individuals are treated as equals and the means of production are publicly owned, and that furthermore such a society can and should be achieved by voluntary and peaceful means.

    The young Dostoevsky worshiped Sand both as a novelist and as a visionary who foresaw a better future for humanity. In a memorial tribute to her in his June 1876 Diary of a Writer, he wrote that “she based her socialism […] on the human moral sense, on humanity's spiritual thirst, on its striving toward perfection and purity.” He maintained that the freethinking Sand was “perhaps one of the most thoroughgoing confessors of Christ even while unaware of being so,” because “her thoughts and feelings coincided with one of the most basic ideas of Christianity, that is, the acknowledgment of the human personality and its freedom” (23:37; WD 1:513).

    Dostoevsky's Christianized, moralistic version of zhorzhzandizm, as the Sand enthusiasm came to be called in Russia, drew him together with other reform-minded Russians, and in 1847 he joined a liberal Petersburg circle led by Mikhail Petrashevsky*, an ardent disciple of Fourier. Through the circle's meetings and extensive reading Dostoevsky became thoroughly familiar with the various competing outlines of socialist utopias, but without developing an allegiance to any one particular plan.

  • 7 - Russian Panpsychism: Kozlov, Lopatin, Losskii
  • Edited by G. M. Hamburg, Claremont McKenna College, California, Randall A. Poole
  • Book: A History of Russian Philosophy 1830–1930
  • Published online: 05 June 2012
  • Print publication: 22 April 2010, pp 150-168
  • View abstract

    Summary

    Aleksei Aleksandrovich Kozlov, who taught at Kiev University, sought to build panpsychism into a comprehensive philosophical system, as did other Russian philosophers who subscribed to it. Two of them who, like Kozlov, deserve credit for the advancement of academic philosophy in tsarist Russia were Lev Mikailovich Lopatin at Moscow University and Nikolai Onufrievich Losskii at St. Petersburg University. Kozlov's philosophical anthropology draws on his panpsychist metaphysics, with its emphasis on each individual substance as, to use his expression, "a whole individual world in itself". A distinctive feature of Lopatin's panpsychism is that he makes clear, in a way Kozlov did not, that the panpsychist metaphysician is typically relying on reasoning by analogy in his efforts to describe other beings and reality in general. The ultimate goal of the teleological cosmic process for Losskii is victory over evil, which means nothing less than the complete elimination of matter.
  • The Federalist and Human Nature
  • James P. Scanlan
  • Journal: The Review of Politics / Volume 21 / Issue 4 / October 1959
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 August 2009, pp. 657-677
  • View extract

    Students of American political theory find themselves in general agreement concerning the character and significance of their most celebrated document, The Federalist. Few deny that this series of essays in support of the Constitution by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay represents a substantial contribution to the literature of political theory. The nature of the contribution is also well established. The Federalist, it is agreed, is a skillful exposition of the principles of constitutional republicanism — an exposition not haphazard or fanciful, but controlled by constant reference to the capacities and limitations of the political animal. The latter point is often emphasized; Benjamin F. Wright states: “The aspect of The Federalist which is of universal applicability is … its recognition of the importance of human nature in politics, togetherwith its remarkably penetrating analysis of the motives and the behavior of men in a free society.” x Finally, there is agreement on the general outlines of this theory of human nature. The authors of The Federalist, it is said, were decidedly “realistic,” brooking no illusions of the inherent goodness or rationality of man, but holding firm to “a conception of human corruptibility.” 2 The adjective most often employed is “pessimistic.”

  • Jan S. Adams, 1920-2007
  • James P. Scanlan
  • Journal: Slavic Review / Volume 67 / Issue 3 / Fall 2008
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 January 2017, pp. 815-816
  • Print publication: Fall 2008
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation
  • Arthur E. Adams, 1917-2007
  • James P. Scanlan
  • Journal: Slavic Review / Volume 67 / Issue 3 / Fall 2008
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 January 2017, pp. 814-815
  • Print publication: Fall 2008
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation
  • Allan Kenyon Wildman, 1927-1996
  • James P. Scanlan
  • Journal: Slavic Review / Volume 55 / Issue 4 / Winter 1996
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 January 2017, pp. 956-957
  • Print publication: Winter 1996
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation

Page 1 of 2