The Method of Search and Analysis of Oppositions as the Basis of Historical Systematization of Philosophy (about the Concept of Charles Renouvier)

Authors

  • Artem A. Krotov Lomonosov Moscow State University. 27/4 Lomonosovsky prospect, Moscow, 119234, Russian Federation

Keywords:

Ch. Renouvier, French philosophy, neocriticism, theory of philosophy, philosophy of the New Age

Abstract

The article analyzes the features of understanding of the history of philosophical process by the leading representative of French Neo-Kantianism. The binary scheme, thoroughly substantiated by Renоuvier in the “Sketch of the Systematic Classification of Philosophical Doctrines”, was a certain result of his previous creative way. In the “Textbook of Philosophy of the New Age”, he, highlighting the pantheism–idealism dilemma, expresses his sympathies for eclecticism. In the “Textbook of Ancient Philosophy”, he advocates giving philosophy a scientific character by combining the laws of reason and history. In “Experiences of General Criticism” he builds a system of neo-criticism, identifying phenomena with reality. Finally, the “Sketch” presents an attempt at an objective consideration of the history of philosophy. Renоuvier identifies six oppositions passing through the entire history of thought (thing–consciousness, infinite–finite, evolution–creation, necessity–freedom, happiness–duty, evidence–belief). The strength of his method is the desire to make a choice between opposing trends, taking into account intellectual motives, passions, practical inducements of varying degrees of community. But both elements of reductionism and unfounded optimism about the lack of influence of all kinds of systems on his own constructions are present in his approach.

Downloads

Published

2022-11-02

Issue

Section

THEORY AND METHODOLOGY OF HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY

How to Cite

Krotov, A. A. (2022). The Method of Search and Analysis of Oppositions as the Basis of Historical Systematization of Philosophy (about the Concept of Charles Renouvier). History of Philosophy, 27(2), 5-15. https://hp.iphras.ru/article/view/8126