Сергеева Ирина Николаевна
Белгородский государственный национальный исследовательский университет


Sergeeva Irina Nikolaevna
Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education "Belgorod National Research University"
postgraduate student of the Institute of Social Sciences and Mass Communications, place of work and position: Lecturer of the College of High Technologies of V.G. Shukhov BSTU Russia, Belgorod city

The article presents an overview of the works of Orest Markovich Novitsky, a philosopher of the 19th century, who developed a system of teaching a psychology course for a European—style higher school and implemented it in practical teaching. He put philosophy below religion, arguing that philosophy appears as knowledge for a few, and religion, due to the presence of higher truths in it, is accessible to all.

Keywords: heritage of the Kiev School of Philosophy, O.M. Novitsky, philosophy, religion

Рубрика: 09.00.00 ФИЛОСОФСКИЕ НАУКИ

Библиографическая ссылка на статью:
Сергеева И.Н. Philosophical and pedagogical heritage in the works of O.M. Novitsky // Современные научные исследования и инновации. 2022. № 4 [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://web.snauka.ru/issues/2022/04/98093 (дата обращения: 23.06.2024).

For the development of modern Russian philosophical thought, the legacy of the Kiev School of Philosophy is of great importance, one of the brightest representatives of which was Orest Markovich Novitsky. It is indisputable that his family and education influenced the formation of his philosophical views. He was sent to study at the Kiev Theological Academy, where he attended lectures on philosophy in Latin, which were read to students by Doctor of Theology, Archpriest I. Skvortsov, and lectures on theology by the rector of the Academy, Archimandrite Smaragd (Krizhanovsky) [Belenchuk, 2010, pp. 89-103].

While studying at the Academy, Orest Novitsky wrote a master’s thesis “On the Dukhobortsy”, which was published in 1832 in the “Experiments of students of the Kiev Theological Academy of the fifth year”. This topic was very relevant at that time, because this trend of old Russian sectarianism was rapidly spreading and gaining features of European Protestantism. Orest Novitsky’s book “About the Doukhobors” was the first serious study of the beliefs, life and customs of the Doukhobors [Zhan, 2016, pp. 149-158].

Later, after the opening of the University of St. Vladimir, he recommended Orest Novitsky for the position of associate professor of philosophy at the university, where he taught psychology, logic, moral philosophy with natural law, as well as the history of philosophy [Belenchuk, 2010, pp. 89-103].

In his lectures, the philosopher proposed to consider philosophy in two aspects, firstly, to consider it in itself, and secondly, to follow it in its further use regarding the practical benefits and goals of life. It is in these two aspects, according to O. Novitsky, that philosophy experiences the greatest complaints and condemnations.

According to O. Novitsky’s views, it would be inappropriate to stop at such a hasty conclusion, based only on the inaccuracy of definitions of the essence of philosophy, because if the concept depends on the subject, then the subject does not depend on the concept. Philosophy, as O. Novitsky notes, expanding its sphere into infinity, contemplates everything that exists as if it is covered by one uncovered panorama: both man and humanity, and spirit and matter, life and death, the finite and the unfinished, because you can philosophize about all this. All this should be imbued with philosophy. And yet, with all the boundlessness of things covered by it, it is able to define and establish its content as an indisputable property, referring to a special source in the knowledge of its objects [Zhan, 2016, pp. 149-158]. Orest Novitsky proposed to consider the true meaning and significance of philosophy for society in all possible directions. However, it is born in the depths of the human spirit and excludes from its sphere everything that can be subject to general laws and forms of being [Zhan, 2016, pp. 149-158].

Philosophy, from the point of view of Orest Novitsky, “draws knowledge of the general laws and forms of being of our mind from his ideas, does not deny the participation of the lower forces of the soul in cognition. Memory offers her treasures of wisdom held in itself, feelings offer an infinite variety of natural phenomena and our own inner world, reason creates for philosophy a new world of thoughts that brings all the diversity of phenomena into two basic principles: matter and spirit. But all this is only so that the mind “illuminates this two-sided world with its diversity with its higher world of ideas and brings life, unity and harmony into it” [Novitsky, 1838, p. 25].

In response to reproaches about the harm of philosophy for religion and the state, Orest Novitsky “noted that religion and the state, as well as the conditions in which philosophy functions, are to blame for this. He saw the connection in the commonality of their objects vision (the world, God), the difference – in the way of perception of the world, forms of knowledge and the level of their reliability” [Zhan, 2016, pp. 149-158].

At the same time, Novitsky placed philosophy lower from religion, arguing that philosophy appears as knowledge for a few, and religion, due to the presence of higher truths in it, is accessible to all. However, he considered the question of the connection of philosophy with religion, faith with knowledge in a spirit freely philosophical, not theological [4, p. 50].

“Throughout his life, the subject of special attention in the philosophical views of Orest Novitsky, as a representative of the Kiev school of Philosophical theism, is the problem of the relationship between philosophy and religion. According to the views of the philosopher, the content of philosophy and religion are the same, they differ only in the way of assimilation of this content. Religion lives in the beliefs of the heart, and philosophy lives in the concepts of the mind. Philosophy thinks about the Unconditional, but only thinks, and does not lead to unity with this Unconditional. And although Orest Novitsky puts religion above philosophy, he still speaks out for the independent development of philosophy from religion” [Zhan, 2016, pp. 149-158].

Thus, O.M. Novitsky “working on the creation of the categorical apparatus of philosophy made a significant contribution to the development of theoretical foundations and principles of historical and philosophical science and understanding of the historical and philosophical process [Novitsky, 1838, p. 25].

  1. Belenchuk L. N., Prokofieva E. A. Pedagogical ideas of representatives of the Kiev philosophical school of the middle of the XIX century. // Bulletin of the PSU IV: Pedagogy. Psychology 2010. Issue 3 (18). pp. 89-103
  2. Zhan S. Orest Novitsky: philosopher and teacher. // Philosophy. FiP • 2016. No. 4 pp. 149-158
  3. Novitsky O. About the reproaches made to philosophy in theoretical and practical terms, their strength and importance / O. Novitsky. – K.: in the University Printing House, 1838. 50 p.
  4. History of Ukrainian philosophy: textbook / M. Yu. Rusin, I. I. Ogorodnik. – K., HC “Kiev University”. 2008. p. 50.

Все статьи автора «Сергеева Ирина Николаевна»

© Если вы обнаружили нарушение авторских или смежных прав, пожалуйста, незамедлительно сообщите нам об этом по электронной почте или через форму обратной связи.

Связь с автором (комментарии/рецензии к статье)

Оставить комментарий

Вы должны авторизоваться, чтобы оставить комментарий.

Если Вы еще не зарегистрированы на сайте, то Вам необходимо зарегистрироваться:
  • Регистрация