PHILOSOPHICAL DAVOS AS A REASON FOR DIVORCE. M. FRIDMAN’s VERSION

Abstract

The paper analyzes the intellectual situation that developed in the 1920s, which led to what later became known as a philosophical split into two directions – continental and analytical philosophy. The author poses a problem: was this a split associated with the division of philosophy into scientifically oriented philosophy, on the one hand, and metaphysics, on the other? Or is this division quite controversial? Using the example of a famous episode, a philosophical discussion between Е. Cassirer and M. Heidegger in Davos in 1929, the author discusses another split in philosophy: into the so-called classical way of philosophizing based on spiritual tradition (represented by E. Cassirer) and the so-called non-classical, represented by M. Heidegger. In this regard, the topic of the development and overcoming of the neo-Kantian tradition, the topic of understanding the basic ideas of the philosophy of I. Kant, but in a new cultural situation is discussed. In his analysis, the author proceeds from the version proposed in the book by M. Friedman: “Philosophy at a Crossroads: Carnap, Cassirer and Heidegger”.