Evald Ilyenkov Research Articles

How ideas connect to the world

The celebrated Russian philosopher, Evald Ilyenkov, draws on Spinoza to solve a key philosophical problem: how exactly does the mind connect to the real world? However, the proposed solution has come under much criticism, for example in a recent special issue of Studies of East European Thought (74, 3). This paper aims to clearly explain the solution, overcoming misunderstandings that are evident in the special issue. The kernel of the solution is an argument that human cognition rests on practical activity. In practical activity humans do not act on a fixed structure within their own bodies, in the manner, say, that the activity of water is determined by its fixed structure, H2O. Instead, human practical activity directly connects with and continually adapts to the structures and causal powers of external bodies. Awareness of practical activity thereby gives the human mind access to a mode of activity that is in direct contact and ever-greater accordance with the objects of the real world. The paper will elaborate and develop this kernel, with particular attention to the notion of ‘causal powers’ that it contains, by drawing from the revival in philosophy and the social sciences of what has been termed ‘causal powers realism’. The paper thereby opens new insights and connections regarding the Spinoza-Ilyenkov solution, alleviating the potential for misunderstandings evident in the special issue.

Э.В. Ильенков и Московский логический кружок: материалы полемики

The publication deals with an almost forgotten dispute between two currents of Russian philosophy that emerged on the threshold of the “Thaw”. Its leaders were Evald Ilyenkov and Aleksander Zinoviev, both of whom had just graduated from Moscow State University. The dispute revolved around the methodology of Marx’s Capital and then developed into a discussion of the subject of dialectical logic and the specifics of thought. Ilyenkov’s archive preserved the theses of his speeches and critical notes on the position of Zinoviev and his followers from the Moscow Logical Circle. This material is published below. The accompanying article reconstructs the contexts of the polemic – theoretical, cultural-historical and personal – and weighs the arguments of each side. The inadequacy of labelling Ilyenkov as a “gnoseologist” is demonstrated. The thesis he defends about the dialectical identity of thinking and being invalidates the very distinction between gnoseology and ontology. The Kantian origins of Zinoviev and his teachers, professors at the Moscow State University, in solving the problem of the specificity of thought are revealed. All of them proclaimed the distinction between the “subjective dialectic” in the human mind and the “objective dialectic” of the external world – in opposition to the principle of the identity of thinking and being, which they regarded as the “Hegelian mysticism”. Ilyenkov, on the other hand, pointed out that this identity is fulfilled before our eyes in practice – in the processes of human labour

Development or self-destruction? Evald Ilyenkov vs. Slavoj Žižek on the problem of radical negativity

Development or self-destruction? Evald Ilyenkov vs. Slavoj Žižek on the problem of radical negativity

Evald Ilyenkov and the enactive approach

AbstractThere is a growing interest in Evald Ilyenkov’s work and its significance for contemporary debates. This interest spans several disciplines. One key thread in Ilyenkov’s ideas concerns a perspective on the relation between biology and psychology. In rejecting crude reductionism and individualism, Ilyenkov put forward a view of mind and personhood as emerging from activity and social practice. In his rejection of brain-bound notions of the mind, Ilyenkov’s ideas bear interesting resonances with current work in 4E cognition. One particularly interesting resonance that has occasionally been noticed are the connections with the enactive approach to life and mind. However, beyond some hints at interesting convergences, there is to date no detailed comparison between the two views. The present article attempts to address this gap, examining both complementarities and possible tensions between the two approaches. Rejecting cognitive views detached from environmental and social processes, the enactive approach, as exemplified by De Jaegher and Di Paolo’s concept of participatory sense-making, emphasises the dynamic constitution of cognition through embodied and situated activities. The article draws parallels between Ilyenkov’s emphasis on historically and culturally situated activity, notably labour, and the enactive understanding of human bodies as dynamically constituted in human activity. The article explores the Ilyenkovian and enactive perspectives on the dialectics of ideality, challenging traditional dualistic views and proposing that the ideal emerges as metastable patterns in the ongoing interactions between world, practices, norms, and bodies. The article concludes by suggesting future research directions for the enactive approach, particularly in areas emphasised by Ilyenkov, such as labour and the mediation of material/cultural artefacts.

Spinoza’s Doctrine of Affect in Cultural-Historical Psychology

Spinoza regarded life as an active play of affects, and human freedom as the taming of passions by means of the concepts of reason. Following him, Lev Vygotsky treats affect as the alpha and omega of mental development. The key theme of Vygotsky’s last manuscripts is the same as in Spinoza’s The Ethics: man’s path to freedom via the reasonable mastery of his affects. Vygotsky defines freedom as the affect in the concept; in the last years of his life, he investigated the processes of synthesis of emotional and intellectual forms in the child’s psychical development. Following Spinoza, Vygotsky defines affect as a dynamogenic state of the body, increasing or decreasing its capacity for action. Thus, affect acts as the intrinsic driving force behind the behaviour of all living beings. In the Spinozist view, psychology is the science about production of affects in the process of object-oriented activity and about exchange of affects in the process of communication of living beings. Vygotsky did not have time to carry out his project of the new psychology of man, and his successors refused or failed to continue this work. Aleksey Leontiev, Vygotsky’s closest disciple and associate, denounced his turn to Spinoza and returned to the phenomenological treatment of affect as a form of experiencing activity. As a consequence, Vygotsky’s problem of the relation between affect and intellect proved to be unsolvable. The philosopher Evald Ilyenkov, who adhered to the Vygotsky school, linked the beginning of psychical activity to the formation of images of the external world, losing sight of affect and, thus, of the problem of freedom as understood by Spinoza. Resuming Vygotsky’s apex psychological project and studying the evolution of the psyche, based on the concept of freedom as the active mastery of human affects and communication relationships, form two growth points of cultural-historical psychology.

Э.В. Ильенков о свободе воли

<p>Evald Ilyenkov’s works explores the issue of free will within the framework of activity theory. According to him, the concept of freedom is linked to the general activity of living beings in the external world and to the purposeful nature of this activity. Human freedom, or the ‘freedom of the will’, is treated as acting in accordance with the “purpose of the species”, that is, the interests of human society. The will is a psychological function that subordinates an individual’s activity to the goals and norms of social life. Alternative doctrines postulate free will as an immediate “fact of consciousness”, discovered through introspection and underlying human activity. This is where traditional empirical psychology intersects with the physiological doctrine of the unconditional reflex of freedom. Ilyenkov regards such a conception of free will as a “psychological illusion” and examines the implications of this illusion in the classic experiments of academician Ivan Pavlov. The article offers a cultural-historical perspective on the development of the human mind as a process of increasing free will: the emancipation of mental activity from the captivity of natural affects through the use of cultural tools and man’s rational understanding of the world and himself.</p>

Interview with Keti Chukhrov

This short interview explores the influence of Evald Ilyenkov’s work on contemporary philosopher, art theorist, and writer Keti Chukhrov. The interview focuses on Evald Ilyenkov’s contributions to Soviet culture, dialectics, and epistemology. She reflects on the distinct intellectual milieu of Soviet thinkers like Ilyenkov, Vygotsky, Davidov, and Lifshitz, who established connections between Marx and the broader world culture. The interview also addresses Žižek’s interpretation of Ilyenkov’s cosmology, emphasizing the ethical dimension of Ilyenkov’s communist spirit. Furthermore, Chukhrov touches on Ilyenkov’s critique of cybernetics and its relevance in contemporary discussions about AI and philosophy.

The problem of subjectivity in the works of Evald Ilyenkov and Slavoj Žižek

The problem of subjectivity in the works of Evald Ilyenkov and Slavoj Žižek

Evald Ilyenkov and the imperialist unconscious in Soviet philosophy

Evald Ilyenkov and the imperialist unconscious in Soviet philosophy

Evald Ilyenkov: “On the State of Philosophy [Letter to the Central Committee of the Party

Evald Ilyenkov: “On the State of Philosophy [Letter to the Central Committee of the Party

Философия и жизнь Эвальда Ильенкова

The article reveals the ideas of the Soviet philosopher Evald Ilyenkov in the context of the characteristics of Soviet philosophy. The reason for the rejection of Ilyenkov’s ideas by official Soviet Marxism was his non-orthodox understanding of Marxist philosophy as materialist dialectics, the main task of which he considered to be the discovery of the laws of knowledge. Ilyenkov was accused of “epistemology,” “idealism,” and “positivism,” although it was him who consistently criticized the idealistic and positivist tendencies in Soviet philosophy. Evald Ilyenkov, being a convinced communist, nevertheless clearly saw the tragic dead end of Soviet history. This caused both his close attention to the problem of communism as a genuine and historically objective ideal of human development, and his personal tragedy of bitter, mortal disappointment. The dialectical-materialistic concept of thinking is analyzed on the basis of the Ilyenkov’s work Dialectics of Abstract and Concrete in Scientific and Theoretical Thinking. This work is a complex, theoretical reworking of Marxist dialectics, a personal and at the same time truly scientific understanding of it. This philosophy allowed Ilyenkov to formulate the most important provisions about the nature of personality. Ilyenkov was convinced that the key to understanding personality development was not in physiology, but in the content and characteristics of sensory-concrete activity. The article also outlines Ilyenkov’s understanding of the category of “ideal” as the essence of an object or phenomenon.

Идеальное в эпоху торжествующего мещанства. Историко-культурный контекст и актуальность философии Эвальда Ильенкова

The article is dedicated to the philosophy of Evald Ilyenkov, its historical and cultural context and its relevance today. Ilyenkov is known for his original solution to the problem of the ideal within the framework of Marxism. The concept of the ideal is the center of his philosophical teaching, from which he draws pedagogical, psychological, and aesthetic conclusions. In Soviet times, the concept of the ideal by Ilyenkov caused a discussion, in which David Dubrovsky opposed the philosopher and his school, defending the “subjectivity of the ideal.” In our opinion, this dispute reflected the opposition of two value systems in the Soviet civilization, one of which dominated in the era of the “thaw,” the other — in the “era of stagnation.” The “thaw” was ambivalent, along with elements of liberal Marxism, from which “perestroika” later grew, there was a tradition in it that went through Lenin to classical culture. “Stagnation” marked the victory of philistinism, the ideology of the black market, huckstering, cynicism, disappointment in ideals under the cover of hypocritical recognition of dogmatic officialdom. This correlated with the positivist denial of the universal Truth, the assertion of relativism, “the subjectivity of the ideal.” The long shadow of “stagnation” in the form of value relativism and cynicism also lies on modern, post-Soviet, peripheral capitalist Russian culture, and therefore the Ilyenkov’s philosophy of the ideal does not lose its relevance.

On the Nature of Thought: Centennial of Evald Ilyenkov

On the Nature of Thought: Centennial of Evald Ilyenkov

Философия России в Китае (2007–2022)

The article provides an overview of the Russian philosophy studies in China over the past 16 years. In addition to the Russian religious philosophy and Marx­ist philosophy that traditionally enjoyed attention in China, research was also conducted in such areas as philosophy of culture, social philosophy, philosophy of science and technology, ethics, Eurasianism, political philosophy of Russia. The priority belongs to the philosophical thought of Nikolai Berdyaev, Lev Shestov, Vladimir Solovyov, Nikolai Fedorov, Semen Frank and Fyodor Dosto­evsky. In addition to historical and philosophical works on Marxism in Russia and the USSR, many works have been devoted to the interpretations of Marxist philosophy by modern Russian scientists, such as Ivan Frolov, Teodor Oizerman, Evald Ilyenkov, Aleksandr Buzgalin et al. The directions and priorities in the study of Russian ethics, philosophy of science, philosophy of culture, philosophy of language are outlined. Narodniks movement and Slavophilism remain impor­tant areas of research; Eurasianism enjoys great attention. The philosophy of An­cient Russia and Russian Orthodoxy are presented in general and special works and translations. The article describes the activities of the Learned Society of Philosophy of Russia. Among the scientific events, a special place is assigned to the biennial All-China Academic Conference on the Philosophy of Russia. In the field of scientific cooperation between Russian and Chinese researchers, lecture series read by Russian scholars in China and Chinese scholars in Russia, as well as joint research projects are described. In the final Section, the problems exist­ing in the research of Russian philosophy in China are indicated.

The Philosophy of Generation of 1960s as a Social Phenomenon

In its main part, the article is devoted to the Soviet philosophy of generation of the 1960s. It begins with a preface, which regards belonging to a generation as a sign of fate, and ends with an afterword, according to which the past is not judged. Belonging to a generation is the seal of time on individual destinies. The author belongs to the generation of Soviet philosophers who directly followed the sixties and got lost in their shadow. It shows how they are seen from this close distance. They personified the renewal of philosophy in the Soviet Union in the second half of the 20th century. It is shown that it began at the Faculty of Philosophy of Moscow University in the form of opposition of young researchers to the dogmatically minded professors, that its origins were two outstanding thinkers – Evald Ilyenkov and Alexander Zinoviev, who set the speculative-dialectical and scientific-analytical lines of development of philosophical research with their work. The philosophy of the sixties was humanistically oriented and emerged as a decisive break with the philosophical dogmatism of the 1930s and 1940s; it was the theoretical justification for the process of de-Stalinization that had begun in the country. It was represented by many original theories of thought and action, inspired by the ideas of the sovereignty of the human mind and the individually responsible existence of the individual. The philosophy of the generation of the 1960s remained loyal to the teachings of Marx and the socialist ideal, existed, as it were, in parallel with official orthodoxy, with its internal rejection.

Marxism, from Ideology to Science: Evald Ilyenkov and His Contribution to Marxist Thought

Marxism, from Ideology to Science: Evald Ilyenkov and His Contribution to Marxist Thought

Spinoza’s Doctrine of Affect in Cultural-Historical Psychology

Spinoza regarded life as an active play of affects, and human freedom as the taming of passions by means of the concepts of reason. Following him, Lev Vygotsky treats affect as the alpha and omega of mental development. The key theme of Vygotsky’s last manuscripts is the same as in Spinoza’s Ethics: man’s path to freedom via the reasonable mastery of his affects. Vygotsky defines freedom as the affect in the concept; in the last years of his life, he investigates the processes of synthesis of emotional and intellectual forms in a child’s psychical development. Following Spinoza, Vygotsky defines affect as a dynamogenic state of the body, increasing or decreasing its capacity for action. Thus, affect acts as the intrinsic driving force behind the behaviour of all living beings. In the Spinozist view, psychology is the science about production of affects in the process of objectoriented activity and about exchange of affects in the process of communication of living beings. Vygotsky did not have time to carry out his project of the new psychology of man, and his successors refused or failed to continue this work. Aleksey Leontiev, Vygotsky’s closest disciple and associate, denounced his turn to Spinoza and returned to the phenomenological treatment of affect as a form of experiencing activity. As a consequence, Vygotsky’s problem of the relation between affect and intellect proved to be unsolvable. The philosopher Evald Ilyenkov, who adhered to the Vygotsky school, linked the beginning of psychical activity to the formation of images of the external world, losing sight of affect and, thus, of the problem of freedom as understood by Spinoza. Resuming of L. S. Vygotsky’s height psychology project and studying the evolution of the psyche, based on the concept of freedom as the active mastery of human affects and communication relationships, form two growth points of cultural-historical psychology.

Philosophical Freethinking in the USSR (Cases of Evald Ilyenkov and Merab Mamardashvili)

The article deals with the phenomenon of philosophical freethinking in the USSR. It is shown that the emergence of freethinking was the result of many years of ideological and political control over philosophical discourse from the early 1930s to the early 1950s. For the generation that chose philosophy as their profession in the 1950s, the main manifestation of freethinking was the creative appeal to the philosophical heritage of Karl Marx, accompanied by attempts to separate the “genuine Marx” from other classics of the Marxist-Leninist philosophical doctrine and to find in Marx’s philosophy the key to understanding modern problems. A remarkable case of philosophical freethinking in the 1950—1970s was the romantic Marxism of Evald Ilyenkov, who was characterized by the desire to protect communist ideals and preserve Marxist dialectics in the face of the threat of the spreading influence of Western philosophy. Another example of freethinking was the philosophical work of Merab Mamardashvili. He began with the development of a Marxist philosophy of consciousness, thanks to which he managed to achieve professional recognition and intellectual independence, but later moved away from the philosophy of Marx and turned to understanding the work of other Western thinkers. The thinking of Descartes, Kant, and Proust for him symbolized a different philosophical homeland and ideals, which in the 1980s he was opposed to Soviet reality and Russian culture.

The Problem of Public Consciousness in Soviet Philosophy and Sociology

The article gives a theoretical survey of the concepts of social consciousness and depicts the history of formation of this concept in the 1950–70s in the works of Vladislav Kelle and Matvey Kovalzon, Evald Ilyenkov, Vasily Tugarinov et al. The philosophy of this period was characterized by the antinomy between the increasing dogmatism of diamat/histmat and the tendency towards convergence with world philosophical thought. The struggle between ideological and scientific attitudes in Soviet humanities intensified. The scientific spirit permeated through the formation of sociology and its increasing influence at both empirical and theoretical levels of analysis. During this period the problems of dialectics of individual and social consciousness, forms of social consciousness and mechanics of their functioning, correlation of social consciousness with public opinion, etc., are under investigation. Much attention is given to the debate on the nature of the ideal, which Ilyenkov explicitly linked to social consciousness. The opposition of natural scientific and philosophical approaches to the study of consciousness is considered. The article draws attention to the scientific breakthroughs of the time: the problem of consciousness for the first time is discussed in the light of the achievements of computerization in the 1960s and the problem of creating artificial intelligence. Three main approaches to the study of social consciousness are considered: ontological, epistemological and sociological. The problem of social consciousness has been actively discussed in Soviet philosophical literature since the late 1950s (although some studies were conducted even in the prewar period). At this time, there appear works in which social consciousness is interpreted not only as a reflection of social being, i.e. of the socio-economic structure of society, but also as a relatively independent phenomenon that requires multidimensional study and has a reverse effect on people’s material relations. Such an approach opened up the possibility of sociological analysis of consciousness. The key concept of Soviet sociology is public opinion, understood as a peculiar state of public consciousness. Thus, the methodological foundations of empirical sociology, which aims to study public opinion, are laid. Boris Grushin discovers the specificity of public opinion in its neutrality, equal acceptability for all social classes. The scholar regards sociological research as an effective tool for the formation of civil society and increasing its self-consciousness. The article shows the specificity of the concept of public consciousness in Soviet sociology, including empirical research based on mass interviews and study of public opinion.

On the materialist interpretation of the ideal by Evald Ilyenkov

On the materialist interpretation of the ideal by Evald Ilyenkov