Chinese Studies in Ukrainian Philosophy of the Soviet Period
This paper presents the results of the authors’ study of the perception of Ancient Chinese philosophy in the Ukrainian philosophy of the Soviet period in the second half of the 20th century. The study is based on a unique source: a monograph by two authoritative and influential Soviet philosophers, Volodymyr Dmytrychenko and Volodymyr Shynkaruk, which was published in Ukrainian in 1958. The authors described the way of perception of Ancient Chinese philosophy, its ideological principles, main problems and key personalities in the Ukrainian philosophy of the Soviet period, and systematically presented them. The paper presents the authors’ conclusions about the leading theoretical positions and methodology of the history of philosophy in the Ukrainian philosophical culture of the Soviet period. The authors concluded that the peculiarity of the development of studies in the history of philosophy in Ukraine in the Soviet era is a departure from Hegel’s theory of the history of philosophy, the main theoretical and methodological shortcoming of which is “Eurocentrism”. This circumstance allows us to assert a critical rethinking of Hegel’s theory of the history of philosophy in the Ukrainian philosophical culture of the Soviet period of the second half of the 20th century. Also, in this paper, the authors prove the point of view that a comparative approach and reception studies are effective methods of studying the history of Ukrainian philosophy of the Soviet period.
Ancient Chinese philosophy; Ukrainian philosophy; Soviet period; history of Marxism; history of philosophy; reception; comparative history of philosophy Ancient Chinese philosophy; Ukrainian philosophy; Soviet period; history of Marxism; history of philosophy; reception; comparative history of philosophy
Bazaluk Oleg, 2017, The Strategies of Systematization of the Theories of Education. The Main Meaning and Features of the Theories of Education of Plato’s and Isocrates’ Lines, Future Human Image, Vol. 7, p. 11–27.
Lakh Roman, 2016, Sinology in the Creative Legacy of John Svit (1897–1989). Chinese Studies, 2016, Vol. 1–2, p. 136–150, URL: http://chinese-studies.com.ua/en/Archive/2016/1-2/17.
Liashenko Iryna, 2018, Wilhelm Dilthey: Understanding the Human World. Philosophy and Cosmology, Vol. 20, p.163–169. https://doi.org/10.29202/phil-cosm/20/16.
Mróz Tomasz, 2018, Reply to the Paper “National Philosophy as a Subject of Comparative Research”. Sententiae, Vol. 37, p. 130–135, doi: 10.22240/sent37.01.130.
Mróz Toamsz, 2016, Selected Issues in the History of Polish Philosophy. Vilnius: Vilnius University.
Dmytrychenko Volodymyr and Shynkaruk Volodymyr, 1958, The Development of Philosophical Thought in Ancient China. Kyiv, Publishing Centre of the Kyiv State University named after Taras Shevchenko.
Rudenko Sergii and Turenko Vitaliy, 2019, Formation and Development of the Philosophical Anthropology Studies in Soviet Ukraine. Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research, Vol. 16, p. 143–156. doi:10.15802/ampr.v0i16.188911.
Rudenko Sergii and Yosypenko Serhii, 2018, National Philosophy as a Subject of Comparative Research, Sententiae, Vol. 37, Issue 1, p. 120–129, doi: 10.22240/sent37.01.120.
Sobolievskyi Yaroslav, 2018, Soviet and Ukrainian Studies of American Philosophy: Translation of Philosophical Texts, Future Human Image, Vol. 9, p. 101–106. doi:10.29202/fhi/9/10.
Tabachkovskii Vitaliy, 2002, Vladimir Illarionovich Shinkaruk – In memoriam. Voprosy Filosofii, Vol. 6, p. 189–190.