Voprosy filosofii
January 1, 2022
I. Kanaev, E. Dryaeva
4 citations
Consciousness remains poorly defined in modern science. This review examines major philosophical and cognitive-science approaches, with special attention to the Russian activity-based tradition that situates consciousness in interaction with the world and culture. Drawing on recent anthropology and neuroscience, the authors argue that human consciousness is distinct from other forms of subjective reality found in other species. They propose defining human consciousness as the capacity to control one's actions at the level of intentions, a capacity that must be acquired during life. This definition distinguishes human consciousness from other subjective realities and suggests an evolutionary trajectory, providing a foundation for linking subjective states to neural activity.
Voprosy filosofii
July 10, 2026
Evgenii N. Ivakhnenko, Maxim F. Yanukovich
Large language models (LLMs) produce meaningful language yet lack human consciousness, creating a philosophical puzzle. The authors argue that common views—either anthropomorphizing AI or dismissing it as a "stochastic parrot"—are inadequate. By reviewing how theorists like Chalmers, Block, Luhmann, Tononi, Searle, and Nagel distinguish phenomenal consciousness (inner experience) from communicative consciousness (functional interaction), and drawing on Luhmann's systems theory, they show that a generative neural network is structurally homologous to a communicative system: it recursively processes meaning but has no phenomenal experience. The concept of an "autopoietic zombie" captures this.
Voprosy filosofii
July 10, 2026
Viktor D. Bakulov, Danil R. Melnikov
A reflection on the collective monograph "Kant and the Philosophy of Mind" examines how Kant's critical project informs current analytic philosophy of consciousness. It asks which features of experience can be conceptually articulated and scientifically explained, and which point to principled limits of investigation. The paper discusses views of leading analytic Kantians—P.F. Strawson, W. Sellars, J. McDowell, H. Putnam—focusing on debates about phenomenal consciousness. It also considers mysterianism and panpsychism, showing how the same epistemic gap between the physical and the phenomenal can yield opposing conclusions: that consciousness is unknowable or that mentality is fundamental. Kant's question "What can I know?" retains methodological significance, delineating a productive space that avoids metaphysical dogmatism and epistemic skepticism while emphasizing examination of underlying assumptions.
Voprosy filosofii
July 10, 2026
Pavel G. Nosachev
The article reviews the theoretical foundations of New Religious Movements (NRMs), New Age studies, and Western Esotericism, highlighting that their advancement is hindered by contradictions in defining each field. In NRM studies, the category of "newness" has lost descriptive precision; New Age phenomena suffer from uncertain boundaries and a lack of unified interpretive principles; and Western Esotericism encompasses mutually exclusive definitions. As a productive alternative, the author proposes Charles Taylor's concept of secularization from *A Secular Age* (2007), which frames secularization not as religious decline but as a shift in belief conditions within the "immanent frame." Taylor's model helps overcome fragmentation by situating new religious phenomena within the broader transformation of Western spiritual life.
Voprosy filosofii
April 2, 2026
Maxim V. Yakovlev
Russian neurophilosophy, based on articles published from 2015 to 2024, has become a significant part of naturalistic and experimental philosophy of consciousness, fostering constructive interaction among philosophers, neurobiologists, and cognitive scientists. This collaboration has produced original theories and ideas, including theoretical constructions by K.V. Anokhin, A.Ya. Kaplan, and V.Ya. Sergin, the information theory of D.I. Dubrovsky, and contributions from V.V. Vasiliev, I.F. Mikhailov, and T.V. Chernigovskaya. Key research areas include the history of naturalistic approaches, philosophical reflection on psyche and brain, neurophilosophy's potential, its subject field and methods, and criticism. Work primarily uses theoretical philosophy methodology, with strengthening experimental research as a future prospect.
Voprosy filosofii
July 6, 2025
Lev Titlin
The article compares how traditional Indian and European philosophies conceive of the subject. In most classical Indian systems—Advaita Vedānta, Yoga, Sāṁkhya, Vaiśeṣika, and Buddhism—the subject (ātman, puruṣa) is strictly separate from the external world, bodily and psychic elements, thinking, intellect, and emotions; in Vaiśeṣika even consciousness is external to the subject. Both traditions originally shared a strong soteriological intention, viewing the inner core as a connecting element toward a higher state. European philosophy, by contrast, long attributed to the subject (as 'soul') qualities like thinking, reasoning, sense perception, emotions, and memory, often highlighting the rational and intellectual element as the principal connection to the divine.
Voprosy filosofii
January 1, 2023
Pavel V. Khondzinskiy
The publication of William James's "The Varieties of Religious Experience" in Russian translation in 1910 prompted a discussion in the journal "Questions of Philosophy and Psychology." Less known is the critical engagement with James's concept by academic theologians M. Tareev, P. Minin, and A. Tuberovsky. They used James's scientific confirmation of religious-mystical experience to address the challenge his pluralism posed: how to distinguish specifically Christian manifestations from the general diversity of religious experience, linking them to Christian teaching and action.
Voprosy filosofii
January 1, 2023
Pavel V. Khondzinskiy
The influence of William James on Russian religious thought is well known, but the contributions of spiritual-academic scholars who developed their own concepts after encountering James's ideas remain underexplored. This encounter was prepared by academic science's interest in empirical psychology and by contacts with philosophers and psychologists from the Moscow Psychological Society. For academic theologians, James's scientific recognition of mystical experience provided support for preaching Christianity in a secular world while requiring them to distinguish Christian experience from other religions. The question of how personal religious experience relates to Christian social action further fueled their interest. The concepts of mystical experience by I. Popov and S. Zarin, previously unconsidered, show a gradual approach to issues legitimized by the 1910 Russian translation of "The Varieties of Religious Experience."
Voprosy filosofii
January 1, 2022
S. Burmistrov
The analysis contrasts how two Indian philosophical traditions—Mahāyāna Buddhism’s Madhyamaka school and the Brāhmaṇic school of Advaita Vedānta—understand time. In Madhyamaka, time is a mental construction produced by consciousness clouded by afflictions (kleśa); it has no reality outside the mind, and true reality is timeless and free from distinctions like past, present, and future. In Advaita Vedānta, time has a positive but relative ontological status: it is part of māyā, the creative power of Brahman, and exists both in individual consciousness and outside it. The empirical world, including time, is not perfectly real but is not perfectly unreal either, as it conceals the truly real Brahman. Overcoming ignorance means penetrating through the changing temporal world to reach Brahman.