This title is printed to order. This book may have been self-published. If so, we cannot guarantee the quality of the content. In the main most books will have gone through the editing process however some may not. We therefore suggest that you be aware of this before ordering this book. If in doubt check either the author or publisher’s details as we are unable to accept any returns unless they are faulty. Please contact us if you have any questions.
Ivan Alexandrovich Ilyin (1883-1954) was a Russian philosopher who was expelled from the Soviet Union in 1922 for his opposition to the Communist regime. He lived in Germany until 1938 before settling in Switzerland, near Zurich. Anyone who loves philosophy - and I am addressing myself mentally to those who love it - has probably asked himself more than once, where does it come from, how does it come about that there are so many differences, disagreements, unresolved disputes, mutual denials in philosophy? Why is it that philosophy, which has existed for more than two and a half thousand years and recognises itself as some higher, better, unconditionally authoritative knowledge, still lives with a claim to such greatness and with indefiniteness in its being? Those who embark on its study often come to the conclusion and realise the conviction that this very abundance of disagreements and fruitless disputes puts philosophical creativity at the disposal of personal arbitrariness and discretion; that philosophising is a matter of subjective taste, personal inclination, personal mood; that everyone philosophises in accordance with his own inclinations and sympathies, and that no one has the right to interfere with another in this activity: for, after all, there is no universally binding truth, or, what is (allegedly) the same thing, it has not been found, or, in any case, has not yet been found; but, even if it were suddenly found, this single, universally binding truth, the truth itself, one can be quite sure that it would not meet with general and full recognition. And so, a soothing confidence is formed that there will be enough sectarian spirit in philosophy for our century, that the stream of disputes and subjectivistic constructions will not be exhausted so soon, and that in this turmoil of opinions, in this whirlpool of disagreements, it will be possible to successfully pave the way to an 'original' philosophical system; for, as the sophists used to say, what is true is what you can convince others of...
