The Assessment of Karl Duprel’s Interpretation of Kant’s Philosophy in Tertium Organum by P. D. Ouspensky
Abstract
The article focuses on P. D. Ouspensky’s assessment of Karl Duprel’s interpretation of Kant’s philosophy in “Tertium Organum”, his first major work. It considers the similarities and differences in the interpretation of Kant’s philosophy by Duprel and Ouspensky, and the cause of these differences. It shows that both thinkers use Kant’s philosophy to criticize materialism and “positive”/“official” science oriented on materialist ontology, as well as to justify the fundamental possibility of supersensible cognition. The main difference separating Ouspensky and Duprel is the understanding of the status of matter: while for Duprel matter really exists and will always exist in a transformed form, for Ouspensky matter is nothing more than a phantom, it has never really existed. In addition, for Duprel the world is a developing system, where the main subjects of development are individuals who always preserve their identity. Ouspensky, on the other hand, denies the reality of both any development and the existence of individuals (as understood by Duprel). Thus, the presence of obvious important coincidences combined with equally important differences leads to an unusual attitude of Ouspensky to Duprel’s ideas. He approves of him, quotes the German philosopher when considering Kant’s ontology and criticizes him omitting any reference when considering the key issues of the theory of cognition.
About the Author
S. S. Loginovsky
South Ural State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Sergei S. Loginovsky — Associated Professor
Chelyabinsk
References
1. Akhutin, A. V. (1990) “Sophia and the Devil (Kant in the Face of Russian Religious Metaphysics)”, Voprosy filosofii 1: 51–69. EDN: TWYBET. (In Russian)
2. Asprem, E. (2010). “Parapsychology: Naturalising the Supernatural, Re-enchanting Science”, in J. R. Lewis, O. Hammer (eds) Handbook of Religion and the Authority of Science. Leiden: Brill.
3. Asprem, E. (2011) “Pondering Imponderables: Occultism in the Mirror of Late Classical Physics”, Aries 11 (2): 129–165.
4. Asprem, E. (2013) “Theosophical Attitudes Towards Science: Past and Present”, in O. Hammer, M. Rothstein (eds) Brill Handbook of the Theosophical Current. Leiden: Brill.
5. Asprem, E. (2014) “Science and the Occult”, in C. Partridge (ed.) The Occult World. London, New York: Routledge.
6. Asprem, E. (2014) The Problem of Disenchantment: Scientific Naturalism and Esoteric Discourse, 1900–1939. Leiden: Brill.
7. Azize, J. (2020) Gurdjieff Mysticism, Contemplation, and Exercises. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
8. Azize, J. (2023) “P. D. Ouspensky’s First Revision of Tertium Organum”, The Alternative Spirituality and Religion 14 (1): 47–67.
9. Balanovskii, V. V. (2019) “The Synthesizing Rationality of E. K. Medtner and His Contribution to the Development of Analytical Psychology”, Filosofskaya mysl’ 2: 42–51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25136/2409-8728.2019.2.28880; EDN: ZABZVB. (In Russian)
10. Duprel, K. (1895) The Philosophy of Mysticism or the Duality of the Human Being. St. Petersburg: Tipografi V. Dimakova. (In Russian)
11. Duprel, K. (1898) The Enigmatic Nature of the Human Being: An Introduction to the Study of Occult Sciences. Moscow: Tipo-lit. T-va I. N. Kushnerev i K°. (In Russian)
12. Duprel, K. (1908) The Monistic Doctrine of the Soul. Moscow: Tipolitografiia T-va I. N. Kushnerev i K°. (In Russian)
13. Falikov, B. Z. (2017) The Magnitude of Quality: Occultism, Eastern Religions, and 20th Century Art. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. (In Russian)
14. Gavriushin, N. K. (1998) “The Knight of Sophia at the Crossroads of Religious Aesthetics”, in In the Footsteps of the Knights of Sophia. Moscow: Star Inter. (In Russian)
15. Hammer, O. (2001) Claiming Knowledge: Strategies of Epistemology from Theosophy to the New Age. Leiden: Brill.
16. Hanegraaff W. (1995) “Empirical Method in the Study of Esotericism”, Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 7/2: 99–129.
17. Hanegraaff W. (2012) Esotericism and the Academy: Rejected Knowledge in Western Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18. Hanegraaff, W. (2013) Western Esotericism: A Guide for the Perplexed. London, New York: Bloomsbury Academic.
19. Hueck, C. J. (2025) “Understanding Organisms by Intuiting Life: Kant, Goethe, and Steiner”, History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences, 47: 36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40656-025-00681-7; EDN: NDFJHS.
20. Iunggren, M. (2001) The Russian Mephistopheles: The Life and Work of Emil Medtner. St. Petersburg: Akademicheskii proekt. (In Russian)
21. Kaiser, T. (2008) Zwischen Philosophie und Spiritismus. Annäherungen an Leben und Werk von Carl du Prel. Saarbrücken: VDM.
22. Kant’s Philosophy and Contemporary Idealism (1987). Moscow: Nauka. (In Russian)
23. Karinskii, M. I. (1873) A Critical Review of the Last Period of German Philosophy. St. Petersburg: Tipografiia departmenta udelov. (In Russian)
24. Kruglov, A. N. (2012) Kant and Kantian Philosophy In Russian Fiction. Moscow: Kanon+ ROOI “Reabilitatsiia”. EDN: QXEKNX. (In Russian)
25. Loginovsky, S. S. (2025) “Kant’s Philosophy in Peter Ouspensky’s Tertium Organum”, Sophia 64: 739–757 [https://doi.org/10.1007/s11841-025-01078-6, accessed on 23.03.2025]. EDN: BVJPYG.
26. Melikh, Yu. (2014) The Irrational Expansion of Kant’s Philosophy in Russia. St. Petersburg: Aleteiia. (In Russian)
27. Mogilianskii, N. M. (1993) “The Cabaret ‘Stray Dog’”, in The Past: A Historical Almanac. 12, pp. 168–188. Moscow, St. Petersburg: Atheneum; Feniks. (In Russian)
28. Monroe, J. W. (2008) Laboratories of Faith: Mesmerism, Spiritism, and Occultism in Modern France. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
29. Motroshilova, N. V. (2006) Russian Thinkers and Western Philosophy. Moscow: Respublika; Kul’turnaia revoliutsiia. EDN: QWLTDD. (In Russian)
30. Noakes, R. (2019) Physics and Psychics: The Occult and the Sciences in Modern Britain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
31. Nosachev, P. G. (2023) “Rejected Knowledge”: The Study of Marginal Religiosity in the 20th and Early 21st Centuries: A Historical and Analytical Study. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. (In Russian)
32. Ouspensky, Pyotr D. (1949) Fragments of an Unknown Teaching. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd.
33. Ouspenskii, P. D. (1911) Tertium Organum: A Key to the Enigmas of the World. St. Petersburg: Tipografiia SPb. T-va Pech. i Izd. dela “Trud”. (In Russian)
34. Owen, A. (2004) The Place of Enchantment: British Occultism and the Culture of the Modern. Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press.
35. Panin, S. A. (2014) “Discussions on the Methodology of Esotericism Research in the Works of European and North American Authors”, Religiovedcheskie issledovaniia 1–2 (9– 10): 60–73. EDN: UKPBDZ. (In Russian)
36. Panin, S. A. (2015) “Kant’s Philosophy and the Idea of the Renewal of Science in Esoteric Literature of the Second Half of the 19th — Early 20th Century”, Gosudarstvo, religiia, tserkov’ v Rossii i za rubezhom 33 (4): 135–151. EDN: VMNDUP. (In Russian)
37. Panin, S. A. (2019) The Philosophy of Esotericism: Esotericism as a Subject of Historical and Philosophical Reflection. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. (In Russian)
38. Parnis, A. E., Timenchik, R. D. (1985) “The Programs of the ‘Stray Dog’”, in Monuments of Culture: New Discoveries. Yearbook. 1983, pp. 160–257. Moscow: Nauka. (In Russian)
39. Razzdiakonov, V. S. (2020) “The Concept of ‘Religion’ In Russian Esotericism of the Late 19th — Early 20th Century (Based on Materials from the Moscow Spiritualist Circle)”, Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I: Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie 89: 129–148. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15382/sturI202089.129-148; EDN: PPNYLH. (In Russian)
40. Razzdiakonov, V. S. (2024) Signs of the Other World: The Russian Spiritualist Movement of the Second Half of the 19th — Early 20th Century. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. (In Russian)
41. Reznichenko, A. (comp.) (2014) The “Musaget” Publishing House: History, Myths, Results: Research and Materials. Moscow: Izdatel’skii tsentr RGGU. (In Russian)
42. Romanov, D. D. (2024) “Kant and Russian Symbolism: Criticism of the ‘Enchanted Distance’”, RUDN Journal of Philosophy 28 (2): 315–331. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-2302-2024-28-2-315-331; EDN: WTDQKV. (In Russian)
43. Sedykh, O. M. (2012) “Pavel Florensky and Immanuel Kant”, in Seminar: Russian Philosophy (Tradition and Modernity). 2004–2009, pp. 131–168. Moscow: Russkii put’. (In Russian)
44. Shmitt, A. B. (2020) “Andrei Bely’s Concept of the ‘Self-conscious Soul’: Synthesis of His Early Reception of Kant with Steiner’s Teachings and Esoteric Practice”, RUDN Journal of Philosophy 24 (2): 201–218. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-2302-2020-24-2-201-218; EDN: IIVVXR. (In Russian)
45. Sommer, A. (2009) “From Astronomy to Transcendental Darwinism: Carl du Prel (1839– 1899)”, Journal of Scientific Exploration 23 (1): 59–68.
46. Spirin, T. V. (2020) “The Anthropological Teaching of Carl Du Prel and Its Reception by Russian Spiritualists in the Late 19th — Early 20th Century”, Studia Religiosa Rossica: nauchnyi zhurnal o religii 4: 58–68. DOI: https://doi.org/10.28995/2658-4158-2020-4-58-68; EDN: VITTLY. (In Russian)
47. Volynskii, A. L. (1889) “Critical and Dogmatic Elements of Kant’s Philosophy”, Severnyi vestnik 7: 67–87. (In Russian)
48. Volynskii, A. L. (1904) “Preface”, in I. Kant, Dreams of a Spirit-Seer, Illustrated by Dreams of Metaphysics. St. Petersburg: Izdanie perevodchika. (In Russian)
49. Webb, J. (1980) The Harmonious Circle: The Lives and Work of G. I. Gurdjieff P. D. Ouspensky, and Their Followers. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons.
50. Weber, T. P. (2007) “Carl du Prel (1839–1899): Explorer of Dreams, the Soul, and the Cosmos”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 38: 593–604.
51. Weir, T. (ed.) (2012) Monism: Science, Philosophy, Religion, and the History of a Worldview. New York: Palgrave.
52. Zhigalkin, S. A. (2011) “Aksenov’s Space-Time”, in M. S. Aksenov, The TranscendentalKinetic Theory of Time, pp. 5–48. Moscow: Iazyki slavianskikh kul’tur. (In Russian)
Review
For citations:
Loginovsky S.S. The Assessment of Karl Duprel’s Interpretation of Kant’s Philosophy in Tertium Organum by P. D. Ouspensky. State, Religion and Church in Russia and Worldwide. 2026;44(1):216-245. (In Russ.)
Views:
34
JATS XML
Email this article 