Universe of Platonic Thought 2026

34th International Conference “The Universe of Platonic Thought: Plato the Architect of Sciences”

Timur Artemev, CSc in Philosophy, Associate Professor; North-Western State Medical University named after I. I. Mechnikov (Saint Petersburg, Russia), Associate Professor

Knowledge by Plato and His Followers in Russian Philosophy

In Plato's dialogues, knowledge emerges in the cognitive process of recalling what is already known. This concept contributes to the subsequent formation of alternative variants of the theory of knowledge, particularly the concept of all-unity in Russian philosophy. For example, P.D. Yurkevich distinguished two levels of knowledge: relative and absolute. V.S. Solovyov partially borrowed from Plato the division of knowledge into sensory, rational, and intuitive components. According to N.O. Lossky, the condition for cognition becomes an internal effort; he follows the idea of a world based on the One. S.L. Frank believed that knowledge is always directed towards such unknown that is already known to us. It is concluded that the listed philosophers, like Plato, emphasize intelligible cognition.

Keywords: Knowledge, Plato, Yurkevich, Solovyov, Lossky, Frank.

Epistemological inquiries in Plato’s dialogues reveal the complexity and multifaceted nature of the question of what knowledge is in itself. In the Theaetetus, he points out that to answer this question, one must first seek what the soul acquires when it engages in the cognition of being as such. In the Meno, Plato — speaking through Socrates — uses the example of an illiterate slave boy solving the complex geometrical problem of doubling the square through a series of leading questions to demonstrate that knowledge already exists within each of us and emerges in the act of recollection. Plato further asserts that knowledge arises from connecting true beliefs. These connecting bonds are what distinguish true belief from correct belief. In cognitive activity, Plato places the role of reason at the forefront. Sensory experience alone is insufficient. Cognition is the process of recollection of what the soul already knew before birth in the body. The human soul remembers the experience of previous lives and the knowledge of universal principles. Knowledge is linked to the soul’s ability to recognize ideas, which requires a special intelligible effort.

Plato lays the epistemological foundation for the subsequent development of alternative theories of knowledge, which were further elaborated by philosophers in later eras. As is known, Plato’s concept of anamnesis implies a pre‑history of the soul’s existence and its connection with eternal ideas. This contributes to the notion of the unity of the human being and all of existence. As a result, through his ontology of the One, Plato had a significant influence on the concept of all‑unity (vseedinstvo).

A follower of Plato’s epistemology, P.D. Yurkevich, distinguished two levels of knowledge: the always imperfect relative knowledge, which relies on experience, and absolute knowledge, which is achieved through the complete union of the knower with the known. His philosophy represented a Christian iteration of Platonism, in which Plato’s ideas were creatively supplemented by an Orthodox worldview with a belief in a personal God. Yurkevich interpreted ideas as objectively real essences of things, apprehended by reason. For Yurkevich, ideas are living images.

Later, V.S. Solovyov (Yurkevich’s student) formulated the idea of all‑unity, partially borrowing from Plato’s conception. In particular, his concept includes the idea that cognition is connected with an appeal to the deeper layers of being. In other words, for both Plato and Solovyov, knowledge is tied to a reality deeper than sensory experience. In Solovyov’s view, a person is metaphysically connected to the Absolute through the bonds of all‑unity, and cognition is not merely a rational process but the unfolding of this inner connection. We may suggest that Solovyov describes the same Platonic idea of recollecting what is already known, albeit in a more complex form.

N.O. Lossky became a follower of V. S. Solovyov’s concept of all‑unity, in which “everything is immanent to everything.” He developed Solovyov’s idea further: the world is knowable because it is organically unified, and a person is capable of directly contemplating the fullness of reality, from objects to God. Reality is given to a person through intuition. Lossky, too, can be considered a Platonist. Thus, for Lossky, cognition is achieved through inner effort (as in Plato). In his ontology, Lossky developed the idea of the organic unity of the world, where all elements are interconnected. This resonates with Plato’s understanding of the world as a whole, grounded in the One. However, Lossky transformed Plato’s ideas within his own conception of ideal‑realism, introducing the new concept of “substantial agents” — individual beings endowed with creative power and freedom, framed within a Christian context. In the spirit of Neoplatonism, he held that Plato’s ideas are a supratemporal and supraspatial being, to which he attributed general concepts and mathematical objects apprehended through intuition.

S.L. Frank also based his epistemology on Plato’s framework. Frank acknowledged the significance of Solovyov’s concept; his own philosophical system was a reinterpretation of all‑unity, incorporating a critique of some of its aspects. Frank viewed Losky’s intuitionism positively but developed his own concept of intuition within the context of the philosophy of all‑unity. Frank asserts that knowledge is always directed toward the unknown, which transcends experience. Yet this unknown is already known to us. It is important to emphasize this last statement, from which we see that the Platonic concept continues to develop in Frank’s work through a creative interpretation. In other words, this unknown is directly known to us through the intuitive apprehension of all‑unity as a self‑evident, irreducible being in general, with which we are united not through consciousness but in our very being. Such knowledge is living and primary in significance. Another kind of knowledge — abstract distinction is secondary.

To rephrase A.F. Losev: “Plato’s worldview extends to all forms of idealism in general.” It should be noted that the philosophers listed, like Plato, start from the idea that there exists a kind of intelligible knowledge. Plato remains a relevant interlocutor for contemporary thought, and his philosophy helps us to comprehend the problems of cognition.