Педагогічний парадокс Канта у київській духовно-академічній філософії ХІХ ст.: статус дитини і стратегія виховання

The present essay aims to investigate the impact of Immanuel Kant’s pedagogical paradox on the philosophy of education in the 19th-century Kyiv spiritual and academic tradition, as well as to gain a better understanding of how Kyiv philosophers rethought the issues of the child’s status and rights arising from Kant’s ethical and pedagogical ideas. This study finds that, while remaining within the paradigm of pedagogical theory as secularized theology, Kyiv professors developed a view of the child’s status radically different from Kant’s, based on the Orthodox dogma of original sin and the image of God (imago Dei) in humans.In their interpretation of the child’s natural state, they sought to balance the opposing view that human nature in its original state is radically good (Rousseau) and that it is radically distorted by evil—wild and unbridled (Kant). Kyiv academicians argue that human nature should be considered good in principle, as humanity is not only a creation but also a bearer of the uncreated spirit of God. At the same time, they maintain that original sin did not corrupt any part of human nature; it merely created the possibility of doing evil, disrupting the harmony in which the spirit governed the forces of the soul and body.However, Kyiv professors believe that, in the case of a child, this potential for evil remains unrealized; therefore, childhood embodies “a mold, a form of a spiritual ideal”—an unconscious “primordial virginity.” On these grounds, there is no doubt that a child should be considered a priori a person and, therefore, that its right to free development should be recognized. This allows them to resolve the pedagogical paradox not only by means of restrictions and coercion—relying on the educator’s humanity —but also by discovering natural ways to help the child recognize its need for freedom and learn to exercise it. According to the Kyiv philosophers, a child is a completely morally healthy being who simply needs support to learn how to distinguish between good and evil within itself and around it, and to do good out of love—in other words, to learn to use freedom and act as a moral subject. Therefore, the strategy of education must be formulates as a response to this fundamental question.