Kritika chistago razuma. Per. M. Vladislavlev [in Cyrillic], [Critique of Pure Reason]. de KANT, Immanuel - 1867

Octavo (212 x 137 mm). XXXIII, 627 pp. Contemporary half leather. Small private institutional stamps, moderately browning throughout the text due to paper quality of the period, otherwise a very good copy. Front fly with foxing, small handwritten name on title. Now housed in a 1/4 morocco slipcase with chemise. FIRST EDITION in Russian of the Critique of Pure Reason, translated by the Russian professor of philosophy M. I. Vladislavlev. Genuinely scarce, WorldCat locating just six copies in institutional holdings worldwide (3 in the US, 2 in Canada, 1 in Poland), and appearing just twice in auction records across the past 25 years. "Unquestionably one of, if not the most significant event facilitating the study in Russia of Kant's philosophy during the reign of Tsar Alexander II was the publication in 1867 of a translation of the Critique of Pure Reason made by an upcoming young scholar Mickhail I. Vladislavlev (1840-90), who had spent over 2 years at the universities of Heidelberg, Göttingen, and Leipzig Vladislavlev's translation is not without flaws as witnessed by the appearance of subsequent translations, particularly that of N. O. Losskij, still in use with some modifications today but despite its deficiencies, was a remarkable accomplishment for someone still in his mid-20s" (Nemeth, pp. 155-6).
Kant's Critik der reinen Vernunft (first 1781) is one of the most influential philosophy books ever published, the first version of the Critique of Pure Reason. "Kant's great achievement was to conclude finally the lines on which philosophical speculation had proceeded in the eighteenth century, and to open up a new and more comprehensive system of dealing with the problems of philosophy. Of the two main systems which preceded his own, Kant had little or no sympathy with the metaphysical categorization of the Cartesians, and inclined more to the empirical methods of Locke and Leibniz The influence of Kant is paramount in the critical method of modern philosophy. No other thinker has been able to hold with such firmness the balance between speculative and empirical ideas. His penetrating analysis of the elements involved in synthesis, and the subjective process by which these elements are realized in the individual consciousness, demonstrated the operation of 'pure reason'; and the simplicity and cogency of his arguments achieved immediate fame" (PMM).