From the era of Kyivan Rus to contemporary postmodern ideas, Ukrainian thinkers have not only developed original concepts but have also integrated into global philosophical discussions, creating a balance between the local and the universal.
The foundations of Ukrainian philosophy were laid during the era of Kyivan Rus, when the need arose to conceptualize statehood, religion, and cultural identity.
In his work Sermon on Law and Grace, Hilarion of Kyiv formulated a historiosophical concept that envisioned human development as a transition from external coercion to inner spiritual freedom.
This was one of the first attempts to comprehend historical processes in the East Slavic world and made a significant contribution to the theological and philosophical traditions of Europe.
The 17th and 18th centuries marked the development of academic philosophy at the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, which became the center of Ukrainian Baroque thought. Philosopher such as Ioanikii Galiatovsky integrated scholastic methods with humanist ideas, laying the groundwork for the secularization of knowledge.
Theophan Prokopovych, in particular, justified the concept of natural law and state sovereignty, which resonates with the views of Hobbes and Locke.
One of the most important philosophers of the early modern period in the 18th century was Hryhorii Skovoroda, who formulated the concept of “affinity of labor”
(srodna pratsia) as the foundation of human happiness. His idea was that each person has an inner calling, and fulfilling this calling ensures harmony between spiritual and material life.
This existentialist concerns about individual authenticity and self-realization, later developed by Western philosophers such as Kierkegaard and Heidegger. Skovoroda also expanded on a Neoplatonic idea of the “two natures”—the visible and the invisible, the material and the spiritual—an idea that aligns with modern metaphysical and deep ecological concepts.
Many scholars regard Skovoroda as a representative of Baroque culture, characterized by multilingualism and openness to diverse cultural influences.
However, his most profound insight was recognizing the central challenge of his time: a person may master many languages and fields of knowledge yet still fail to find themselves.
This is the existential moment of choice, where an individual faces limitless opportunities but cannot realize them without deep self-awareness. Skovoroda believed that the fundamental task of a person was to encounter their true self, understand their vocation, and act in accordance with it.
In the 19th century, Mykhailo Drahomanov, influenced by European socialism, formulated the concept of communal self-governance,
which envisioned a decentralized democratic model where the community played a central role.
He proposed a federalist model of social organization that sought to reconcile democratic principles with ethnonational characteristics. He saw democracy not only as a form of political governance but also as a mode of social organization based on self-government and civic participation.
Another prominent intellectual is Lesya Ukrainka who not only created innovative literary forms but also explored the clash of value systems
. Her dramaturgy transcends historical and mythological plots, becoming a space for philosophical reflection on the conflict between freedom and power, the individual and society, faith and rationality.
In her dramatic works, including Orgy, The Stone Host, Boyarynya, and Rufin and Priscilla, the central dilemma revolves around the choice between ethical autonomy and conformity. Her writing resonates with the ideas of Friedrich Nietzsche (critique of slave morality), Albert Camus (the notion of rebellion), and Jean-Paul Sartre (existential responsibility).
Particularly striking is Cassandra (1907), which delves into the problem of truth and its place in society. The protagonist, a bearer of truth, is doomed to misunderstanding and isolation.
In the early 20th century, Viacheslav Lypynskyi developed the concept of “agrarian democracy,”
in which he viewed the political process as being led not by an abstract populace but by a responsible elite supported by the middle class and landowners.
Lypynskyi criticized the populist tradition, which, in his view, contributed to political anarchy, and emphasized the importance of institutional stability and continuity in statehood.
His ideas resonate with European conservative theories and the principles of responsible leadership. Lypynskyi perceived the state as an organic structure formed through hereditary responsibility rather than through mechanical electoral processes.
In the 20th century, Ukrainian philosophy experienced a split between its metropolitan and émigré branches. In the Soviet Union, Marxism-Leninism dominated official discourse, suppressing independent thought, though underground intellectual resistance persisted.
Meanwhile, in the West, Ukrainian philosophers such as Dmytro Chyzhevskyi made significant contributions to integrating Ukrainian thought into the broader European intellectual context.
In his works, Chyzhevskyi analyzed the philosophical ideas of Kyivan Rus, the Cossack era, and modernity, proving that Ukrainian thought is an inseparable part of the broader European discourse.
He identified key characteristics of Ukrainian philosophy as personalism, existential depth, and ethical orientation, distinguishing it from the rationalism of the Western tradition and the collectivism of Russian thought.
In the second half of the 20th century, Myroslav Popovych combined analytical methodology with historiosophical analysis of Ukrainian culture. His works traced the evolution of Ukrainian philosophy from Kyivan Rus to modernity, emphasizing the interaction between tradition and modernization.
His research became foundational for understanding the intellectual history of Ukraine and its place in global academic thought.
In an era of postmodern relativization of values and ethical norms, Popovych, in his book The Philosophy of Freedom, exposed that behind this apparent neutrality lay an attempt to separate the social world from the moral one.
Echoing Skovoroda’s legacy, one of Popovych’s central scholarly themes was the problem of freedom, which he saw as essential to the human condition.
Having evolved from medieval theological reflections to contemporary postmodern discourses, Ukrainian philosophy embodies both tradition and innovation.
Its contribution to global thought is evident in its exploration of the harmony between personal freedom and social responsibility, the ethical imperative of political action, and the importance of spiritual autonomy.
In light of the 21st century’s global challenges, Ukrainian philosophy continues to integrate into the worldwide intellectual context, remaining a vital source of ideas for contemplating the future of democracy, culture, and society.
This publication was compiled with the support of the International Renaissance Foundation. It’s content is the exclusive responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily reflect the views of the International Renaissance Foundation.
