THE SCIENTIFUC ADVISOR’S REVIEW OF THE BACHELOR’S THESIS OF A STUDENT OF  SAINT PETERSBURG STATE UNIVERSITY EVSEI PETROVITCH GLASOV ON THE TOPIC "PHILOSOPHY AS A PERSONAL ACTION"

The bachelor’s theses by E.P. Glasov are dedicated to an eternal, and therefore never ceasing to be relevant topic, to the disclosure of which he approached in a very original way, perhaps even too much original one. Of the three chapters of the work, the first one corresponds to the stated topic most of all, the rest are more general and indirectly related to it. The first chapter, in my opinion, is the most rigorous, elaborated and grounded part of Evsei Petrovitch’s research.
Glasov’s work testifies to the independence of the thinking of its author, his creativity, i.e. the ability to “create” new notions and conceptions, the capacity to make significant generalizations, not always, however, justified, to work in various types of abstractions. The text he presented shows that in Glasov’s characteristic way of thinking, synthesis obviously predominates over analysis. It is impossible not to mention the fact that Evsei Petrovitch’s research verifies a sufficient level of familiarity with the material, the choice of which seems to be very strange sometimes. He draws to the works of very different authors, the topics of which, at first glance, are weakly connected with each other. Often Glasov moves from the plane of philosophical research into the sphere of psychological consideration.
Of the main essential achievements of Evsei Petrovitch’s research, I would like to draw attention to two ones. (1) Formation of a scheme of a specific correlation between the personal efforts of a philosopher and the “sedimentary heritage” as moments of philosophical thinking in its history (see p. 13 of the theses). 2) A sketch of the concept of the triad “real — virtual — actual" (see chapter II, §5 of the theses). I would not say that the way it is presented in Glasov’s theses, this conception is bene fundata. There are many ambiguities in its formulation, the arguments in its favor are too disputable. Nevertheless, in a case of proper, serious and thoughtful revision, which may even require correction of the terminology itself, the triad introduced by Glasov can be heuristically promising.
Unfortunately, this research is not without shortcomings, the main of which is the inadequacy of claims, and they are global in this text, to actual realisation of the research. Such inadequacy is associated with too broad formulation of research aims, distortion of the thought of prominent philosophers of the past and present, “using” of it to the interests of the author of the theses, the introduction of new entities without the necessary, but at the same time with an abundance of truisms, sometimes with not quite convincing argumentation, insufficient coherence parts of the text with each other. The thoughts of Evsei Petrovitch often lacked discipline.
Nevertheless, I believe that Evsei Petrovitch Glasov’s bachelor’s theses on the topic “Philosophy as a Personal Deed” are absolutely original. They diverse a positive assessment (the recommended rating is “good”).

Candidate of Sciences in Philosophy
Associate Professor of the Department of 
Philosophy of Science and Technology				Andrei Patkul