Abstract
<jats:p>The article aims to overcome the theoretical opposition between E. V. Ilyenkov’s (1924-1979) socio-activity concept of the ideal and D. I. Dubrovsky’s (b. 1929) neurobiologically oriented theory of subjective reality through a dialectical synthesis. This synthesis results in the philosophical substantiation of the category of “individual cognitive sovereignty” as a holistic model of a human being adequate to the challenges of the 21st century. The scientific novelty of the study lies in the fact that, for the first time, the debate between Ilyenkov and Dubrovsky regarding the nature of the ideal and its relationship to the material world is examined within the plane of dialectical unity through the category of “individual cognitive sovereignty”, which allows for the explanation of social content through the ontology of the psychic. The philosophical-anthropological concept of “individual cognitive sovereignty” is presented as a four-level structure (substrate base, substantive content, reflexive mechanism, and volitional act), establishing an interdisciplinary research program. The article undertakes a radical reinterpretation of the famous discussion between Ilyenkov and Dubrovsky on the problem of the ideal. Contrary to the established tradition of viewing their positions as mutually exclusive alternatives, the author proves that their concepts are dialectical opposites forming a conceptual unity. The core of this unity is the individual’s cognitive sovereignty, which, being formed by socio-cultural activity (Ilyenkov) and possessing a unique subjective reality rooted in the neurodynamics of the brain (Dubrovsky), performs the decisive act of reflexive choice and the positing of one’s own life program. Consequently, based on the synthesis of the ideas of these two thinkers, a new philosophical-anthropological concept is proposed: the “sovereign cognitive system”.</jats:p>