So, originating around the middle of the first millennium BC in Ancient China, India and Greece, philosophy has gone through a long historical path. Naturally, at different stages of its development it had its own characteristics.

From the point of view of the European tradition, the following historical types of philosophy can be distinguished:

- ancient philosophy (or ancient Greek philosophy),

- medieval philosophy,

- philosophy of humanism,

- philosophy of the New Age,

- modern. or non-classical philosophy.

Ancient (ancient Greek) philosophy . Its specific feature, especially at the beginning, was the desire understand the essence of nature, space, the world as a whole. Its first representatives were often called “physicists” (physics is “nature” in Greek). Already among the first “physicists” philosophy is thought of as the science of the causes and beginnings of all things. At the same time, early philosophical thinking seeks, if possible, rational explanations of the origin and essence of the world. The early natural philosophers were characterized by a special kind of elementsnaya dialectsToA thinking. They are considering space as continuoussI'm changing it a lotschthere is a whole, in which the unchangeable principle appears in various forms, experiencing all kinds of transformations. The dialectic is especially clearly represented in GHeraclitus, according to which everything that exists must be thought of as a moving unity and a struggle of opposites.

Perhaps the most famous and amazingly long-lived was atomic theory Democritus(atom, as an indivisible, uncreated and indestructible “first brick” of everything material in this world). Cosmocentrism For a long time it was the main line of ancient philosophy, within the framework of which the problem of man as a part of the cosmos and nature was considered. However, new ideas about the place and purpose of man in space are gradually being formed, the role and significance of the problem of man in the structure of ancient Greek is increasing. philosophical knowledge.

A new step in the development of ancient philosophy is associated with the name Plato(427 -347 BC). He, unlike Democritus, considers being (existing) not as material, but as ideal, thereby becoming the founder objective idealism in philosophy. And finally, the pinnacle of development of ancient Greek philosophical thought was philosophy Aristotle(384 -322 BC). Aristotle ends the classical period in the development of ancient Greek philosophy. In fundamental philosophical issues, Aristotle is close to objective idealism, which will make it possible to use his philosophical teaching for the further development of Christian theology.

Medieval philosophy. The philosophical thought of the Middle Ages belongs to the V-XV centuries. Medieval thinking in its essence theocentric: the reality that determines all things is not nature, but God. The theocentrism of medieval philosophy is closely related to creationism(the idea of ​​the divine creation of the world “out of nothing”), providentialism(divine plan predetermines the history of society, the lives of people) and eschatology(teaching about the end of the world).

Medieval thinking and worldview determined two different traditions: Christian revelation, on the one hand, and ancient philosophy, mainly in its idealistic version, on the other. These two traditions, of course, were not so easy to reconcile with each other. The first systematizer of Christian doctrine was Augustine the Blessed, or Aurelius Augustine (354 - 430), and one of the most prominent figures was Thomas Aquinas (1225 -1274). However, we should not forget that even in the Middle Ages, despite the dominance of Christian theology, some freethinking remained in Europe.

Philosophy of humanism. XV - XVI centuries Western Europe were the period of formation of early bourgeois relations, and were called the Renaissance.

This new era recognizes itself as a revival of ancient culture, an ancient way of life, a way of thinking, hence the name “Renaissance,” that is, “Rebirth.” The most important distinguishing feature of the Renaissance worldview is its orientation towards art: if the Middle Ages can be called a religious era, then the Renaissance can be called an artistic and aesthetic era par excellence. And if the focus of antiquity was natural-cosmic life, in the Middle Ages - God and the associated idea of ​​salvation, then in the Renaissance the focus is on man. Therefore, the philosophical thinking of this period can be characterized as AntroPotsentric.

Versatility was the ideal of a man of that era. Unlike the medieval master, who belonged to his corporation, workshop, etc. and achieved mastery precisely in his field, the Renaissance master, freed from the corporation and forced to defend his honor and his interests, sees the highest merit precisely in the comprehensiveness of his knowledge and skills. Hence renewed interest in nature, the desire to understand it, because nature is the workshop of the human creator.

Thus, philosophy again becomes natural philosophy - the philosophy of nature, and theism is replaced by pantheism("God is in everything") - Christian God merges with nature, dissolves in it. In the philosophy of humanism, a radical rethinking of the role of man takes place, the idea is born Prometheism- man as the creator of the world, equal to God, continuing his creativity.

Philosophy of the New Age. The seventeenth century opens the next period in the development of philosophy, which is commonly called the philosophy of modern times. In the last third of the 16th - early 17th centuries, a bourgeois revolution took place in the Netherlands and England, the most industrially developed European country. The development of bourgeois society gives rise to changes not only in economics, politics and social relations, it also changes the consciousness of people. The most important factor in this change in public consciousness is science.

The development of modern science gradually weakens the influence of the church and brings to life a new orientation of philosophy. Confidence in the power of the human mind, in its limitless possibilities, in the progress of science, creating conditions for economic and social prosperity - these mentalities were formed back in the 17th century and were continued and deepened in the 18th century, which recognized itself as an era of reason and light, the revival of freedom , the flowering of sciences and arts that came after more than a thousand years of darkness in the Middle Ages. There are two main slogans written on the banner of the enlighteners - science and progress.

The philosophy of modern times is characterized, first of all, by rationalism, the desire to create holistic philosophical systems. Problems peace, its origins and patterns, are considered taking into account new scientific achievements, hence, for example, the dominance mechanism in views of the world and man. Of particular importance is theory of knowledge. Quite a diverse range of opinions on the issue person.

Modern. or non-classical philosophy. Classical philosophy was characterized, first of all, by rationalism and the desire to create integral philosophical systems. In modern times, even skepticism retained faith in science; it was, on the whole, a rationalistic movement; theories that differed from rationalism and, especially, opposed to it, as they say, were not decisive.

Non-classical philosophy criticized traditional rationalism, its understanding of the world and knowledge, and claimed to establish a new worldview. The starting point was the study and appreciation of the role of non-rational forms and processes of spiritual experience. The philosophy of the 20th century replaced reason with other, already irrational, “absolutes.”

Such a radical ideological revolution was due to processes that took place already in the 19th century. Society is not just changing, but changing before the eyes of one generation, and these changes are recorded at the level of simple common sense. Hence the inevitable formation of a feeling of instability, variability of the world as opposed to stability and stability. An indicator of dynamism was not only the achievements of scientific and technological progress that entered the lives and everyday life of people. Perhaps more important was political instability: the nineteenth century was an era of political revolutions that rocked Europe throughout the century. And the First World War and its consequences radically changed the worldview of Europeans. The conclusion made at the level of advanced social thought could be extremely clear: the world is not just fragile and unstable, a person is not just a small grain of sand in this world, but, what is perhaps especially important, the world is unreasonable, it defies reasonable understanding and explanation. It is impossible, from the point of view of common sense, the human mind, to explain the desire of people to destroy their own kind, to self-destruct. These sentiments will only intensify in the twentieth century, which will provide even more facts confirming these conclusions. This is the Second World War, and the creation of atomic and other similar weapons, and the destruction of the natural balance in various regions of the globe...

Attempts by philosophers to find other, new fundamental principles of existence, to understand the place of man in the “other” world, to create a different universal morality, a system of ethical and aesthetic values ​​and ideals, etc. have become a distinctive feature of modern philosophy. Within the framework of philosophy of the second half of the 19th - 20th centuries, several directions emerged: “philosophy of life”, positivism, pragmatism, Freudianism, existentialism and others. Each of them contributed to the formation of the worldview and culture of the twentieth century. Each had its own social support, its own degree of influence on society. However, it is quite obvious that the history of modern Western philosophy began as a history of irrational philosophy. And over the past one and a half hundred years, it was irrationalism that was the leading feature of philosophy.

Consideration of the central problems that confronted philosophers of a particular period will help at the same time to give an idea of historical types of philosophy, about the originality of philosophical thought different nations V different periods their stories.

Thus, ancient philosophy arises and lives in a “force field”, the poles of which are, on the one hand, mythology, and on the other, mythology that is formed precisely in Ancient Greece the science. In the Middle Ages, philosophical thought developed in close connection with the religious form of consciousness that dominated during this period. This connection, however, is complex, and through the polemics of different directions it is easy to see the ambiguity of this connection. During the Renaissance - XV-XVI centuries - philosophical thinking received strong impulses from the sphere of art, in particular through a new reading ancient literature and immersion in the world of images ancient culture; the aesthetic approach plays a dominant role here, especially among the so-called humanists. This is due to the process of secularization, the gradual liberation of thought from church authority. Unlike the Renaissance, the Reformation highlights moral and ethical themes and emphasizes the practical aspect, both in human activity, and in thinking, criticizing the speculative rationalism of scholasticism and the secular aestheticism of the humanistic culture of the Renaissance.

The philosophy of modern times (XVII-XIX centuries), taken as a whole, is characterized by an orientation towards science, on the one hand, and the legal sphere, on the other. It must be emphasized that science in modern times means experimental and mathematical natural science, which differs significantly from ancient and medieval science, which did not yet know experiment (however, the beginnings of an experimental approach to the study of nature can be seen in the Hellenistic era, for example, in the works of Archimedes). Leading philosophers of modern times therefore set as the most important task the justification scientific knowledge, each time trying to clarify the concept of “science”. In the 17th, and especially in the 18th century, a reorientation of worldview occurs - theology is replaced, on the one hand, by developing science, on the other - by legal consciousness, closely connected with the doctrine of the state, with the so-called contractual theory of the state (Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau and others) .

An important role in the philosophy of modern times was played by the ideology of the Enlightenment, represented in the 18th century in England primarily by Locke, in France by a galaxy of materialists: Voltaire, Diderot, Holbach and others, and in Germany by Herder and Lessing. Criticism of religion, theology and traditional metaphysics constituted the main pathos of the enlighteners who ideologically prepared the French bourgeois revolution. The belief that reason, understood primarily as a new science, is the source and mover social progress, defines the mentality of the 18th century. The analysis of this mentality, and not the analysis of individual teachings of philosophers of this period, constitutes the content of the section on the Enlightenment. Here both the strengths of Enlightenment materialism and its limitations are revealed.

From the end of the 18th century, a critical revision of the principles of the Enlightenment began. One of the most profound critics of the Enlightenment understanding of science and reason was the founder of German idealism, Kant, whose worldview, however, was formed precisely in line with Enlightenment ideas. Philosophical thinking of the 19th century, especially in Germany, where the decisive role was played by German idealism(Fichte, Schelling and Hegel), is essentially determined by the principles of historicism and dialectics: it is no coincidence that it was in the 19th century that we observed the flourishing of the history of culture, law, science, religion, etc.

Analysis of the specifics of philosophical knowledge in each of these periods allows us to show, firstly, to what extent philosophy in its development is determined by sociocultural factors and, secondly, how the difference in the style of thinking dominant in a given era leaves its mark on the methods of solving philosophical problems, modifying old ones and putting forward new problems. It is important, however, to keep in mind that, despite the uniqueness philosophical teachings, in different historical periods in the development of thought, significant continuity is preserved, which allows us to talk about the unity of the historical and philosophical process.

Historically, three main types of philosophizing are known, which developed in parallel and simultaneously in every human civilization, and therefore do not exclude each other at all, but, in accordance with the principle of complementarity, only complement each other in the most diverse respects. Most often, they have their own categorical apparatus, their own axiomatic system, as a result of which mutual criticism turns out to be simply incorrect and therefore does not achieve the goal. These are the three stages of philosophizing: 1) worldview carried out within the framework of the “philosophy of science” and presented at the present stage scientistically oriented philosophy (materialism, positivism, naturalism); 2) attitude, carried out within the framework of the “philosophy of life” and presented at the present stage existentialist oriented philosophy (existentialism, personalism, philosophical anthropology); 3) worldview carried out within the framework of “religious philosophy” and presented at the present stage theologically oriented philosophy (neo-Thomism, theological teachings of various religions). The result is a scientific, anthropological and religious philosophy, or what is the same, but in a different synonymous series: scientistic, existential and theological philosophy, and it is initially unclear which terminology will prevail or a new one will appear.

The first step in this direction was taken in Russian philosophy by the authors of “Introduction to Philosophy” (edited by I. T. Frolov, part one), distinguishing worldview and worldview, but not as large historical types of philosophizing, behind which stand scientific and existential philosophies, but like "this and that" in the structure modern philosophy. It remains, therefore, to take the next step and recognize (or postulate) world comprehension as the third main type of philosophizing, behind which religious philosophy fully and equally stands, so that a complete set of three main historical types of philosophizing is obtained. The following considerations can be given to support this.

Persons inclined to accurate facts and scientific proof prefer a worldview (scientist orientation), while persons inclined to analyze their own internal experiences and self-reflection tend to prefer a worldview (existential orientation), and persons inclined to religious mysticism choose a worldview (theological orientation). But since all these three types of people are represented in society, then in the end every human civilization has all these types of philosophizing. Already in ancient times, the worldview was represented by the cosmological school of philosophy, atomistic doctrine Democritus and Leucippus, the worldview is the teaching of Protagoras about man as “the measure of all things,” and the worldview is the teaching of Plato about ideas. The three main historical types of philosophizing - scientific, anthropological and religious - can be traced not only in each historical era simultaneously and in parallel, but also manifest themselves in a shift in emphasis when changing historical eras. Thus, in the Middle Ages, religious philosophy prevailed (the connection between philosophy and religion: “Philosophy is the handmaiden of theology”), in the Renaissance it prevailed anthropological philosophy(the connection between philosophy and art: Renaissance humanism), and in modern times scientific philosophy prevailed (the connection between philosophy and science: “Knowledge is power!”).

And this trend continues to this day. An attempt to synthesize these three streams of philosophizing, presenting them as a single worldview, is worthy of every encouragement, but this attempt can only be successful at the initial stage of development of a new philosophical school, since in the future, personal, individual inclinations and preferences of the mentioned three types will certainly prevail among philosophers, and as a result, the philosophical school will once again be divided into three branches - scientific (scientist), anthropological (existential) and religious (theological).

Scientific, anthropological and religious types of philosophizing are not the result of the persuasiveness of certain arguments, but of personal, individual choice, which stems from the subjective inclinations of a person, his innate temperament, character traits, social environment, upbringing, education, life destiny, specific circumstances and situations akin to the “installation” of Dm. Uznadze. That's why it's rational thinking man for the most part professes scientism, poetically sensitive natures profess existentialism, and the mystic usually professes one or another religious philosophy. This pattern manifests itself so clearly that in the same country, at the same time, there is a rich diversity philosophical directions, movements, schools and all kinds of “isms”. Their parallel coexistence is thus not only justified, but also necessary in the future, in any distant future, in order to satisfy the ideological aspirations of internally unequal, differently oriented people. In fact, behind these three types of philosophizing there are three aspects of the human psyche: cognition (“I want to know”), feelings ( emotional experience your “I”, your stay in the world) and will (desire by force of will penetrate into the essence of the world - “transcensus”). Each of the three types of philosophizing can be symbolically represented (or designated) - for a better understanding of their essence - in the form of three well-known sayings:

scientific philosophy - “I want to know everything!”

anthropological philosophy - “Know thyself!”

religious philosophy - “Know God in yourself!”

The difference between scientific, anthropological and religious types of philosophizing is clearly visible both at the content and at the formal level. In essence, this difference is illustrated by a specific example of the relationship of the three types of philosophizing to human death. Yes, for scientific philosophy human death is a normal, natural physiological process of extinction, stopping and cessation of life, characteristic of all complex living organisms, passing through the path from birth, youth and maturity to old age and death. When a person as a biological being weakens all the basic vital functions: vision, hearing, memory, motor skills, reproduction, all kinds of senile ailments appear, diseases of the heart, blood vessels, kidneys, liver, stomach, metabolism, etc., etc. ., - quite naturally the death of a weak person occurs, first clinical death, then agony and, finally, the finale - death. Nothing special, from the point of view of scientific philosophy, is happening here; this process is known to any doctor who comes into close contact with death every day (Metchnikov, for example, described own death, his own dying - with a pencil and a sheet of paper in his hand), and even to an ordinary person who loses loved ones, friends, neighbors throughout his life and participates in the rituals of funeral, burial, commemoration, etc., inherent in every nation.

Anthropological, existential philosophy looks at death completely differently, for which the death of a person is the greatest universal, space disaster, the end of the world, since this world is concentrated in a given person, it is a landslide collapse of all things. Finally, for religious philosophy, the death of a person is just a departure from this mortal world to another, better, more perfect world, approaching God. Immortality and transmigration of the soul and even resurrection from the dead are recognized here. It is quite obvious that these are three different approaches to explaining and assessing human death - materialistic, psychological and spiritualistic, although, of course, the fundamental difference is not only in this, but in all philosophical issues.

At the formal level, the difference between scientific, anthropological and religious philosophy is manifested in their categorical apparatus, which over many centuries has managed to finally form and even ossify, becoming almost traditional, with a tinge of prejudice. A set of philosophical categories of one, another or third type is able to unambiguously determine to which main historical type of philosophizing these categories belong. So, for example, if we have such specific categories as matter, movement, space, time, causality, regularity, possibility, reality, development, verification, falsification and others, then this is certainly scientific philosophy. If we come across the categories of I and non-I, absurdity, abandonment in the world, vital impulse, will to power, intuition, freedom, responsibility, guilt, escape from freedom, selfhood, identity, concern, anxiety, loneliness, fear of death, borderline situation, etc., then this is clearly a “philosophy of life”, or existential philosophy. Finally, categories such as God, world mind, higher mind, absolute, absolute spirit, divine emanation, Providence, revelation, creative act, intelligible world, other world, heaven, hell, sinfulness, second coming, etc., are definitely indicative of religious philosophy. And although there are many philosophical categories common to all three types of philosophizing (Universe, world, mind, consciousness, knowledge, truth, error and others), even in this case, these categories are given different meanings by representatives of scientific, anthropological and religious philosophy.

United according to this typical characteristic philosophical categories form stable philosophical systems that differ significantly from each other both in the set of elements of the system and in the way they are structurally connected with each other and with previous systems of a related type. As a result, a situation arises where philosophical systems of a related type, separated in time by centuries and millennia, are closer to each other in all their main parameters than philosophical systems that are contemporary to each other, but belonging to different types of philosophizing. This circumstance is so striking and obvious that it itself can serve as an indicator for distinguishing the main historical types of philosophizing.

In this regard, it is necessary to consider how the antithesis of materialism and idealism, dialectical and metaphysical methods look against the background of the three types of philosophizing. In principle, they find their place within the mentioned types as they completely or partially coincide with them (materialism is a scientific philosophy, subjective idealism- anthropological philosophy, objective idealism - religious philosophy), then as common to all three types (dialectical and metaphysical methods philosophical analysis). But there are also philosophical systems, such as analytical or critical philosophy, that are difficult to attribute specifically to one or another type of philosophizing. With all this, there are so many different kinds of philosophical “isms” that clarifying the question of where they gravitate most is a thankless task and can only be done by specialists in the field of the history of philosophy.

To complete the presentation, we should dwell on facts and considerations that do not fit into the above diagram. Here are some of them.

Firstly, it is known that, with the exception of the first generation of positivists (O. Comte, G. Spencer), which in general gravitated towards materialism and Russia XIX century was recognized as materialistic, then already the second generation of positivists (R. Avenarius, E. Mach, J.-St. Mill), and especially their third generation (the neo-positivism of the “Vienna Circle”) was not considered as such. Neopositivists declared the most important categories materialist philosophy“metaphysical fictions”, “pseudo-problems”, bringing to the fore logical and linguistic analysis (logic, semiotics, semantics). In addition, the claim of neopositivism to be “scientific” did not go further than the “philosophy of science” (we refer to the book of the prominent representative of the “Vienna Circle” F. Frank “Philosophy of Science”). Meanwhile, “philosophy of science” essentially means a philosophical and methodological analysis and interpretation of the achievements of science, similar to how it is done from a sociological position in the “sociology of science” or from an economic position in the “economics of science”, etc. that is, this is one of the aspects of modern science. The term “scientific philosophy” means, in essence, something very different from “philosophy of science”, namely: here it is not philosophy that is used to explain and analyze scientific achievements, but, on the contrary, scientific achievements are used for philosophical generalizations, to substantiate and confirm philosophical conclusions. For example, the cosmological “anthropic principle” (Carter, 1969: “I think, therefore I exist, and the world exists with its present parameters and world constants”) is suitable for justifying and confirming the reality of the world in its existing parameters; the law of conservation and transformation of matter and energy is used to justify the eternity, uncreation and indestructibility of the world; the functional asymmetry of the two hemispheres of the human brain is used to substantiate and confirm the existence of two levels of human cognition - sensory and abstract, etc.

It turns out that combining materialism, positivism and naturalism into one group of “scientific philosophy” is not historically and meaningfully justified, and in some cases it is impossible. However, this is not entirely true. The very fact that the first positivists were close to materialism is very symptomatic; further, the argumentation of the second generation of positivists revealed its inconsistency in the 20th century, and as for the third generation of positivists, the same 20th century gave impressive examples of the counter movement of neopositivism and materialism, when materialism recognized the undoubted achievements of neopositivists in various fields of science (mathematical logic), linguistics philosophy, and neopositivism removed some of its too extreme or odious statements. But it is enough that by the middle of the 20th century neopositivism, with all its pros and cons, practically disappeared from the philosophical arena along with naturalism, and materialism continues to exist until today“scientific philosophy” has been a “scientific philosophy” for 2.5 thousand years now.

Secondly, existentialism can be found atheistic (that is, almost materialistic) and religious (that is, almost objectively idealistic). It follows that existential philosophy can potentially be classified as both a scientific and a religious type: philosophizing; therefore, its identification as a separate group is called into question. To this it can be objected that the reference to atheism proves little, since it is known that one of the founders of the “philosophy of life” F. Nietzsche with his godless principle “There is no God, therefore everything is permitted” did not become one iota of a “scientific materialist” "; as well as J.-P. Sartre, an atheistic existentialist, did not, however, become a consistent materialist because of his atheism. In other words, one cannot equate materialism with atheism. And vice versa, even such a religious existentialist as N. Berdyaev, in his writings, operated not with theological (theological), but with existential categories. At the same time, the fact that the recognized founder of European existentialism, S. Kierkegaard, was a Danish priest-theologian, suggests that the proposed distinction between the main historical types of philosophizing (scientific, anthropological and religious philosophy) apparently needs additional differentiation criteria, so that the original thesis can be considered proven.

Thirdly, religious philosophy, in addition to the fact that it has points of contact with existential philosophy, also claims to some extent to be real or imaginary scientific, especially in Catholic world, in the form of neo-Thomism, trying to rely on the authority of science; There is a Pontifical Academy of Sciences in the Vatican, which awards master's and doctoral degrees in theology. And this is the case not only in the Catholic religion, but also in all other theologies, which again raises the question of the legitimacy of distinguishing between the main historical types of philosophizing. Meanwhile, with religious philosophy the situation is much simpler than in the other two cases: here it is enough just to refer to God the Creator at any hierarchical stage of evolution or to call your philosophy theosophy, demonology, monadology or other religious-mystical teaching in order to be considered a religious philosophy. Although, on the other hand, it is also true that theology itself is already a religious philosophy, since it tries to judge the essence of the world and the place of man in this world: what the world is and what place we, people, occupy in this world.

As you know, there is only one truth - there are no two, three or four truths about the same subject, taken at the same time and in the same relation. Meanwhile, as we see, when considering the subject and essence of philosophy, not one, but several different, sometimes opposing, incompatible points of view are expressed that claim to be true. However, there is no contradiction in this, since scientific, anthropological and religious philosophy appeal to various aspects of human consciousness, satisfying the demands and needs of cognition, feelings and will (“triple truth” instead of the medieval “ dual truth"). One has to remember the famous saying of Him. Kant: “I limit knowledge in order to open the way to faith.” Very often, according to a long tradition, this saying is interpreted as if it meant religious faith. It seems, however, that here “faith” means not only and not so much religious faith (with a literal reading of Kant), but in general any assumption about “first principles,” “the cause of all causes,” the essence and meaning of being. Consequently, this Kantian “faith” should be interpreted as a possibility of choice: since there are no unambiguous answers to these “metaphysical”, in the Kantian understanding, “damned questions”, it depends on the person which of the possible answers (and there are at least several dozen ) he will prefer based on his spiritual inclinations, education and life experience. This is what Immanuel Kant meant.

In conclusion, we emphasize that all three analyzed historical types of philosophizing - scientific, anthropological and religious - are called philosophies (and completely equal and equally probable in relation to each other), because they all, although in different ways, answer the question about the essence the surrounding world and the place of man in this world. And this is the main purpose of philosophy in human society.

1. Ancient and medieval philosophy.

2. Philosophy of the Renaissance and Modern times.

3. German classical philosophy.

Aristotle's socio-political teaching also differs from Plato's. Aristotle’s ideal is a polis state, formed not on the basis of an ideal model like Plato’s, but on a natural “ human nature" It is the state that must create the conditions for the optimal expression of “human nature,” because the state as a community of people is a necessary organization for a happy existence. The goal of man is happiness, which is achieved by living a virtuous life, achieved by study and reflection.

The goal of Aristotle himself was to give a comprehensive understanding of “how a person should live.”

Aristotle ends the flowering of ancient Greek philosophy. Gradually its decline and crisis begins (I-V centuries AD). During this period, five philosophical trends emerged and developed:

Thomas Aquinas sought to substantiate the question of the harmony of faith and reason, to deduce the existence of God from the existence of things, and proposed the idea of ​​potential (possible) and actual (actual) existence. In anthropology, Thomas Aquinas proceeded from the idea of ​​personality as the unity of soul and body.

Medieval philosophy, due to its religiosity and scholasticism, was dogmatic and conservatist, and by the end of the 14th century. no longer satisfied requests social development. It was replaced by the philosophy of the Renaissance.

Ficino(1422-1495) considers pre-existing religions as stages of development of a “universal religion”, endows a person with the ability to understand the world, protects earthly beauty, the contemplation of which he considers as the highest level of knowledge. Cusanian(1401-1464) is famous for having discovered the principle of the coincidence of opposites - maximum and minimum, being the founder of the new European dialectic and with his teaching destroyed the ancient and medieval performance about space as something finite.

The revolutionary revolution in the worldview of the Renaissance is associated with the discoveries of the Polish astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus(1473-1543) - heliocentric system; Italian thinker Giordano Bruno(1548-1600), who put forward the idea of ​​the infinity of the Universe and the plurality of worlds; Italian scientist Galileo Galilei(1564-1642), who laid the foundations of experimental mathematical natural science, which sought to separate science from religion. The principle of geocentrism that prevailed before these discoveries (the Earth is the center of the Universe), which believed that the visible is identical to the real, was replaced by a new heliocentric principle (the Sun is the center of the solar system), according to which the visible is a distorted reflection of the essence hidden behind the phenomena. This new principle became the epistemological method of all classical science.

In the field of socio-political teachings, Renaissance humanism manifested itself in the development of the theory of the state and utopian socialist ideas. Italian historian Niccolo Machiavelli(1469-1527) and French sociologist Jean Bodin(1530-1596) substantiate the doctrine of a centralized state, which is considered as the main weapon in the fight against the hegemony of the church.

Socialist utopian ideas on building a just society develop: English humanist Thomas More(1479-1555), Italian monk Tommaso Campanella(1568-1639), German reformer Thomas Munzer (1490-1525).

The founder of philosophy and experimental science of modern times was Bacon(1561-1626). He revived materialism, which had its origins in antiquity. He considered matter as an active principle, integral to movement.

Clearing the way for a new science, Bacon did a great job of “the great restoration of the sciences.” He embodied his plan in the “New Organon”. There are obstacles on the path to understanding nature - this is the contamination of people's consciousness with “idols” (or ghosts), distorted images of reality and false ideas. F. Bacon identified four types of “idols”.

At the center of Bacon's philosophical views was inductive method (following from the particular to the general), aimed at experimental, empirical study of nature.

In contrast to this approach, Descartes(1596-1650) sought to develop a universal method of knowledge based on rationalism(lat. rationalis- reasonable, expedient, justified), recognizing reason as the only source of reliable knowledge. Descartes believed that in human knowledge there are a number of innate ideas, primarily the idea of ​​God. Descartes considered the main method of knowledge deduction, those. following from the general to the specific.

The main feature of Descartes' philosophy is dualism. There are, he believed, two substances independent of each other: spiritual and material, soul and body.

The 18th century has gone down in history as the Age of Enlightenment. French philosophy The Age of Enlightenment was not homogeneous. The most radical part of the enlightenment took the positions of materialism and atheism: P. Holbach, C. Helvetius, J. Lametrie, D. Diderot. Less radical: C. Montesquieu, M. Voltaire, J.-J. Rousseau- was on the positions of idealism and deism. Deism(lat. deus- God), admitted the existence of God as the root cause of the world, denied his subsequent intervention in natural and social processes.

French philosophy championed freethinking. She gave a scientific-materialistic explanation of the world and subjected religion to a critical analysis.

At the end of the 18th - first half of the 19th centuries. German thinkers created a successive series of philosophical systems, which are commonly called classical German philosophy. Its main features were:

a) revival of dialectics;

b) criticism of ordinary (rational) philosophy;

c) the desire to present philosophy as a system of scientific knowledge.

The founder of the German classical philosophy is I. Kant(1724-1804). In the initial period of his activity, in the so-called “pre-critical” period (until the 70s of the 18th century), Kant dealt primarily with natural scientific problems. He substantiated the dependence of sea tides on the position of the Moon, and developed a hypothesis about the origin of the Solar system from a gas nebula (later called the Kant-Laplace hypothesis).

In the “critical” period (from the beginning of the 70s), Kant rethinks the previous theory of knowledge and the role of man as a subject of knowledge. The main feature of this period is agnosticism. Kant divides the knowable world into phenomena (these are things as they exist in consciousness) and “things in themselves” (these are things as they exist in themselves). “Things in themselves” affect the senses, cause sensations, but sensations and even judgments do not give a person reliable knowledge about the “thing in themselves.”

Our thinking strives to achieve absolute knowledge about the “thing in itself,” but cannot go beyond the phenomena that form our consciousness, cannot go beyond experience. It falls into antinomy (an insoluble contradiction) since it turns out that it can be proven that a person has freedom and does not have it, that the world is finite and infinite, that there is a first cause (God) and that it does not exist.

In addition to the experienced world, the world given to us in the senses, there is also a second world - the world of freedom, cognizable practical mind. Kant teaches that man has an autonomous will. Under the pressure of willpower, practical reason guides a person's actions in society. These actions are subject to moral laws and impose certain categorical demands on a person or the categorical imperative (Greek: kategorikos- decisive, unconditional; lat. imperative- command, demand). The imperative says: “Act so that your behavior can become a universal law. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Know that by your actions you shape the behavior of others and create the form and nature of mutual relationships.”

As we see, Kant, substantiating the doctrine of man and his knowledge, divided the world of nature and the world of man, which are in contradiction.

They tried to overcome the contradictions indicated by Kant I. Fichte(1762-1814) and F. Schelling (1775-1854). But it was only possible to do this G. Hegel (1770-1831).

Its main task Hegel considered the creation of dialectics as a science, as a system and as Logic. To do this, Hegel needed to embrace all knowledge and all human culture in their development, critically process them and create a complex philosophical system, in which the development of the world is presented as the development of an absolute idea (spirit).

Hegel's philosophical system begins with the doctrine of logic. He solves the question of logic from the position of idealism. Logic as a whole includes objective logic (the doctrine of being and essence) and subjective logic (the doctrine of concept).

Objective logic is the logic before the natural world, which is in a state before the creation of the world by God. It's there absolute idea. God and the absolute idea are identical as primary causes, but at the same time they are different in their state. God is always equal to himself, while the absolute idea continuously develops from abstract and poor in content definitions to more complete and concrete definitions.

After the “work” of objective logic, subjective logic (the doctrine of the concept) comes into play. It follows the same path with the help of concepts, judgments and conclusions and at the same time reflects the history of the practical movement of culture, in the process of which a person masters (cognizes) the world.

The self-development of an idea leads logic to the final point of movement - nature arises. Hegel's concept of nature is unusual. Nature is otherness, i.e. another form of existence of an idea. The meaning and significance of nature is to mediate the divine and human spirit in their development - deployment.

The goal of the dialectical development of the absolute idea is awareness and absolute knowledge of one’s own path. This awareness must occur in a form that corresponds to the content of the idea. Moving towards absolute self-knowledge, the spirit itself finds the necessary forms for itself - these are contemplation, representation and conceptual thinking, which at the same time are the stages of self-knowledge of the spirit.

At the stage of contemplation the spirit appears in the form of art, at the stage of representation in the form of religion and at highest level in the form of philosophy. Philosophy is the pinnacle of world history and culture and the final stage of self-knowledge is the absolute truth.

Grandiose philosophical work, done by Hegel, led him to the conclusion about the rationality of the world, which he expressed in the aphorism: “Everything that is real is reasonable, everything that is reasonable is real.” At the same time, in the process reasonable development of the idea overcomes the evil and imperfection of the world.

Hegel's philosophy was of great importance for the subsequent development of the entire spiritual culture of Europe. But philosophical comprehension of the world has no limit. And Hegel's philosophy was not only further developed, but also criticized.

Feuerbach(1804-1872) directed his creativity towards criticism Christian religion, Hegel's idealism and affirmation anthropological materialism. He believed that the common basis for religion and idealism is the absolutization of human thinking, its opposition to man and its transformation into an independently existing entity.

The roots and secret of religion and idealism are on earth. Man as a generic being in his activity is only indirectly connected with ideas, with the general, which prevails over the individual. People do not understand that these general ideas are their own creations and attribute supernatural properties to them, turning them into the absolute idea of ​​God.

To overcome this understanding of the idea, you need to understand man as an earthly being with his thinking. The subject of philosophy should not be spirit or nature, but man.

For Feuerbach, man is a spiritual-natural being, the most important characteristic of which is sensuality. People are connected by natural ties and, above all, by a feeling of love. At the same time, Feuerbach misses a very important feature of man - his social essence.

The following literature will help you gain a deeper understanding of the topic:

History philosophy. - K., 2002.

Story philosophy. - M., 1999.

New philosophical encyclopedia. In 4 volumes - M., 2001. Art.: “ Ancient philosophy", "Philosophy", "Scholasticism", "Classical German philosophy» “Philosophy of New and Contemporary Times”, etc.

Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary. - K., 2002. Art.: “Philosophy”, “Rebirth”, “German classical philosophy” and others.

The problems of ancient Eastern philosophy were determined by cruel caste division and inequality, and the influence of zoomorphic mythology. Because of totemism and ancestor worship, this type of philosophy is not rationalized enough. In philosophy Ancient India It is customary to distinguish the following schools: orthodox (yoga, Vedanta, Mimamsa, Samkhya) and heterodox (Charvaka Lokayata, Buddhism, Jainism). Most of them clearly define the concept of karma - the law on which the fate of each person entirely depends. Another fundamental concept was “samsara” - the chain of incarnations of living beings in the world. The way out of this chain is moksha, but its various principles distinguished the philosophical schools of Ancient India.

In ancient Chinese philosophy, which was formed in the same era as ancient Indian philosophy, two trends stood out: materialistic and mystical. The first assumed the presence of five primary elements (metal, water, wood), opposite principles (yang and yin). Ancient Chinese philosophy usually includes Confucianism, Legalism, Yijinism, and Moism.

Ancient philosophy

Ancient philosophy, formed in Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome, went through several stages in its development. The first stage is the emergence of philosophy. Associated with it is the appearance Milesian school, to which Anaximenes, Thales, Anaximander and their students belonged. The second stage is associated with the research of such philosophers as Aristotle, Plato, Socrates. During the heyday of ancient philosophy, the formation of the school of sophists, atomists, and Pythagoreans took place. The third stage is no longer ancient Greek, but ancient Roman. It includes such movements as skepticism, stoicism,.

Philosophers of antiquity observed natural phenomena, trying to explain them. The “heart” of the teachings of ancient philosophy can be called cosmocentrism. Man is a microcosm that exists within the macrocosm - nature and the elements. The philosophy of this period is characterized by a unique combination of natural scientific observations with aesthetic and mythological consciousness. Ancient philosophy is dozens philosophical ideas, which were often directly opposite to each other. However, this is precisely what determined more and more types of philosophy.

Medieval philosophy

In the era of feudalism, to which medieval philosophy belongs, man was subordinated to the interests of the church and strictly controlled by it. Religious dogmas were zealously defended. The main idea of ​​this type of philosophy is the monotheism of God. It is not the elements and not the macrocosm that are the main force, ruling the world, and only God is the creator of all things. At the core medieval philosophy there were several principles:
- creationism (God’s creation of the world from emptiness);
- providentialism (the history of mankind is a plan invented in advance by God for the salvation of man);
- symbolism (the ability to see hidden meaning in the ordinary);
- realism (God is in everything: in things, words, thoughts).

Medieval philosophy is usually divided into patristics and scholasticism.

Renaissance philosophy

During the period of the emergence of capitalist relations in Western Europe (15-16 centuries), a new type of philosophy began to develop. Now at the center of the universe is not God, but man (anthropocentrism). God is perceived as a creator, man formally depends on him, but man is practically equal to God, for he is capable of thinking and creating. The world is viewed through the prism of subjective perception of its personality. During the period of Renaissance philosophy, first a humanistic-pantheistic worldview appeared, and later a naturalistic-deistic one. Representatives of this type of philosophy are N. Cusansky, G. Bruno, G. Pico Della Mirandola, Leonardo da Vinci, N. Copernicus.

Philosophy of the New Age

The development of mathematics and mechanics as sciences, the crisis of feudalism, bourgeois revolutions, the formation of capitalism - all this became the prerequisites for the emergence of a new type of philosophy, which would later be called the philosophy of the New Age. It is based on the experimental study of existence and its comprehension. Reason was recognized as the highest authority to which everything else was subordinate. Philosophers of modern times thought about rational and sensual form knowledge, which determined the emergence of two main movements: rationalism and empiricism. Representatives of the philosophy of the New Age are F. Bacon, R. Descartes, G. Leibniz, D. Diderot, J. Berkeley, T. Hobbes and others.

German classical philosophy

The social transformations of the late 18th century that took place in Germany, as well as the French bourgeois revolution, became the prerequisites for the emergence of a new type of philosophy, the founder of which is considered to be Immanuel Kant. He explored issues of natural science. It was Kant who came up with the hypotheses that the Earth’s rotation slows down due to tides and that solar system arose from a gas nebula. Somewhat later, Kant turned to the problems of human cognitive capabilities, developing his theory of knowledge in the key of agnosticism and apriorism. According to Kant, nature does not have “reason,” but is a collection of human ideas about it. What is created by man is knowable (in contrast to the chaotic and irregular world of phenomena). Kant’s epistemological concept includes 3 stages of knowledge: sensory cognition, the area of ​​reason and the area of ​​reason that guides the activity of reason. Kant's ideas were developed by I.G. Fichte, F. Schelling. German classical philosophy includes G. Hegel, L. Feuerbach and others.

Philosophy of Modern Times

This type of philosophy developed in the 19th century. The fundamental idea was that human knowledge is limitless and it is this that is the key to realizing the ideals of humanism. At the center of philosophy is the cult of reason. The original principles of classical philosophy were rethought by Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, and Schopenhauer. Their theories were called neoclassical philosophy. Scientists of the Baden School suggested that there are historical sciences and natural sciences. The first are the sciences of events, the second are the sciences of laws. They recognized only individual cognition as truly existing, considering anything else an abstraction.
The works of Karl Marx are considered an important part of the philosophy of modern times. Among other things, he formulates the concept of alienation and the principle of the revolutionary elimination of alienation, the creation of a communist society where any person can work freely. Marx is convinced that the basis of knowledge is practice, which leads to materialistic understanding stories.

Russian philosophy

Russian philosophy has always been original, as, indeed, has been the entire cultural and historical development of Russia. It arose somewhat later than in Europe, and initially professed the ideas of ancient and Byzantine thought, and then was influenced by Western European trends. Russian philosophy is closely connected with religion, artistic creativity and socio-political activity. It is focused not on epistemological issues, but on ontologism (knowledge through intuitive knowledge). Special meaning Russian philosophy focuses on human existence (anthropocentrism). This is a historiosophical type of philosophy, since a person cannot live and think outside of socio-historical problems. Much attention in Russian philosophy is paid to the inner world of man. Representatives of Russian philosophy can be considered G. Nyssky, I. Damaskin, K. Turovsky, N. Sorsky, Elder Philofey, V. Tatishchev, M. Lomonosov, G. Skovoroda, A. Radishchev, P. Chaadaev, A. Khomyakov, A. Herzen, N. Chernyshevsky, F. Dostoevsky, L. Tolstoy, V. Solovyov, V. Vernadsky, N. Berdyaev, V. Lenin and others.

Philosophy of the last quarter of the 20th century

In the last quarter of the last century, philosophers around the world turned to the search for a new rationality. There are three turns in the development of philosophy: historical, linguistic and sociological. Modernist tendencies are emerging within theological traditions. Parallel to this, there is a process of reflexive processing of the products of myth-making. Philosophers “cleanse” Marxism of utopianism and direct political interpretations. The philosophy of the last quarter of the 20th century is open, tolerant, there are no dominant schools and movements in it, since the ideological boundaries between them have been erased. Philosophy is partially integrated with the humanities and natural sciences. Representatives of the philosophy of the last quarter of the 20th century are G. Gadamer, P. Ricoeur, C. Lévi-Strauss, M. Foucault, J. Lacan, J. Derrida, R. Rorty.

Nature