The problem of man in modern Western philosophy. Introduction to philosophy

Introduction______________________________________________________________2

general characteristics modern Western philosophy________________3

Man in the world and the world of man_______________________________________________6

Between life and death_________________________________________________8

Analysis of the “Man-Technology” relationship________________________________8

Conclusion______________________________________________________________10

List of used literature_________________________________11

Introduction:

In the second half of the 19th century, the transition to Not classical philosophy, there is a departure from the classics, a change in principles, models, and paradigms of philosophizing is taking place. Classical philosophy, from a modern point of view, is characterized as a certain general orientation, a general tendency or style of thinking, characteristic as a whole of approximately a three-hundred-year period of development of Western thought. The mental structure of the classics was permeated with an optimistic sense of the presence of a natural order, rationally understandable in knowledge. Classical philosophy believed that reason is the main and best tool for transforming human life. Knowledge and rational cognition were proclaimed as the decisive force that allows us to hope for the solution of all the problems that face man.

Classical philosophical constructions did not satisfy many philosophers due, as they believed, to the loss of man in them. The specificity, the diversity of human subjective manifestations, they believed, is not “captured” by the methods of reason and science. In contrast to rationalism, they began to develop a non-classical philosophy, in which they began to represent life (philosophy of life) and human existence (existentialism) as the primary reality. There was a “destruction” of the mind: instead of reason, will (A. Schopenhauer, F. Nietzsche), instincts (psychoanalysis of S. Freud), etc. came to the fore. In non-classical philosophy, the desire of philosophical classics to present society as an objective formation similar to natural objects was questioned. The new image of social reality, characteristic of the philosophy of the twentieth century, is associated with the concept of “intersubjectivity”. It is intended to overcome the division into subject and object characteristic of classical social philosophy. Intersubjectivity is based on the idea of a special kind of reality that develops in the relationships between people. At its origins, this reality is the interaction of “I” and “Other”.

General characteristics of modern Western philosophy.

Since the middle of the 20th century, the interest of philosophers in the problems of interaction between society and nature, in understanding the results and ways of development of modern civilization, has noticeably increased.

In general, Western philosophy of the second half of the 19th-20th centuries. represents a wide variety of different movements, schools, concepts, problems and methods, often opposing each other.

WITH mid-19th century, the rationalistic vector of classical modern European philosophy through the efforts of A. Schopenhauer, S. Kierkegaard and F. Nietzsche was opposed by the phenomenon irrational- unconscious processes and emotional-volitional acts. Let us note that classical thought, for a number of reasons discussed above, did not focus attention on the problems of will, intuition, spiritual insight, instinct, the will to live and the will to power, i.e. on those that did not obey the laws of logic and reason. The philosophical opponents of classical rationalism tried to fill this intellectual “gap.”

The founder of European irrationalism is Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860), who systematically outlined his views in the work “The World as Will and Idea” (1818). The world, according to Schopenhauer, can be discovered by man both as will and as representation. Will- this is the absolute beginning of all being, a certain cosmic and biological force in nature that creates the world and man. With the advent of the latter, the world appears as an idea, as a human picture. Man is a slave of the will, because in everything he serves not himself, but the Absolute. The will forces a person to live, no matter how meaningless his existence may be. It lures the individual with phantoms of happiness and temptations such as, for example, sexual pleasure. In fact, a person has only an indirect significance for the will, since he serves as a means for its preservation. A person has only one way out - to extinguish the will to live. This truth, according to Schopenhauer, was discovered by ancient Indian sages, who expressed it in the Buddhist doctrine of nirvana.

Schopenhauer identified two types of people who have ceased to be slaves of the will: saints in earthly life and geniuses in art. According to Schopenhauer, genius is the ability to remain in pure contemplation. A person immersed in such a state is no longer an individual, but a pure, weak-willed, timeless subject of knowledge. An ordinary person is not capable of this kind of contemplation. He pays attention to objects due to the fact that they relate to his will. Therefore, he must be content either with unsatisfied desires, or, if they are satisfied, with boredom. At the same time, Schopenhauer emphasized, every person has three the highest goods life - health, youth and freedom. As long as they exist, the individual does not realize or value them; he only realizes them if they are lost, since these goods, according to Schopenhauer, are only negative quantities.

Schopenhauer was the first in the 19th century. gave a philosophical justification for pessimism. However, his reasoning about the meaninglessness human existence did not seem convincing enough. European society continued to look forward optimistically, the ideal of progress not yet overshadowed by future shocks. The fame of a true thinker-prophet would come to Schopenhauer much later.

One of the brightest representatives of European philosophical irrationalism was the German thinker Friedrich Nietzsche(1844-1900). In his first major work, “The Birth of Tragedy from the Spirit of Music” (1872), the philosopher analyzes the culture of pre-Socratic Greece. Nietzsche claims that it was determined by the equality of two principles - Dionysian and Apollonian. Dionysus is the god of wine and intoxication, the god of life itself in its physical sense. Apollo is the patron of the arts. The cult of Apollo is a cult of reason and harmony. According to Nietzsche, starting from the times of Socrates and Plato, European culture took the path of suppressing the Dionysian principle with hypertrophied Apollinism. This led her to a deep crisis. As for everyday life, it turned out to be strictly regulated; there was no longer any room left for heroism and action. Everywhere there is a triumph of mediocrity. Mediocre people invented mass religions for themselves - Christianity and socialism. These religions are the religions of the offended and oppressed, the religions of compassion. According to Nietzsche, Christian morality, like socialist morality, only weakens the personal principle in man. Man is the path to the Superman, the one who stands above the “herd”, above the crowd with its prejudice and hypocrisy. The latter needs a special morality - the courageous morality of a fighter and warrior.

Nietzsche viewed life as " will to power"Every living thing, according to the philosopher, strives for power, while inequality of power creates natural differentiation. Life is a struggle of all against all, in which the strongest wins. Violence, according to Nietzsche, is a crystal clear manifestation of man’s innate will to power.

The main reason The philosopher saw the collapse of his contemporary civilization in the dominance of the intellect, in its predominance over the will. Where the intellect rises above the will, it is doomed to inevitable decay. That is why the mind must be subordinated to the will and work as an instrument of power.

Nietzsche tried to break the boundaries of purely theoretical knowledge and introduce practical life into it as a regulator. However, this regulator turned out to be nothing more than an instinctive activity directed by a blind irrational will to power.

Nietzsche was one of the first to speak about the onset of nihilism, i.e. a time when the Christian God lost its significance for European culture. The thinker saw the purpose of European man, sobered by nihilism, in courageously triumphing over the remnants of illusions.

The German philosopher-prophet was, of course, right in characterizing contemporary European culture as " thin apple peel over hot chaos ".

At the beginning of the 20th century. The teachings of the French philosopher, a representative of intuitionism, gained great popularity in Europe Henri Bergson(1859-1941), whose goal was to overcome the one-sidedness of positivism and traditional rationalistic metaphysics. The emphasis in it is on direct experience, with the help of which the absolute is supposedly comprehended. In metaphysics, according to Bergson, there are two central moments - true, concrete time (duration) and intuition that comprehends it as a truly philosophical method. Duration is understood by the philosopher as the basis of all conscious mental processes. Unlike the abstract time of science, it presupposes the constant creation of new forms, formation, interpenetration of past and present, unpredictability of future states, and freedom. Intuition as a way of comprehending duration is opposed to intellectual methods of cognition, which are powerless before the phenomena of consciousness and life, for the latter are subordinated to practical and social needs and are able to give knowledge only of the relative, and not of the absolute.

Man in the world and the world of man.

Existentialism (from Lat. exsistentia - existence), or

philosophy of existence , played and continues to play a significant role in the development of philosophy of the twentieth century. It is characterized by anti-scientist

orientation and is focused on problems related to man, the meaning of his existence in modern world.

However, the philosophy of existence does not represent some kind of monolithic, unified teaching. Each of its main representatives creates, as it were, his own teaching. Each of the existentialist philosophers focuses on some real side of human relations and gives them a convincing socio-psychological analysis. However, paying attention to one of the characteristics of these relations, he leaves aside others, considering them derivatives of it, and at the same time creates quite complex philosophical constructions. The great Russian writer-thinker F. M. Dostoevsky is rightly called the forerunner of existentialism as a philosophy of human existence. But a systematic ordering of the ideas of the philosophy of existence appears in German philosophers, primarily in the book “Being and Time” by M. Heidegger (1927), and in the three-volume “Philosophy” of K. Jaspers (1932), as well as by the French philosopher J.-P Sartre in his book “Being and Nothingness” (1943).

Existentialism is often divided into atheistic and religious. But this division is quite conditional, since all representatives of this movement focus on the existential problems common to them, first of all, the meaning of human existence in the world, and not just a person in general, but each individual. Big influence The existentialists were influenced by the Danish thinker S. Kierkegaard, who dissolved a specific person in an absolute idea, strictly logically and dialectically unfolding in history.

Existentialists use phenomenological method Edmund Husserl (1859 - 1938), changing it in accordance with his concept. For

For Husserl, it was important to find a reliable foundation on the basis of which it was possible to create philosophy as a strict science that would serve as the foundation for all other sciences and all human culture. The main thing in his method is direct discretion the essence of a thing in the process of experiencing this thing. This method is also called the method intentional analysis . Intention means the direction of consciousness towards an object. Consciousness is always consciousness about something. If I experience joy or sadness, then this joy and sadness will be about some object or event. There are no pointless experiences. A student and follower of Husserl, from whom he moved further and further, Martin Heidegger (1889 - 1976) takes not the categories of objective science, but subjective categories as a means of describing and interpreting being. existentials - emotionally charged concepts. Heidegger's basic existential “being-in-the-world” says that human existence and the world are inseparable from each other. Man is always in the world and the world is man’s world. The philosophy of existence tries to reveal the socio-ethical aspects of human existence. At the same time, German and French existentialism often emphasize the dark, pessimistic properties of existence, its absurd nature. Anxiety, fear, guilt, suffering invariably accompany a person in his life. Heidegger distinguishes between empirical fear, which concerns the everyday existence of man (Furht), and ontological fear, which lies at the core of his being (Andst). This is fear of nothing, death in its true sense, as well as fear due to the inability to find one’s personal meaning of being. Problems of life and death appear as the most important for humans.

Pessimistic motives characterizing human existence (

pessimistic existentialism ), prevail because existentialists developed their teachings in an era of major historical

shocks after the First World War and during and after the Second World War. The largely senseless deaths of millions of people on the battlefields and other tragedies of the 20th century, of course, affected this worldview. However, it should be noted that in the 60s, an optimistic version of existentialism also appeared in England. One of the main representatives is the writer and philosopher Colin Wilson. He considers Heidegger's philosophy to be nihilistic and pessimistic and therefore has no future for its development. Wilson talks about a new understanding of freedom, which consists of expanding and deepening consciousness through various methods of psychoanalysis, psychotherapy and meditation. Wilson wrote a six-volume work, The Outsider. An outsider is a prototype of a new person with

developed intellect, in contact with the sphere of the subconscious as a source of cosmic energy. Wilson's hero is busy searching for and realizing the meaning of human existence. K. Wilson himself writes that he develops optimistic existentialism .

Another important topic in the philosophy of existence is the topic of human communication, mutual communication or intersubjectivity. Man in existentialism initially appears as social creature. In alienated existence, for example, in a crowd, in a mass, everyone acts as the others do, following fashion, established patterns of communication, customs, and habits. Existentialists not only describe facts, but clearly express protest against mass, tabloid culture. However, it is characteristic that, speaking against mass culture, existentialism itself subsequently became a fashion and an element of that same mass culture.

Between life and death .

One of the most important problems considered by existentialists is the problem of being between life and death.

Every person experienced the death of loved ones; many, at the height of life or at its end, had to look death in the eyes; Every person necessarily thinks about death.

A person’s life can be filled with meaning, but it can suddenly lose this meaning for him.

To die with dignity when death comes, to fight it when there is a chance to live, to help other people in their mortal struggle - this is a great skill that any person needs. Life itself teaches him. The life and death of a person, the meaning of life - these are eternal themes for philosophy.

This problem is becoming more and more urgent. The global historical situation today has become borderline: both the death of a person and his survival are possible. The most important step that humanity must take and is already taking is the realization that a qualitatively new situation has emerged, borderline between human life and death. And in this regard, the task of philosophy is to help humanity overcome fear and survive. Unfortunately, how to do this - existentialists do not answer this question.

Man-technique .

According to many philosophers and thinkers of our time, the contradictions in the culture of the twentieth century stem from the contradiction between man and machine. In general, the past century has demonstrated to humanity that culture, as an integrating principle of social development, covers not only the sphere of spiritual, but, to an increasing extent, material production.

All the qualities of technogenic civilization, whose birth was marked just over three hundred years ago, were able to fully manifest themselves in our century. At this time, civilizational processes were as dynamic as possible and were of decisive importance for culture. Between the traditional humanitarian culture of the European West and the new, so-called “scientific culture”, derived from the scientific and technological progress of the 20th century, a catastrophic gap is growing every year. Enmity between two cultures can lead to the death of humanity.

This conflict most acutely affected the cultural self-determination of an individual. Technogenic civilization could realize its capabilities only through the complete subordination of the forces of nature to the human mind. This form of interaction is inevitably associated with the widespread use of scientific and technological achievements, which helped the contemporary of our century to feel his dominance over nature and at the same time deprived him of the opportunity to feel the joy of harmonious coexistence with it.

Machine production has cosmological significance. The kingdom of technology is a special form of existence that arose quite recently and forced us to reconsider the place and prospects of human existence in the world. The machine is a significant part of culture; in the 20th century it develops gigantic territories and takes over masses of people, in contrast to past eras, where cultures covered a small space and a small number of people, built on the principle of “selection of qualities.” In the 20th century everything becomes global, everything extends to the entire human mass. The will to expansion inevitably brings broad sections of the population into historical life. This new form of organization of mass life destroys the beauty of the old culture, the old way of life and, depriving the cultural process of originality and individuality, forms a faceless pseudo-culture.

Conclusion:

The twentieth century forced many scientists to view culture as the opposite of civilization. If civilization always strives for steady movement forward, its path is to climb the ladder of progress, then culture carries out its development by abandoning unidirectional linear movement forward. Culture does not use the previous spiritual heritage as a springboard for new achievements for the reason that it cannot abandon the cultural fund in whole or in part. On the contrary, involvement with various incarnations of tradition is of great importance in the cultural process. Culture can only be built on the basis of spiritual continuity, only taking into account the internal dialogue of cultural types.

Today, the development of the principle of dialogue of cultures is a real opportunity to overcome the deepest contradictions of the spiritual crisis, to avoid an ecological dead end and atomic night. A real example of the consolidation of different cultural worlds is the union that formed towards the end of the 20th century in Europe between European nations. The possibility of a similar union between vast cultural regions can only arise through dialogue that preserves cultural differences in all their richness and diversity and leads to mutual understanding and cultural contacts.

List of used literature:

1. Ortega y Gasset H. “Aesthetics. Philosophy of culture", "Art", M., 1991.

2. Aisina F. O., Andreeva I. A. “History of world culture”, “Enlightenment”, M., 1998.

3. Philosophy. Tutorial. Ed. Kokhanovsky V.P., R/Don., “Phoenix”, 1998.

4. "Basics" modern philosophy" Ed. "Doe." St. Petersburg, 1997

Introduction______________________________________________________________2

General characteristics of modern Western philosophy________________3

Man in the world and the world of man_______________________________________________6

Between life and death_________________________________________________8

Analysis of the “Man-Technology” relationship________________________________8

Conclusion______________________________________________________________10

List of used literature_________________________________11

Introduction:

In the second half of the 19th century, the transition to non-classical philosophy was gradually being prepared, a departure from the classics was taking place, and a change in principles, models, and paradigms of philosophizing was taking place. Classical philosophy, from a modern point of view, is characterized as a certain general orientation, a general tendency or style of thinking, characteristic as a whole of approximately a three-hundred-year period of development of Western thought. The mental structure of the classics was permeated with an optimistic sense of the presence of a natural order, rationally understandable in knowledge. Classical philosophy believed that reason is the main and best tool for transforming human life. Knowledge and rational cognition were proclaimed as the decisive force that allows one to hope for the solution of all problems that face a person.

Classical philosophical constructions did not satisfy many philosophers due, as they believed, to the loss of man in them. The specificity, the diversity of human subjective manifestations, they believed, is not “captured” by the methods of reason and science. In contrast to rationalism, they began to develop a non-classical philosophy, in which they began to represent life (philosophy of life) and human existence (existentialism) as the primary reality. There was a “destruction” of the mind: instead of reason, will (A. Schopenhauer, F. Nietzsche), instincts (psychoanalysis of S. Freud), etc. came to the fore. In non-classical philosophy, the desire of philosophical classics to present society as an objective formation similar to natural objects was questioned. The new image of social reality, characteristic of the philosophy of the twentieth century, is associated with the concept of “intersubjectivity”. It is designed to overcome the division into subject and object characteristic of classical social philosophy. Intersubjectivity is based on the idea of a special kind of reality that develops in the relationships between people. At its origins, this reality is the interaction of “I” and “Other”.

General characteristics of modern Western philosophy.

In general, Western philosophy of the second half of the 19th-20th centuries. represents a wide variety of different movements, schools, concepts, problems and methods, often opposing each other.

Since the middle of the 19th century, the rationalistic vector of classical modern European philosophy, through the efforts of A. Schopenhauer, S. Kierkegaard and F. Nietzsche, was opposed by the phenomenon irrational- unconscious processes and emotional-volitional acts. Let us note that classical thought, for a number of reasons discussed above, did not focus attention on the problems of will, intuition, spiritual insight, instinct, the will to live and the will to power, i.e. on those that did not obey the laws of logic and reason. The philosophical opponents of classical rationalism tried to fill this intellectual “gap.”

The founder of European irrationalism is Arthur Schopenhauer(1788-1860), who systematically outlined his views in the work “The World as Will and Idea” (1818). The world, according to Schopenhauer, can be discovered by man both as will and as representation. Will- this is the absolute beginning of all being, a certain cosmic and biological force in nature that creates the world and man. With the advent of the latter, the world appears as an idea, as a human picture. Man is a slave of the will, because in everything he serves not himself, but the Absolute. The will forces a person to live, no matter how meaningless his existence may be. It lures the individual with phantoms of happiness and temptations such as, for example, sexual pleasure. In fact, a person has only an indirect significance for the will, since he serves as a means for its preservation. A person has only one way out - to extinguish the will to live. This truth, according to Schopenhauer, was discovered by ancient Indian sages, who expressed it in the Buddhist doctrine of nirvana.

Schopenhauer identified two types of people who have ceased to be slaves of the will: saints in earthly life and geniuses in art. According to Schopenhauer, genius is the ability to remain in pure contemplation. A person immersed in such a state is no longer an individual, but a pure, weak-willed, timeless subject of knowledge. An ordinary person is not capable of this kind of contemplation. He pays attention to objects due to the fact that they relate to his will. Therefore, he must be content either with unsatisfied desires, or, if they are satisfied, with boredom. At the same time, Schopenhauer emphasized, every person has the three highest blessings of life - health, youth and freedom. As long as they exist, the individual does not realize or value them; he only realizes them if they are lost, since these goods, according to Schopenhauer, are only negative quantities.

Schopenhauer was the first in the 19th century. gave a philosophical justification for pessimism. However, his reasoning about the meaninglessness of human existence did not seem convincing enough. European society continued to look forward optimistically, the ideal of progress not yet overshadowed by future shocks. The fame of a true thinker-prophet would come to Schopenhauer much later.

The philosopher saw the main reason for the collapse of his contemporary civilization in the dominance of the intellect, in its predominance over the will. Where the intellect rises above the will, it is doomed to inevitable decay. That is why the mind must be subordinated to the will and work as an instrument of power.

The German philosopher-prophet was, of course, right in characterizing contemporary European culture as " thin apple peel over hot chaos".

At the beginning of the 20th century. The teachings of the French philosopher, a representative of intuitionism, gained great popularity in Europe Henri Bergson(1859-1941), whose goal was to overcome the one-sidedness of positivism and traditional rationalistic metaphysics. The emphasis in it is on direct experience, with the help of which the absolute is supposedly comprehended. In metaphysics, according to Bergson, there are two central moments - true, concrete time (duration) and intuition that comprehends it as a truly philosophical method. Duration is understood by the philosopher as the basis of all conscious mental processes. Unlike the abstract time of science, it presupposes the constant creation of new forms, formation, interpenetration of past and present, unpredictability of future states, and freedom. Intuition as a way of comprehending duration, it is opposed to intellectual methods of cognition, which are powerless before the phenomena of consciousness and life, for the latter are subordinated to practical and social needs and are capable of providing knowledge only of the relative, and not the absolute.

Man in the world and the world of man.

Existentialism (from Lat. exsistentia - existence), or

philosophy of existence , played and continues to play a significant role in the development of philosophy of the twentieth century. It is characterized by anti-scientist

orientation and is focused on problems related to man, the meaning of his existence in the modern world.

However, the philosophy of existence does not represent some kind of monolithic, unified teaching. Each of its main representatives creates, as it were, his own teaching. Each of the existentialist philosophers focuses on some real side of human relations and gives them a convincing socio-psychological analysis. However, paying attention to one of the characteristics of these relations, he leaves aside others, considering them derivatives of it, and at the same time creates quite complex philosophical constructions. The great Russian writer-thinker F. M. Dostoevsky is rightly called the forerunner of existentialism as a philosophy of human existence. But a systematic ordering of the ideas of the philosophy of existence appears among German philosophers, primarily in the book “Being and Time” by M. Heidegger (1927), and in the three-volume “Philosophy” of K. Jaspers (1932), as well as in the French philosopher J.- P Sartre in his book “Being and Nothingness” (1943).

Existentialism is often divided into atheistic and religious. But this division is quite conditional, since all representatives of this movement focus on the existential problems common to them, first of all, the meaning of human existence in the world, and not just a person in general, but each individual. The Danish thinker S. Kierkegaard had a great influence on the existentialists, who dissolved a specific person in an absolute idea, strictly logically and dialectically unfolding in history.

Existentialists use phenomenological method Edmund Husserl (1859 - 1938), changing it in accordance with his concept. For

For Husserl, it was important to find a reliable foundation on the basis of which it was possible to create philosophy as a strict science that would serve as the foundation for all other sciences and all human culture. The main thing in his method is the direct perception of the essence of a thing in the process of experiencing this thing. This method is also called the method intentional analysis . Intention means the direction of consciousness towards an object. Consciousness is always consciousness about something. If I experience joy or sadness, then this joy and sadness will be about some object or event. There are no pointless experiences. A student and follower of Husserl, from whom he moved further and further, Martin Heidegger (1889 - 1976) takes not the categories of objective science, but subjective categories as a means of describing and interpreting being. existentials - emotionally charged concepts. Heidegger's basic existential “being-in-the-world” says that human existence and the world are inseparable from each other. Man is always in the world and the world is man’s world. The philosophy of existence tries to reveal the socio-ethical aspects of human existence. At the same time, German and French existentialism often emphasize the dark, pessimistic properties of existence, its absurd nature. Anxiety, fear, guilt, suffering invariably accompany a person in his life. Heidegger distinguishes between empirical fear, which concerns the everyday existence of man (Furht), and ontological fear, which lies at the core of his being (Andst). This is fear of nothing, death in its true sense, as well as fear due to the inability to find one’s personal meaning of being. Problems of life and death appear as the most important for humans.

Pessimistic motives characterizing human existence (

pessimistic existentialism ), prevail because existentialists developed their teachings in an era of major historical

Another important topic in the philosophy of existence is the topic of human communication, mutual communication or intersubjectivity. In existentialism, man initially acts as a social being. In alienated existence, for example, in a crowd, in a mass, everyone acts as the others do, following fashion, established patterns of communication, customs, and habits. Existentialists not only describe facts, but clearly express protest against mass, tabloid culture. However, it is characteristic that, speaking against mass culture, existentialism itself subsequently became a fashion and an element of that same mass culture.

Between life and death .

One of the most important problems considered by existentialists is the problem of being between life and death.

Every person experienced the death of loved ones; many, at the height of life or at its end, had to look death in the eyes; Every person necessarily thinks about death.

A person’s life can be filled with meaning, but it can suddenly lose this meaning for him.

Man-technique .

Conclusion:

List of used literature:

Ortega y Gasset H. “Aesthetics. Philosophy of Culture”, “Iskusstvo”, M., 1991.

Aisina F. O., Andreeva I. A. “History of world culture”, “Enlightenment”, M., 1998.

Philosophy. Tutorial. Ed. Kokhanovsky V.P., R/Don., “Phoenix”, 1998.

"Fundamentals of modern philosophy". Ed. "Doe."

St. Petersburg, 1997 person... Conclusion Russian philosophy combines both, and Eastern culture, and combines both- initially...

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation

Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution

higher professional education

Ural State Economic University

Department of Economics and Law

CONTROLJOB

in the discipline "Philosophy"

Topic: The problem of human freedom in philosophy

Completed by: student gr. E and P-10 (5.5)

Klyukina K.V.

Checked by: Associate Professor

Tikhomirova A.M.

Kamensk-Uralsky - 2011

INTRODUCTION

CONCLUSION

INTRODUCTION

Freedom is one of the main philosophical categories, characterizing the essence of a person and his existence, consisting of the individual’s ability to think and act in accordance with his ideas and desires, and not as a result of internal or external coercion. It was developed in such philosophical problems as free will and human responsibility, the possibilities of being free, and the understanding of freedom as a force regulating social relations. No philosophical problem, probably, has had such a great social and political resonance in the history of society as the problem of freedom.

Everything in the world is subject to forces that act immutably and inevitably. These forces also subordinate human activity. If this necessity is not comprehended, not realized by a person, he is its slave, but if it is cognized, then the person acquires “the ability to make a decision with knowledge of the matter.” This expresses human free will.

In the formation and formation of a person’s worldview culture, philosophy has always played a special role associated with its centuries-old experience of critically reflective thinking about deep values and life orientations. Philosophers at all times and eras have taken upon themselves the function of clarifying the problems of human existence, each time re-posing the question of what a person is, how he should live, what to focus on, how to behave during periods of cultural crises.

The same is true with the concept of human freedom. Philosophers of different eras put different meanings into this concept. For example, in classical Greek philosophy freedom was considered an innate property of a person if he was lucky enough to be born into the family of a full citizen. Whereas in the philosophy of the New Age, greater emphasis is placed on the spiritual liberation of the human personality.

1. THE CONCEPT OF FREEDOM. FREEDOM POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE

freedom philosophical will spiritual

The problem of freedom is one of the important and complex problems; it has worried many thinkers throughout the centuries-old history of mankind. We can say that this is a global human problem, a kind of riddle that many generations of people have been trying to solve from century to century. The very concept of freedom sometimes contains the most unexpected content; this concept is very multifaceted, capacious, historically changeable and contradictory.

In each era, the problem of freedom is posed and solved differently, often in opposite meanings, depending on the nature of social relations, on the level of development of productive forces, on needs and historical tasks. The philosophy of human freedom has been the subject of research by various directions: Kant and Hegel, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, Sartre and Jaspers, Berdyaev and Solovyov.

Freedom is a state of mind, a philosophical concept that reflects the inalienable right of a person to realize his human will. Without freedom, a person cannot realize the wealth of his inner world and his capabilities.

Freedom is one of the indisputable universal values, but freedom is not absolute. If the individual is given the right to control his own destiny, an age of chaos will begin. After all, the instincts of self-will, destructiveness and selfishness are strong in him. Freedom is, of course, good, but it is also wonderful when a person voluntarily submits to the general will and consciously moderates his own impulses.

Freedom is positive and negative.

Some philosophers have tried to distinguish between positive freedom, or the freedom to do, and negative freedom, the freedom from. Roosevelt's message mentioned two positive freedoms (freedom to speak and worship) and two negative freedoms (freedom from fear and want). However, the difference between freedom to do and freedom from is not very big. philosophical significance. After all, freedom to do and freedom “from” are often just two sides of the same coin. Thus, in a social or political context, freedom from censorship means the same thing as freedom to say and write what you see fit, freedom from persecution for your religion means the same thing as freedom to worship whom you see fit, or not worship at all. It follows that the main difference between freedom to do and freedom from is usually purely verbal.

2. FREE WILL AND NECESSITY - DIFFERENT CONCEPTS

The problem of freedom is one of the most difficult moral problems facing man and humanity. What does this concept mean? How free is a person in his actions? How is his freedom limited, and what are its consequences? Philosophy and ethics have traditionally resolved all these questions from the standpoint of the relationship between freedom and necessity.

Necessity for a moral subject is those external conditions and circumstances in which he is forced to act. In this case, both objective factors and life situations (civil war, market prices, earthquakes), as well as established norms and traditions of morality and even the whims of another person, prescribing a certain type of behavior for the subject, can act as a necessity. To what extent is a person free within the limits of the necessity given to him?

What is the nature of “necessity”? Necessity, a number of philosophers believe, exists in nature and society in the form of objective, i.e. laws independent of human consciousness. In other words, necessity is an expression of a natural, objectively determined course of events. Supporters of this position do not believe that everything in the world, especially in public life, strictly and unambiguously defined, they do not deny the existence of accidents. But the general natural line of development, deviated by chance in one direction or another, will still make its way.

In addition to objective natural necessity, a person is encouraged to act one way and not another by certain social conditions. There are norms of morality and law, traditions and public opinion. It is under their influence that a model of “proper behavior” is formed. Taking into account these rules, a person acts and acts, makes certain decisions.

Some religious and philosophical teachings claim that freedom as such does not exist, and that what is usually called freedom is only an illusion, an appearance. Denial of the existence of human freedom leads to fatalism (from the Latin “fatum” - “rock”, “fate”), the doctrine of the universal predestination of both processes occurring in nature and society, and all human actions. Fatalism can be considered in two varieties : religious-idealistic and materialistic. Religious-idealistic fatalism is based on concepts of fate or fate that have a supernatural origin. ancient greek mythology fate was seen as something that rules over all beings; even the gods were forced to obey fate and could not violate its instructions.

In the teachings of monotheistic religions (Christianity and Islam), the concept of “fate” is embodied in the principle of Divine Providence (the doctrine of providentialism). Providence determines everything that happens and directs the ongoing processes towards the good goal set by God - the triumph of goodness and justice. Providence in its essence is irrational and can only be comprehended by man to a small extent. In Christianity, the doctrine of providentialism, according to most theologians, does not completely deny human freedom. Man is endowed, unlike animals, with free will and is quite independently capable of making a choice between good and evil. However, a person's choice must be in favor of what God requires. Otherwise, a person is inclined to sin. The duality of freedom is emphasized: freedom can become a way of communion with God, but at the same time freedom can lead a person to the path of sin. God knows in advance what a person will do, but still the person makes his own choice. According to this teaching, God predetermined the fate of every person, predetermining for him what he would come to: salvation or destruction. No human effort can correct this decision of God, which is incomprehensible to the human mind. Evidence of the chosenness or non-chosenness of a particular person to salvation is the success of a person’s actions in earthly life.

The second type of fatalism is materialistic fatalism. The ontological basis of materialistic fatalism can be considered the idea of determinism. Determinism is the doctrine of the universal certainty of objects and processes in the universe. First of all, they mean causal certainty. From the point of view of determinists, everything that exists is a network of events in which each event turns out to be a consequence of some cause, but at the same time is the cause for some subsequent events. It is postulated that the connection between cause and effect is necessary: when the cause occurs, the effect inevitably appears. This model of determinism received its most consistent expression in the views of the French astronomer and mathematician Pierre Simon Laplace (1749 - 1827). Laplace determinism argued that since all phenomena of the universe are determined by each other through a network of necessary cause-and-effect interactions, it is possible, if absolutely all factors are taken into account, to accurately calculate the state of things at any moment in the past or future. Even the image of Laplace's demon arose - a creature who, possessing perfect intelligence, could gain complete knowledge of reality. Laplace determinism was based on the idea that there are only dynamic laws in the universe that unambiguously determine natural processes. Such consistent materialistic determinism led to the denial of freedom and fatalism. Man acted here not of his own will, but under the influence of mechanical particles. This type of determinism was common among representatives of mechanistic materialism in the 18th century. However, during the revolution in natural science at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. it has been proven that in the world there are not only dynamic, but also statistical patterns in which there is no strict connection of cause and effect, allowing one to accurately determine the position and state of an object. To some extent, the discovery of statistical regularities provided justification for criticism of the mechanistic model of determination. So, materialistic fatalism is based on ideas about the cause-and-effect determination of all processes in the universe. Human behavior is determined by the influence of material particles on him in accordance with mechanical laws. Freedom turns out to be nothing more than an appearance (an epiphenomenon) that has no real basis. A person thinks that he himself determines his actions, but in fact, he is only subject to the influence of the environment.

The position of recognizing the complete and absolute freedom of man. received its most vivid expression in the philosophy of existentialism. Existence (personal existence of a person) is declared to be initially free and thus fundamentally different from the existence of other things, phenomena and beings that are subject to necessity. Let us dwell on the reflections on freedom of the most prominent existentialist thinker Jean-Paul Sartre. Sartre taught that man lacks any original essence that determines his existence. This is precisely the guarantee of the freedom of a person who independently creates his own essence. Human freedom, according to Sartre, is complete and absolute. A person is doomed to freedom and cannot lose it, no matter how desirable it may be for him in some circumstances. There cannot be any degrees of freedom (“more free”, “less free”). A person is free always and under any circumstances. However, Sartre connects freedom with a person's responsibility for his actions. The higher the freedom, the higher the responsibility. Since human freedom is absolute, then human responsibility is equally complete. We are responsible for everything that happens in the world. With each of our actions we set a model of behavior for others and are responsible for further life path these people. A person should be able to use his freedom not to the detriment of others, but to balance his actions with their further consequences.

The opposite concept to freedom is necessity. It implies the unambiguous predetermination of the occurrence of something, the absence of variability. Necessity has long been associated with the principle of determinism and did not initially imply freedom. The thinkers of modern times began to assert that freedom is an expression of necessity. B. Spinoza also put forward the thesis about freedom as perceived need. Using the means of dialectics, Hegel showed the deep nature of the connection between freedom and necessity. Marxism also adopted a similar understanding of freedom as a cognized and realized necessity. Of course, a person is not initially free, but, being a rational and conscious being, he is capable of cognizing the laws of existence, which reveal the need to use open laws to more effectively carry out his activities. In this understanding of freedom, the emphasis is on a person’s ability to understand the world. In accordance with the attitude adopted in the worldview of the New Age, man's knowledge of reality increases man's power over nature and, accordingly, makes him more free. A person’s achievement of freedom turns out to be only a manifestation of the necessity that permeates the entire universe. A person can become free only when he carries out his activities in accordance with the correctly understood laws of nature and society. Otherwise, even if a person acts willfully, it cannot be called true freedom.

3. DIFFERENT FACETS OF FREEDOM: POLITICAL, ECONOMIC, SPIRITUAL, THEIR RELATIONSHIP

Freedom cannot be reduced only to what is most often spoken and written about mass media- to political freedom. In reality, freedom is a multifaceted, multifaceted concept.

We are talking primarily about economic freedom, that is, to a large extent, about freedom from exploitation, which in turn also cannot be reduced only to unequal relations between the owners of the means of production and the owners of labor power deprived of them. Unequivalent exchange has been and remains characteristic of relations between the region of developed countries and the third world today, and it is often found in relations between city and countryside. The transition to patriarchy, which meant the world-historical defeat of women, testified to the emergence of another type of exploitation - discrimination against half of humanity, restrictions on women’s rights in owning property, in obtaining an education and profession, in remuneration, etc.

But economic freedom in its scope significantly exceeds freedom from exploitation, including, in particular, such an important point as freedom to make economic decisions, freedom of economic action. An individual (and only he) has the right to decide which type of activity is preferable for him (entrepreneurship, hired labor, etc.), which form of ownership participation seems most appropriate to him, in which industry and in which region of the country he will be active.

Political freedom is extremely important, that is, a set of civil rights that ensures the normal functioning of an individual. At the same time, political freedom cannot be considered only as a means of realizing other freedoms - economic, ideological, etc. Being a means, political freedom at the same time has intrinsic value, since a civilized society (especially a modern one) is unthinkable without universal and equal suffrage, a fair national-state structure, and the direct participation of the people in resolving issues that affect them. The need for political comfort provided by democracy is an integral feature of the mentality of a modern civilized person.

Another aspect of social comfort is ensured by spiritual freedom - freedom to choose a worldview, ideology, and freedom to propagate them. A special place in the system of spiritual freedom is occupied by what is called “freedom of conscience” both in official documents and in social science literature. Usually, when using this term, we mean the freedom of a person to profess any religion or not to profess any (to be an atheist), as well as the right to religious or atheistic propaganda.

And yet, freedom is only one side that characterizes the social status of an individual. It cannot be absolute, and therefore is relative. The relative nature of freedom is reflected in the responsibility of the individual to other individuals and society as a whole. The dependence between freedom and responsibility of the individual is directly proportional: the more freedom society gives a person, the greater his responsibility for using these freedoms.

CONCLUSION

A review of various aspects of human freedom allows us to conclude that freedom is inherent in every person as an opportunity to project their intentions into the outside world. However, the real existence of freedom presupposes its awareness by man. In other words, a person is free to the extent that he is aware of what freedom is, what opportunities and what consequences are associated with it. Therefore, human development does not mean the emergence of some qualitatively new abilities or characteristics in him, but is associated with the development of the consciousness of freedom. The person will be considered completely developed person when he finally realizes what it means to be free. But for now he is only at the beginning of this path.

LIST OF SOURCES USED

1. Maksimov A.M. Dimensions of freedom. - Ekb: Publishing house "Diamant", 1994. - 151 p.

2. Berdyaev. N. A Philosophy of Freedom. The meaning of creativity. - M.: Pravda, 1989. - 608 p.

3. Erich Fromm. Escape from freedom. - M.: AST, 2009. - 288 p.

4 Spirkin A.G. Philosophy: textbook. - M.: Gardariki, 2001. - 816 p.

Posted on Allbest.ru

...

Similar documents

The concept of freedom and personality in Ancient China. Man and the world in Russian culture and philosophy. The European tradition of perception of these concepts in the era of antiquity, during the Middle Ages. New European worldview and understanding of the issue of human free will.

abstract, added 08/23/2013

The problem of freedom in philosophy. Analysis of transformations of freedom in the history of classical philosophical teachings: ontological components of freedom, epistemological aspects and transformations of freedom. Analysis of social and existential transformations of freedom.

dissertation, added 02/20/2008

Work by E. Fromm "The Spiritual Essence of Man." Man as a product of the cultural conditions that shape him. The problem of human freedom. Consideration of free will. The act of self-liberation in the process of decision. A person’s actions, his inclinations and internal forces.

book analysis, added 06/25/2011

A holistic person is a god-man in N.A.’s concept of personal freedom. Berdyaev. Interpretation of the nature of the creative act. Creativity as the realization of freedom, the path to the harmonization of existence. Understanding the purpose of man is the moral core of Berdyaev’s philosophy.

abstract, added 05/11/2015

The concept of freedom, the interpretation of its idea in different eras(Middle Ages, Renaissance, Reformation). External freedom and a person’s refusal of something external to him. Inner freedom and development of the individual's personality. Causes and mechanisms of escape from freedom.

course work, added 06/05/2012

Becoming philosophical views ON THE. Berdyaev. The idea of the God-man in the concept of personal freedom. Creativity as the realization of freedom, the path to the harmonization of existence. Freedom as a philosophical category of human essence.

course work, added 05/31/2008

Personality as an object and subject of social life. The concept of "free will" in the history of philosophy. The problem of freedom and responsibility in various philosophical concepts. Free will and morality. The content of the process of formation of the social “I”.

test, added 12/04/2010

Formulation of the problem of human alienation, his freedom and creativity in the philosophy of Nikolai Aleksandrovich Berdyaev. The range of problems considered by Russian existential thinkers. Freedom as the most important sign of the spirit. The torment of the problem of salvation.

abstract, added 12/20/2015

Understanding freedom as one of the universal and national values. Philosophical and methodological understanding of freedom. Understanding freedom from a philosophical point of view. Freedom in Russian philosophy. Pedagogical understanding of freedom and its development.

thesis, added 12/18/2008

Freedom as one of the philosophical categories, its main characteristics and transformation in the process of evolution of society. Studying the essence of freedom from the perspective of the directions of voluntarism and fatalism. Objective and subjective factors in the development of society.

§ 1 Main problems and features of modern Western philosophy. It is characteristic of modern Western philosophy great amount schools, trends, concepts, therefore, it is advisable to analyze this period in the history of philosophy according to the main problems being developed. Moreover, with all the abundance philosophical schools and directions, many of them have common features, and this also allows for a certain classification. The merit of Western philosophy is that it raised a number of questions that did not find proper resolution in the previous period. Such problems include the following:

- the problem of human existence in the world

*existentialism K. Jaspers (1883-1969), M. Heidegger (1889=1976), J.P. Sartre (1905-1980), A. Camus (1913-1960);

*pragmatism C. Pierce (1839-1914), W. James (1842-1910), J. Dewey (1859-1952);

*personalism H. W. Kerr (1857-1931), W. Stern (1871-1938), R. T. Flewelling (1871-1960), E. Sh. Brightman (1884-1953).

- the problem of language, the meaning of terms, the specifics of philosophy

*neopositivism R. Carnap (1891-1970);

*philosophy of linguistic analysis Wittgenstein (1889-1951);

- problems of science development

*critical rationalism K. Popper (1902-1994)

*postpositivism I. Lakatos (1922-1974), T. Kuhn (born 1922), P. Feyerabend (born 1924);

- problems of historical development

*theories of post-industrial society, welfare society D. Bell (b. 1919), A. Toffler (b. 1928), W. Rostow;

*theories of the circulation of locally closed civilizations O. Spengler (1880-1936), A. Toynbee (1889-1975);

- problems understanding

*hermeneutics of consciousness F. Schleiermacher ((1868-1934), W. Dilthey (1833-1911)

*phenomenology, hermeneutics of being E. Husserl (1859-1938), H. G. Gadamer.

All of the above areas are characterized by some features that are worth mentioning separately.

First, the principles of classical philosophy are subject to critical revision. The latter was reasonable in its orientation: it believed in the power of reason and science, and considered reason to be an effective means of cognition and transformation of reality. Knowledge was assumed only as clear, demonstrative, logically coherent, corresponding to the external world. Reason itself was considered in its supra-individual form, setting a rational order for nature, which is revealed to the individual mind (Hegel). In the 20th century, philosophers drew attention to the fact that the spirit includes non-rational elements (instincts, intuition, emotional and volitional acts). They cannot be reduced to intelligible, rational moments of our knowledge. Irrationalistic trends in philosophy emerge: Freudianism, intuitionism, hermeneutics, Bergson’s “philosophy of life.”

Secondly, despite some irrationality of modern philosophical systems, they adapt and are guided by modern scientific knowledge. Even theological systems try to assimilate data modern science. Yes, representative neo-Thomism(modern interpretation philosophical teaching Thomas Aquinas) P. Teilhard de Chardin (1881-1955), scientist, philosopher and theologian, attempted a synthesis of scientific and religious knowledge to explain the laws of the evolution of the Universe and the emergence of man.

Thirdly, in the early - mid-20th century, some philosophical trends (neopositivism, pragmatism) declared ideological problems to be pseudoscientific, and philosophy to be a meaningless form of knowledge. For the second half of the century, such an anti-philosophical orientation is no longer characteristic; numerous connections between philosophy and science are recognized and analyzed, but the status of philosophy as a worldview discipline, and not a scientific one, has already been determined.

Fourthly, modern philosophers are not satisfied with classical systems due to the loss of a specific person in them. In a person, first of all, his essence was considered, and even that from the side of the universal (spirit, universal human thinking); man's diverse subjective manifestations remained outside of analysis. Non-classical modern philosophy takes as its basis life in its diverse manifestations (philosophy of life), the existence of an individual person (existentialism). The technique used by classical philosophy, namely, the reduction of every individual, individual to the general, is replaced by consideration of a specific individual in specific life circumstances. The philosophy of essences is replaced by the philosophy of existence.

Fifthly , in a number of philosophical systems that consider changes in society, theories appear that abandon the idea of progress. It is also characteristic that they strive to present society as an integral system. As a rule, they deny the determining role of economic relations in the development of society and recognize the influence of many factors in social processes. This, for example, is the “theory of local civilizations” by A. Toynbee, the idea of cultural supersystems by P. Sorokin. Particular attention is paid to phenomena specific to our time - scientific and technological revolution, the unification of life in different societies, the increasing role of various technologies in people's lives. These are the theory of a unified industrial society, the theory of convergence.

§ 2. Main trends of modern Western philosophy. Let us dwell in more detail on the most significant problems of modern Western philosophy, primarily on the problems of science, scientific knowledge, and ways of knowing. They, according to Western philosophers, should be reinterpreted, because rational and rational methods of cognition must be supplemented by non-rational aspects. This was started by the positivists E. Mach (1838) and R. Avenarius (1838-1916). This movement in philosophy is called second positivism.

The main point from which Mach and Avenarius start is the separation of the subject and the object of study. The subject of research exists outside of me, but the object of research? What is he like? It is obvious that the cognitive actions of the subject, the means of observation, influence the image of the studied natural object. One might even say that we see only what our means of observation and knowledge allow us to see (this thought in Kant was expressed in the separation of “things in themselves” and “things for us”). What is there then? scientific concepts in essence? It can be assumed that they are nothing more than symbols for describing our sensory experience, organizing and ordering our cognition. Then the content of the concept is a complex of sensations, “marked” by him. There are elements of truth in such reasoning of the Machists, and there are also some productive moments. For example, the content of knowledge was associated with experience and practice. This is where it started pragmatism.

Pragmatism became most widespread in the 20s of our century. The most prominent representatives of this trend are I. Peirce, W. James and D. Dewey. According to Peirce, the concept of an object is achieved by considering the practical results obtained in interactions with that object. Conversely, our beliefs (knowledge) are the rules for our action. Then, according to W. James, to find out the meaning of a statement means to determine the method of action and behavior that causes this statement. The meaning of the concept of “gravity” is revealed in the direct acts of “pulling” us to the Earth.

What then is meant by reality? The reality that I can judge is experience, any content of consciousness, the “stream of consciousness.” Experience is not given to us initially; it changes depending on our goals. Then all objects of knowledge are formed by our cognitive efforts in the course of solving life problems. And the functions of knowledge are to overcome doubt before action, to choose means to achieve a goal, to solve a “problematic situation.”

James generally believes that the truth of our knowledge is determined by its usefulness for our behavior. What is true is what serves the success of action, what is useful, gives an effective result. Truth is the efficiency of an idea. But, obviously, it is not only the truths of science that “work” in this sense. The idea of God must also be recognized as true. The idea of the existence of a higher power helps humanity realize the highest ideals of morality, goodness and love, and to some extent organizes the coexistence of people in society.

In light of the above, it is necessary to reconsider the tasks of philosophy. It should not “contemplate” and comprehend some first principles of existence, it should become a method for solving empirically fixed life problems arising in a constantly changing world. Dewey believes that philosophy arose not from wonder at the world, but from social conflicts and stress.

Dewey's position is also called instrumentalism. He saw the tasks of philosophy in such an organization social existence that would improve people's lives. Science and reason should help her with this. Scientific ideas and theories act as intellectual tools for understanding and effectively overcoming various life problems. Those that are effective, successful, lead to the goals set are true. Moreover, the choice of theories should not be subjective (depend on the desires of the subject), it should correspond to the nature of the problem - the means are determined by the goal.

Of course, there are some logical stretches in the concept of pragmatism: practice turns from a criterion of truth into the content of truth; The specificity of science, its difference from other spiritual formations in culture, for example, from religion, is lost. But the influence of pragmatism on politics (Dewey was a remarkable political thinker), on pedagogy and psychology is undeniable.

The status of philosophy and science is decided differently analytical philosophy . This direction is represented by a large number of schools ( logical positivism or neopositivism, philosophy of linguistic analysis, postpositivism), but all of them are united by a special interpretation of the subject and tasks of philosophy, the idea of creating a “scientific” philosophy in the likeness of natural science knowledge. The ideal of a scientifically oriented and scientifically organized philosophy was formed under the impression of the tremendous successes of science of the 20th century, especially mathematics and physics.

One of the founders of neopositivism, Bertrand Russell, is confident that reliable knowledge about the world is given to us directly, primarily in sensory data. Knowledge is expressed in language, so it is logical to analyze linguistic structures. Ludwig Wittgenstein, founder of the philosophy of linguistic analysis, in " Philosophical studies” offers an unconventional understanding of the language. Common sense believes that a word corresponds to the object to which it refers. For example, the phrase “my hand” corresponds to an object - a hand as a part of my body. But Wittgenstein shows that the correspondence of a word to the designated object is not always obvious. For example, a paralyzed person may refer to his caregiver as “with his hands.” According to Wittgenstein, the meaning of a word is determined by its use. That's why the same word gets different meanings in its use by children and adults, scientists and non-scientists. You are probably familiar with youth and professional slang, and there are territorial dialects. Wittgenstein believes that language is rather a form of play activity, a form of life. The rules of the game are not set initially; they are formed and learned within a certain community of people. The meaning of words is constructed in the process of life, in the language game. Philosophy must reveal these rules of the game, clarify the ways of using words, and remove linguistic nonsense. The object of philosophical analysis is natural language. Based on the above, we can say that Wittgenstein proposed a new way of philosophizing and even defined the character of Western philosophy. But what about the fate of philosophy itself?

The world of facts and events is described by a set of scientific proposals. The meaning of the sentences is facts. All sentences are generalizations of some elementary sentences that can be correlated directly with facts. If such a correlation is impossible (for example, mystical knowledge), then this is not knowledge at all. Philosophy, unlike science, consists of proposals that cannot be correlated with facts, therefore ideological problems in general are pseudo-problems. How can such concepts as “absolute spirit”, “pure mind”, “matter” be correlated with experimental data? Therefore, philosophical propositions are neither true nor false: they are meaningless. And the task of philosophy is not to provide information about the world, but to clarify our thoughts with the help of logic. Philosophy is not a system of knowledge, but a certain type of activity. Neopositivists deny the significance of philosophy as a doctrine of the first principles of existence. From their point of view, all currently known philosophical values should be re-evaluated, and a “testable philosophy” should be constructed.

To clarify the nature of scientific knowledge and the status of philosophical knowledge, neopositivists divide all proposals into analytical and synthetic . Analytical proposal is a sentence whose truth is determined by its own content. “There are three angles in a triangle”, “the angle of a square is straight”, “the bodies are extended”. Indeed, three angles follow from the definition of a triangle, and so does the extension of a body. But the sentence “this tutorial will help me get acquainted with some philosophical problems" is synthetic. It is empirical and not necessary. The truth of such a proposal will be tested in practice: if you read it, you really get to know it (there may be a negative result). The principles of philosophy are neither analytical nor synthetic. “Being determines consciousness.” The concept of consciousness does not follow from the concept of being, and in experience I do not deal with pure being.

Neopositivists set the task of “re-teaching” philosophy. If earlier philosophy included statements that were not verified by practice, now all the provisions of philosophy must be tested for truth. Philosophical statements that do not directly come into contact with experience are verified by reducing them to the simplest, “atomic” sentences and comparing the latter with experimental conditions. Is it impossible to do this for philosophical knowledge? Means, philosophical knowledge extra-scientific, and he is left with the functions of developing beliefs (which brings it closer to art and science).

The division of judgments into analytical and synthetic, the expulsion of philosophy from the field of theoretical knowledge, of course, is a logical extreme. It is necessary to take into account the coherence of all provisions within the framework of any theory. And if a theory is experimentally confirmed, then the philosophical assumptions on which it is based are automatically confirmed. In addition, in such an empirical test we are talking more about the correctness of knowledge, and not about its truth. “The sun rises and sets” is confirmed by experience, but is not true. And finally, not all knowledge can be expressed in language.

But neopositivists demand direct experimental verification of not only philosophical truths, but also scientific ones. They introduce verification principle: each sentence in the language of science must correspond to a set of “basic” “protocol” sentences, which must be directly verified by practice. A more specific task has been defined - to reduce the provisions of science to “protocol” proposals. And difficulties immediately arise: the generalizing provisions of science cannot be reduced to such proposals, because This is the specificity of theoretical knowledge. Theory does extralogical a step beyond experience. Even the seemingly understandable: “all people are mortal” cannot be verified in practice (isn’t everything possible people already exist now?).

Postpositivism introduces and develops softer criteria for selecting knowledge than strictly verifiable ones, in particular scientific theories. K. Popper and his followers believe that knowledge cannot be absolutely true. What we thought was true turns out to be a fallacy over time. A much more important and interesting problem is not the testing of knowledge, but its growth and development. Popper suggests falsification principle as a criterion for selecting scientific knowledge: all propositions of science must be in such a form that they can be refuted. Until a disproving fact is found, the theory is considered scientific, and even true. But it will remain so until the moment of refutation.

Some basic provisions

T 1 are refuted, the entire T1 is rejected T 2….

In fact, Popper suggests that in science true knowledge simply no, it is all clearly hypothetical in nature, and rather, these are simply plausible statements with a limited lifetime.

Popper reflected some patterns of the growth of scientific knowledge, but the main idea of a scientist’s rejection of a theory for which disproving material has been obtained is not confirmed by scientific practice. For example, a large number of facts have now been obtained, contradictory to theory Newton, but it is still widely used by scientists. Popper's follower I. Lakatos, taking this into account, proposes a more flexible model of the development of scientific knowledge, which allows us to explain this situation in science. Lakatos believes that in science it is not one theory that competes with another, but systems of interrelated theories united by similar topics and research methodology. These are the so-called research programs. The research program includes a “hard core”: some basic principles and assumptions; and "protective belt": some hypotheses that should explain anomalous facts and can be destroyed without damaging the research program. The transition from one program to another occurs if the “hard core” of the old one is destroyed. Thus, the “solid core” of Newton’s classical mechanics includes the three laws of mechanics and the law of universal gravitation. On their basis, new knowledge in physics is still being developed.

The Lakatos development model assumes the accumulation of an array of knowledge in science, at least within the framework of research programs. American philosopher Paul Feyerabend is confident that knowledge does not cumulate in science, since different theories are incommensurable with each other. Each of the theories uses its own categorical apparatus, presupposes its own methods of studying the object, even the same observation data within the framework of different theories receives a different theoretical interpretation. Moreover, the more diverse forms of knowledge there are (even contradictory, even absurd), the better for knowledge itself. The task of a scientist is to put forward as many of the most unexpected theories as possible and propagate them. But the next logical move would be to recognize any form of knowledge: whether science, religion or magic, as valuable for obtaining truth. Under such conditions, it is difficult to even distinguish one form from another.

The American philosopher Thomas Kuhn, also critically reworking Popper's scheme for the development of science, places emphasis not on the system of knowledge, but on the activities of the scientist within the scientific community. He introduces the concept paradigms, characteristic of this stage of scientific development. A paradigm is a certain pattern of activity of scientists that is dominant in the scientific community, determining their behavior and ensuring an increase in knowledge. This includes some valuables. scientific research, technical and logical techniques, basic assumptions and criteria for assessing the acquired knowledge. A paradigm appears to be broader than a research program or theory. It is clear that as long as this particular paradigm dominates in science, scientists receive knowledge that does not contradict it, and it grows. This is the so-called period of “normal science”. But over time, based on facts that are inexplicable from the point of view of the dominant paradigm (anomalous facts), a new pattern is formed scientific activity, which destroys it, a period begins scientific revolution. A new paradigm is replacing the old one. Kuhn assumed that paradigms are incommensurable with each other, there is no logical continuity between them. The merit of his model is that the role of social and psychological factors in scientific knowledge was identified.

Structuralism(C. Lévi-Strauss, J. Lacan, M. Foucault), which mainly spread in France, raised the question of the basic methods of research in science. Structure is understood as order, a stable way of organizing a system, and the relationship of its parts. Structuralists insist on the importance of using structural research methods in science. To do this, it is necessary to identify a certain structure - a set of relationships that is preserved during various transformations (an example is a stable system of connections between people, a social structure). Structural patterns can then be identified across multiple objects. With this approach, it is not the “natural” properties of objects entering into relationships that become important, but systemically acquired. The system has primacy over the element. For example, society is a set of relationships between people, and a person acquires certain qualities by entering into these relationships. I am Russian not because I was born one, but because I am involved in the system of relations characteristic of Russia. As a rule, structuralism works on a certain sign structure, and behind the connection of elements it tries to discover some unconscious deep structures. Thus, it was intended to eliminate subjectivism in knowledge. For example, culture as a set of sign systems (language, science, art, mythology, religion, Mass culture, fashion, advertising...) should be analyzed from the perspective of deep structures (mentality, paradigm, language patterns, etc.). Then you can discover the hidden patterns that a person obeys. This is how one can explain unmotivated murders or universal human universal patterns and laws of intellect. Structuralism has achieved great results in the study of historical communities, political and moral structures, but it should be noted that it is still an exaggeration and transfer of one of the specific ways of knowing to all other areas. Well, for example, if structuralism is transferred to the area of understanding problems modern society, then paradoxical conclusions can be drawn. Firstly, the question of human freedom is removed, since his activity is predetermined by systemic connections of a more general nature. Secondly, if social structures set system-forming properties for a person, if a person is considered simply as an element, then the problem of man is removed altogether. There is no longer a person - a free subject, all his characteristics are predetermined by more general structures: linguistic, cerebral, historical and cultural. That is why structuralism is called the “concept of human death”, and is clearly opposed to the currents of hermeneutics and existentialism.

Hermeneutics– a philosophical direction that studies the process of understanding. The main issue of this movement is the possibility of understanding the meaning of recorded knowledge. Representatives of hermeneutics - F. Schleiermacher, V. Dilthey, H. Gadamer. In translation, hermeneutics is the art of interpreting texts. In the 20th century, hermeneutics became a methodology of the historical and human sciences. The question of whether and how it is possible to understand the products of a past culture, a text in which the individuality of another person is recorded or the meaning of some sign structure (this could be science) is very interesting for people of the modern era. Let us pay attention to the Russian word “understand”, which actually indicates the mechanism of understanding: “understand” - “to fuck”, or to grasp the meaning, to give a name. Modern hermeneutics believe that we can talk about understanding not only texts, but everything that is involved in human life. You can grasp the meaning of a stone if it acts as a symbol of some business or human game.

Hermeneutics today can be conditionally divided into two directions: hermeneutics of consciousness and hermeneutics of being. The first deals with the psychological world of another person, and understanding is getting used to the mental state of other people - authors of books, technical devices, theatrical plays, musical works, empathy for their creative act. The hermeneutics of being has as its object the deed, the experience of another person, while understanding presupposes the reconstruction of those conditions that led the person (the author) to any result of his activity, comprehension of the essence of the realized deed.

The difference between the two directions can be seen using the example of the Moscow Kremlin. A hermeneutic of consciousness will be interested in the thoughts, opinions, and experiences of the creators of this architectural monument. The hermeneuticist of being will look for the embodiment of some national tradition, a symbol of the Russian people. Understanding the past in both cases involves, as it were, transferring oneself into this past. Hermeneutics believe that sometimes a person can be understood better than he understands himself. We have probably all encountered situations when another person’s world became our world, when his awareness of his problems seemed insufficient to us, we saw more than he did.

In any case, understanding presupposes dialogue, and dialogue can begin if people already have something in common. Understanding is based on pre-understanding, preliminary understanding. It is set by an already existing tradition, or a general semantic and cultural field. For example, viewing and evaluating a certain feature film by people of different nationalities may differ significantly due to differences in pre-understanding. Pre-understanding can be corrected, but it cannot be freed from it. Based on pre-understanding, the understander analyzes the parts, then the structure as a whole, and finally complete understanding arises. The interpreter understands more meaning than the author intended, since the meaning of some creation has already expanded due to new connections in a broader structure. For example, Dostoevsky's character Rodion Raskolnikov in Crime and Punishment is more tragic for us in light of historical events, associated with real attempts in Germany and Russia to embody the idea of a superman in society. Full understanding enriches our pre-understanding. This is how it arises hermeneutic circle: to understand the whole it is necessary to understand its individual parts, but to understand the individual parts it is already necessary to have an idea of the meaning of the whole. In conclusion, it must be said that hermeneutics as a philosophical direction has significant untapped potential.

§ 3. The human problem. The main problems of philosophy: why does a person live? What is the meaning of his life? What is his place in the world? Attitude towards death? – are being addressed in a new way in the 20th century. Existential philosophy offers its own version of the solution. Existentialism(Heidegger, Jaspers, Sartre, Marcel, Camus) tries to reflect the diverse aspects of human existence in the world. Existence in translation means existence. The essence of this concept can be conveyed in the following provisions:

1) The starting point for a person is his own existence. He captures it not with the help of thought, in concepts, but experiences it emotionally.

2) In man, existence precedes essence. In the world of things, essence precedes existence, i.e. Before the moment of creation (beginning of existence), a thing already exists as this thing, as a thing with this essence in the consciousness of the creator - man. In man, everything is the other way around: first, man begins to exist, and then he makes himself, finds his essence.

3) Thus, there is no predestined human nature, and no one except the person himself can turn him into a person. Man himself is responsible for not becoming a man (read: free man ohm). A person is a kind of project that lives, self-unfolds, self-realizes (or does not self-realize), and this process of making oneself a person lasts a lifetime. Moreover, this “fashioning” of oneself as a person is not just a person’s desire, it is his destiny, not easy and truly human. The meaning of human existence, according to existentialists, lies precisely in realizing oneself as a free individual. A person is not born free, a person must become free.

4) A person forms not only his essence, he creates a special human existence, a world built with the help of man around man himself. New ideas about the world (ontology) emerge, in which the characteristics of being, consciousness, activity, and the historical era are intertwined. The existence of the world is the existence of the world for man through the prism of human consciousness. We only know the world that we have mastered; it exists insofar as I give it meaning and significance. The question of the independent existence of nature is uninteresting for existentialism. The scheme of connection of concepts is as follows: being, existence (human existence), being-in-the-world (these are Heidegger’s provisions). Moreover, being-in-the-world is emotionally experienced, burdened with concern for the world, “concern” for it. How correct are the existentialists' reasoning on the question of the existence of the world? Partly true. Each individual sees the world in his own way and identifies characteristics that are significant to him. But this does not mean at all that the world as such does not exist. People are able to identify not only properties that are significant to them, but also the properties of things themselves. Otherwise, we together, each of us, simply would not be able to exist in this world.

5) Empirically, we record another fact that a person lives in a hostile world filled with suffering. Human alienation is not a momentary state; it exists in all historical eras and gives rise to tragic mentalities in people. Philosophy, according to existentialists, is obliged to help a desperate person overcome his mood and look for his true “I” in the most absurd situations.

6) It is clear that it is difficult to identify the essence of a person in a situation of alienation. But this is possible under the conditions of the so-called. “borderline situation”, “borderline person”, which are understood as existence on the verge of life and death. In his real existence When a person, due to circumstances beyond his control, is “thrown” into this world, he is constantly faced with the future, in the face of death. A person experiences fear, anxiety, expectation, and he is forced to make a choice: to be or not to be in this world, where it is scary, boring, and absurd (Camus). Existence between life and death, the existence of a desperate individual - undoubtedly interest Ask. With such a being, existing in such a world, a person must determine himself regarding his destiny. In this regard, Camus draws an analogy with the fate of the mythical hero Sisyphus - a man who did not want to part with earthly life and deceived the god of the underworld Hades. The gods punished him with an eternal stay on earth and eternal work: he had to roll a stone up a mountain, but at the top the stone fell down again. It would seem like this eternal existence Sisyphus should have preferred death, but the spirit of the mythical hero was not broken. Camus considers Sisyphus happy. Through the seeming meaninglessness of his actions, their deeper meaning emerges: Sisyphus reveals his strengths and capabilities, he strengthens his will, he learns to solve problems posed by fate and the gods. The struggle to reach the top fills his heart and it compensates for the absurdity of his situation. Likewise, a person, it would seem, eternally carries out the activities imposed on him, bears the burden of life, but by solving absurd problems, he becomes a person, forms his own inner world. Constructive activity and creativity more than compensate for the shortcomings of an alienated society. That is why a person is afraid to part with this life. He is unhappy when, having discovered the inauthenticity of his existence, he does nothing to transform it into something genuine.

7) Nevertheless, the question of death inevitably arises before a person. Existentialists view human existence as a movement towards death. And in some borderline situations, when a person seriously thinks about the meaning and content of life, he may consciously choose death. Therefore, A. Camus considers the question of suicide to be the main philosophical question. The humanistic task of philosophy, in his opinion, is to help a person who is on the verge of suicide choose life after all. The somewhat pessimistic sentiments of existentialists reflect the sentiments of people existing in crisis societies. The loss of established guidelines (and on this basis the need to choose new ones), uncertainty about the future (even one chosen independently) - all this sometimes makes one prefer death to life. But it is more humane to orient a person towards life and opposition to death. A person must die with dignity when death is inevitable, fight it when there is a chance to survive and help other people in the fight against death.

8) Genuine human existence, the essence of man is understood as freedom, free personal choice. A person has a sea of possibilities, and he is forced to choose some of them. By making his choice, a person realizes himself as a free being. Situations of choice are not always associated with rational arguments; people often act contrary to calculations and circumstances. They seek support for their choice in themselves, in their individual essence (in their existence, as an existentialist would say).

9) Some existentialists understand freedom as complete independence from circumstances, even as ignoring objective laws, which is very reminiscent of unlimited arbitrariness. But the more common understanding of freedom is rather in the form of a mental negation of objective conditions, rather than as some real action. A slave can be free if he views his situation in a certain way. Mental disagreement is already an act of liberation. As Camus said: “I rebel, therefore I exist.” Therefore, to become free, it is not necessary to change the world, you need to change your attitude towards it.

10) But free choice is necessarily associated with responsibility for one’s thoughts and actions. This responsibility is not only to other people, but, above all, to oneself. And this is the burden of responsibility that falls heavily on a person’s shoulders.

11) It is already clear that the alienated existence of a person differs from his true existence, from his essence. Alienated, Inauthentic existence means that a person is “not free”, he is included in everyday life, and society dominates him. When a person is not free, he is not responsible for his actions. Other people impose on him motives for action, means of achieving goals and forms of behavior. Existentialists have a sharply negative attitude towards society, towards “We”. “I” is killed by “We”.

12) Existentialism openly proclaims the uniqueness of human existence, the integrity of man. To be free is to be yourself, not rely on others, preserve your individuality. Society limits the individual, it imposes impersonal, average standards, and one must free oneself from them. Such a rejection of standard norms has nothing to do with immorality (violation of moral norms); on the contrary, only under this condition will a person be able to realize the potential inherent in him. Let us note that existentialism became widespread in the 40s, when the fight against fascism, an ideology imposed on many members of society, was very relevant. It was precisely this kind of society that the French existentialists protested against. From a philosophical point of view, being with other people certainly standardizes us in some way, but I only know what my individual “I” is in communication with other people, my “I” can only develop in interaction with others. It is impossible to deny the influence of society on the individual.

§ 4. Problems of social development are also the focus of attention of modern thinkers. The peculiarity is that they focus on such phenomena that are especially noticeable and specific to our time. These are, first of all, the consequences of the scientific and technological revolution and Negative influence human activity to their habitat. Ideas about the development of society are diverse, but can be classified using the following scheme.

Society development

Directional non-directional(gyre)

Theories of the circulation of locally closed civilizations (O. Spengler, A. Toynbee).

progress regression

factors determining development

scientism anti-scientism

Until the beginning of the 20th century, ideas about history in Western European philosophy were clearly progressive in nature. Each subsequent stage in the development of society is viewed as more organized and complex. The reasons for such mentalities are, firstly, the truly obvious and long period of progression of society, secondly, insufficient knowledge of the civilizations preceding our society, and thirdly, the dominance in philosophy and culture in general of the idea of development in the form of progress. As the negative consequences of diverse and large-scale human activities are revealed, regressive ideas are formed. Each subsequent social state was seen as a decline in comparison with the previous one. Regression in explaining social development was already characteristic of J. J. Rousseau, but he associated it, first of all, with the decline of the morality of mankind.

The scientific and technological revolution that unfolded in the second half of the 20th century gave rise to the hope that with its help the problems and contradictions of modern life would be resolved. Such mentalities are called "scientism""(from the English word science - science). Scientists claim that with the help scientific achievements and the latest technology can solve all the global problems of humanity. Scientism underlies the concepts of post-industrial, information societies.

At first, the influence of scientific and technological achievements on public life and social development was thought of as powerful and direct. This is the concept of a “welfare society” (W.W. Rostow, D. Bell). It was assumed that due to the development of science and technology, new technologies would emerge, the management of social processes would become truly scientific, the volume of scientific information and the educational level of the entire population would increase many times over, and competent scientific and technical specialists would come to power, not distracted by often contradictory value systems. Such views are also called “ technocracy"(translated - the power of technology). Essentially this is progressive sentiments about the development of society, combined with scientism.

In the 70s and 80s, technocratic thinking was faced with aggravated problems and contradictions in society against the backdrop of previously unprecedented scientific and technological achievements. The ground has arisen for the emergence of scientistic pessimism, which does not see in science and technology a panacea for all ills of society, but does not see any other development factors as powerful as these.

The more optimistic wing of scientism, recognizing the existence and even development of social conflicts, assumes that a new round in scientific and technological development will allow them to be resolved. These are the concepts of “post-industrial society”, “information society”. Post-industrial society is characterized by: a developed sphere of production of services, the criterion of social progress is the growth of production of goods, the goal is to achieve a developed “consumer society”, knowledge workers predominate, the development and use of science and technology is controlled, but they are also the main factors in the development of society.

The version of the information society as a developed stage of post-industrial society is based on the recognition of information as the fundamental basis of scientific and technical activity. In such a society, information is quickly accumulated, intelligently, multilaterally and repeatedly used, and largely determines the sphere of production and management. In developed countries of the West and East (USA, Japan, Western European countries), one can already observe phenomena characteristic of information societies: multi-channel media, automated and computerized services, healthcare and education, automatic control of the environment and much more. And yet, it would not be entirely correct to make the development of society directly dependent on the accumulation and use of information. Antiscientism became a reaction to scientism and technocracy.

Antiscientism noted that science and technology can be brought to perfection, but the consequence of this can be the suppression of human individuality. Representatives of this trend note non-scientific factors, such as the preservation of traditions, religiosity of the population, national values and others, as driving forces for the development of society. In the 20th century, talented works in the dystopian genre were created: R. Bradbury “Fahrenheit 451°”, J. Orwell “1984”, E. Zamyatin “We”, O. Huxley “O wondrous new world" They depict a future dominated by technology, a totalitarian state, suppressed freedom and a lack of individuality. Perfect technical devices control the behavior and consciousness of people; society, through the system of education and training, practically constructs the necessary type of person, depriving him of independent thinking. Dystopias are a way to prevent the consequences of the omnipotence of science and technology.

Along with the concepts of directed development of society, theories of historical cycles arose in the 20th century. Interesting in this sense is the work of O. Spengler “The Decline of Europe”. In it, the author quite rightly states that culture as a whole has relative unity. There is no single universal human culture; there are different types of cultures: Egyptian, Chinese, Western European, Mayan, Russian-Siberian (8 in total). Each crop has its own life span, an “internal life cycle.” After the death of a culture, it is reborn into “civilization.” The latter is embodied intelligence, the mechanical reproduction of social technologies. For Western civilization, culture begins to transform into civilization in the 19th century. Then technicism begins to dominate.

Developing Spengler's thoughts, A. Toynbee presents the entire socio-historical development of mankind as a cycle of local civilizations. World history then is a collection of histories of peculiar, closed civilizations. Every civilization goes through certain stages: emergence, growth, breakdown, decay, and death. Repeatability in social development in the performance of various local civilizations is possible. That is why there can be foreknowledge of major events in history.

The driving force for the development of civilization is the “creative minority”, which has a “vital impulse”, and captivates the “inert majority”. This “creative minority” must successfully capture and respond to “historical challenges.” In this sense, it is a public authority. If this is not the case, then the struggle of the majority in combination with external enemies can lead to the death of civilization. According to Toynbee, the criterion for the progressive development of humanity as a whole is its spiritual improvement, which, first of all, manifests itself in the development of religious beliefs.

Conclusion

Two and a half thousand years of meaningful development of mankind have provided solid philosophical experience. The course of history was accompanied by changes in styles and forms of philosophizing, each historical era- antiquity, the Middle Ages, the Renaissance, Modern times, modernity - have their own face. But no branch of philosophy can lay claim to absolute truth, the absolute understanding of beauty or goodness.

The history of philosophy acts as a successive system of various schools and directions. A person can become a philosopher when he brings together all the best in them, and then, having synthesized this, in a new way, more deeply understands himself and others, the world as a whole. Philosophy does not claim priority over science, art, religion - each has its own tasks. But it remains the prerogative of philosophy to positively combine the experience accumulated at different stages and in different ways of mastering the world.

To form your opinion on the above issues, we invited you to get acquainted with the basic ideas of Western and Eastern philosophy, with the main stages in their development. Conciseness in the presentation of the material could only arouse further interest in the study of philosophy, which would be satisfied by more serious independent searches. The result of mastering the philosophical heritage will be whole system worldview that helps a person in theoretical and practical activities.

List of used literature

1. Ableev S.R. History of world philosophy / S.R. Ableev. - M.: AST, Astrel, 2005 - 414 p.

2. Asmus V.F. Ancient philosophy/V.F. Asmus. - M.: Higher Education, 2004. - 541 p.

3. Ancient philosophy. encyclopedic Dictionary/Ed. M. Solopova. - M.: Progress-Tradition, 2008. - 896 p.

4. Alekseev P.V. History of philosophy / P.V. Alekseev. - M.: TK Velby, Prospect, 2005. - 240 p.

5. Alekseev P.V. Philosophers of the XIX-XX centuries / P.V. Alekseev. – M.: Academic Project, 2002. – 1152 p.

6. Reader on philosophy. Textbook / Comp. P.V. Alekseev. 3rd ed., revised. and additional - M.: Prospekt Publishing House, 2010 - 576 p.

7. Bogolyubov A.S. Bourgeois philosophy of the USA of the 20th century / A.S. Bogolyubov. - M.: Mysl, 1974. - 343 p.

8. Bourgeois philosophy of the eve and beginning of imperialism: Textbook /Under. ed. A.S. Bogolyubova, Yu.K. Melville, I.S. Narsky. - M.: Higher School, 1977. - 423 p.

9. Introduction to philosophy: Textbook for universities /Auth. team: Frolov I.T. and others - 4th ed., revised. and additional - M.: Cultural Revolution, Republic, 2007. - 623 p.

10. Eastern philosophies /Ed. M.T. Stepanyants. - M.: Academic Project, Culture, 2011. - 496 p.

11. Gulyga A.V. German classical philosophy / A.V. Gulyga. 2nd ed., rev. and additional - M.: Rolf, 2001. - 416 p.

12. Zotov A.F. Bourgeois philosophy of the mid-19th - early 20th centuries / A.F. Zotov, Yu.K. Melville. - M.: Higher School, 1988. - 520 p.

13. Ilyin V.V. History of philosophy / V.V. Ilyin. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2003. - 732 p.

14. Indian philosophy. Encyclopedia /Ed. M. Stepanyants. - M.: Eastern literature, 2009. - 952 p.

15. History of Russian philosophy / Ed. Maslina M.A. - M.: KDU, 2008. - 640 p.

16. History of Philosophy / Ed. Ch.S. Kirvelya. - Minsk: New knowledge, 2001. - 728 p.

17. Kuznetsov V.N. French materialism of the 18th century / V.N. Kuznetsov. - M.: Mysl, 1981. - 303 p.

18. Kuznetsov V.N. Western European philosophy XVIII century /V.N. Kuznetsov, B.V. Meerovsky, A.F. Gryaznov. - M.: Higher School, 1986. - 400 p.

19. Mareev S.N. History of philosophy / S.N. Mareev, E. V. Mareeva. - M.: Academic Project, 2004. - 880 p.

20. Narsky I.S. Western European philosophy of the 19th century /I.S. Narsky. - M.: Higher School, 1976. - 584 p.

21. Russian philosophy: Encyclopedia /Under general. ed. M.A. Olive. M.: Algorithm, 2007. - 736 p.

22. Svetlov V.A. History of philosophy in diagrams and comments. Textbook /V.A. Svetlov. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2010. - 256 p.

23. Modern bourgeois philosophy / Ed. A.S. Bogomolova, Yu.K. Melville, I.S. Narsky. - M.: Higher School, 1978. - 582 p.

24. Modern Western philosophy. Encyclopedic Dictionary /Under. ed. O. Heffe, V. Malakhov, V. Filatov. - M.: Cultural Revolution, 2009. - 392 p.

25. Sokolov V.V. European philosophy XV - XVII centuries /V.V. Sokolov. - M.: Higher School, 1984. - 448 p.

26. Tatarkevich Vl. History of philosophy. Antique and medieval philosophy/Vl. Tatarkevich. - Perm University Publishing House, 2000. - 482 p.

27. History of philosophy in summary. Per. from Czech I.I. Boguta. - M.: Mysl, 1995. - 590 p.

28. Philosophy: textbook / Ed. A.F. Zotova, V.V. Mironova, A.V. Razin. - M,: Prospekt, 2009. - 672 p.

29. Firsov A.V. History of philosophy for university students. 3rd ed. - Rostov n/d: 2006. - 156 p.

30. Reader on Western philosophy. Antiquity, Middle Ages. Revival. / Comp. L. Yakovleva, Lyubov Yakovleva, D. Radul, M. Kovalzon. - M.: AST, Astrel, 2003. - 800 p.

Related information.

SECTION X

POSTCLASSICAL DEVELOPMENT OF WORLD PHILOSOPHY IN THE SECOND HALF OF THE XIX - XX centuries.

The problem of man in modern philosophy

A person would not be a person if he were limited to the existing conditions of existence and life and did not strive to go beyond their limits. Therefore, previous generations, having encountered certain problems and not being able to overcome them, always appealed to the next ones, maintaining faith in the power human mind and spirit, hoping for the continuation and completion of their plans by their descendants. Humanity placed special hopes on the 20th century, on the triumph of reason. Like most of the previous stages world history, the current century has proven unable to solve a number of problems inherited from its predecessors. The dynamism of development was largely driven by irrationality and tragedy. On the one hand, an unprecedented rise in the productive forces, scientific and technological progress, a period of social and national liberation revolutions, fundamental reforms that qualitatively changed the face of the world, and on the other hand, two world wars with their huge and unjustified victims, totalitarian regimes, genocide, violence, cruelty, increasing social alienation, local, regional, environmental and global crises threatening the existence of civilization, the decline of morality and spirituality - all this required deeper philosophical understanding.

The variety of manifestations of social existence has led to such a variety of philosophical schools, movements, trends that this has given grounds to talk about a new revolution in philosophy. However, these currents and directions sometimes demonstrated opposite positions, offering either overly optimistic or overly pessimistic conclusions and forecasts. Moreover, in the conditions of a divided world in opposing socio-political systems, the voice of passions prevailed over reason, and ideological intolerance revolved around scientific bias against the general background of increasing ideologization and politicization of science and philosophy, all forms of social consciousness. Therefore, another conclusion has ripened, opposite in its content to the first: modern philosophy is in a state of deep crisis. After all, general confrontation reigned, party slogans and political factors were declared to be the ultimate truth, and critical analysis of the views of opponents revolved around the search for errors (real or imaginary) and labeling. Such philosophizing became the norm not only of Marxist systems, but also of Western philosophical thought. Humanity had to go through terrible upheavals in order to realize simple truths: the world is not only split, but also unique; In addition to university-class and party interests, there are universal human values, we all live in one house - on Earth, and pluralism of opinions presupposes their dialogue, thanks to which the development of philosophical thought is possible.

Searching for the culprits of this state of affairs is a futile task, and not only because of their fleeting nature, but also because such were the “communists” and “capitalists,” “Soviet” and “bourgeois” philosophers, defending their own interests in the “name of the people.” And the point, in fact, is not their conformism, for it was not they who determined the development of philosophical thought.

Both in Western and Marxist philosophical tradition In addition to frank apologetics, preaching mysticism and the occult, means of intoxication, and distracting people from the concrete realities of life, there are a number of fundamental works that laid the foundation for new philosophical directions and disturbed important problems of meaning in life. In distinguishing the complex interweaving of schools and trends in modern philosophy, and at the same time identifying points of contact between them, in addition to the division associated with the main issue of philosophy into idealism and materialism, there are other approaches.

Depending on the object of study and the formulation of central problems in modern philosophy, two currents are clearly distinguished - scientific and antiscientific. The first focuses on science, mainly natural science, completely subordinating philosophy to the cognitive needs of science and ignoring its ideological functions, trying to turn philosophy itself into exact science with clearly fixed positions that can be verified. The second current focuses on man, the world of his culture, paying special attention to the ideological functions of philosophy, reducing the latter to the doctrine of man, his culture; therefore it is often called anthropological.

IN Lately The structuring and division of modern (we are talking about Western) philosophy is often associated with a general territorial approach, according to which numerous philosophical concepts are divided into continental (European) and English-language ones. This does not coincide with previous classifications. However, given the difference philosophical concepts According to the method of argumentation, the conceptual apparatus, such a division is completely justified, especially since it reflects some general trends, where the correlation of continental and English philosophy with materialism and idealism, scientism and anti-scientism is more or less obvious.

The English-language tradition, to which the philosophy of Great Britain, Canada, Australia, and the USA belongs, is closely connected with the scientific movement, reflected in various forms of positivism, structuralism, and post-positivism. Continental (European) tends to antiscientism, anthropological movements of “philosophy of life”, phenomenology, existentialism, personalism, hermeneutics, neo-Thomism and their modifications. It is more theoretical, mainly focused on the light of consciousness and man, and stands far from the empiricist, while the English language is closer to experience and tries to be scientific. All movements have their predecessors in classical XIX philosophy century, the ideas of which they developed and used in the process of their formation, even being critical of it.

In modern philosophy, along with a wide variety of schools, trends, trends, there is also a convergence and interweaving of them. That is, in a certain period, one school or system dominates and exerts influence. When the ideas and principles of the latter come into conflict with the real processes of cognition and practice, there is a need to turn to other, more productive systems. This simultaneously encourages the formation of new schools and determines their diversity, both in form and content, while recognizing the rational aspects of their predecessors and refuting those provisions that have not been justified by practice.

Relations between modern philosophical systems are increasingly built on the principle of pluralism, a synthesis of views, styles, approaches in defining current issues, using the direction of methods. However, the very concept of “pluralism is currently acquiring a specifically epistemological and social meaning and means the right of everyone to their own truth. Within the framework of this approach, such a form of synthesis, as a discussion of the most pressing issues at symposia, meetings of philosophers of various orientations, which, however, has not only positive, but also negative aspects. So, if in the 60s there were recognized authorities, leaders of trends, original thinkers (E. Husserl). , M. Scheler, B. Russell, G. Carnap, P. Sartre, A. Camus, C. Popper, M. Heidegger, H. G. Gadamer, J. Habermas, etc.), then groups now dominate, who unite around controversial issues.

With all the variety of problems, the “cross-cutting” and most acute problem is the human problem. It integrates the search for modern philosophy. Awareness of human involvement in the global contradictions of the world necessitates constant consistency of its behavior with the objective laws of nature and society, foreseeing the possible consequences of human influence on nature.

The movement of social life actualizes the role of ideological regulators of human activity, sharpening interest in the problems of the meaning of life, the future of humanity, freedom, creativity, alienation and ways to overcome it, the relationship between the individual and the social. After all, a person who does not compromise on principles and conscience is not only the goal, but also the condition for the progressive development of society. When the intellect is not complemented by high spiritual needs, moral ideals, then turns into evil force, generating a deficit of decency, duty, and responsibility. This requires integration and coordination of philosophical searches. As the Ukrainian philosopher V.P. Ivanov rightly noted, if philosophy is not oriented toward man and is not connected with ideological problems, it will lose its meaning and purpose. The extent of its humanization is determined by the understanding of the essence of human existence. Philosophical anthropology assumes the functions and representation of the science of man.

Zodiac signs

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Similar documents

You may also like