The philosophy of ancient skepticism existed for quite a long time and was the most influential movement in philosophy for many, many centuries - from the 4th century. BC to III-IV centuries. after R.H. The founder of ancient skepticism is traditionally considered to be the philosopher Pyrrho along with his student Timon. Subsequently, skepticism of the Pyrrhonian type fades somewhat, and so-called academic skepticism appears in Plato’s Academy with such representatives as Carneades and Arcesilaus - this is the 2nd century. BC Pyrrhonian skepticism (what was later called Pyrrhonism) was revived in Aenesidemus and Agrippa (the works of these philosophers have not survived to this day). The representative of late ancient skepticism is the philosopher and physician Sextus Empiricus, who lived in the 2nd century. after R.H. In the III-IV centuries. the school still exists, and elements of skepticism can be found in the physician Galen.

A few words about the life of the founder of ancient skepticism - Pyrrho. He was born in Elis in 360 BC and lived for 90 years. Pyrrho is one of those philosophers who did not write philosophical treatises, like Socrates, showing through his life the philosophy that he developed. We know about him from the book of Diogenes Laertius. The chapter on Pyrrho in it is the main source of information on Pyrrhonism. From it we learn that he refrained from any judgment, i.e. he had doubts about the knowability of the world. And Pyrrho, being a consistent philosopher, strove throughout his life to be a supporter of this teaching. As Diogenes Laertius points out, Pyrrho did not move away from anything, did not avoid anything, did not avoid any danger, be it a cart, a pile or a dog, without being exposed to any sense of danger; he was protected by his friends who followed him. This is a rather bold statement, because it contradicts the essence of skeptical philosophy. Diogenes further reports that at first Pyrrho was engaged in painting; a painting, painted rather mediocrely, has survived. He lived in solitude, rarely showing himself even at home. The inhabitants of Elis respected him for his intelligence and elected him high priest. This gives rise to some thought. Again, it is not clear how a person, being an extravagant and convinced skeptic, could become a high priest. Moreover, for his sake they decided to exempt all philosophers from taxes. More than once he left home without telling anyone anything and wandered around with just anyone. One day his friend Anaxarchus fell into a swamp, Pyrrho passed by without shaking hands. Everyone scolded him, but Anaxarchus praised him. He lived with his sister, a midwife, and went to the market to sell chickens and piglets.

A famous incident is mentioned by Diogenes Laertius: when Pyrrho was sailing on a ship and, together with his companions, was caught in a storm, everyone began to panic, only Pyrrho alone, pointing to the ship’s pig, which was serenely slurping from its trough, said that this is exactly how a true man should behave. philosopher

Little is known about Pyrrho's student Timon: only that he was a poet and expressed his teachings in the form of poetry, syl. Subsequently, skeptical ideas began to develop in Plato's Academy. Plato's students developed Plato's teachings in their own way. Carneades and Arcesilaus, considering themselves true Platonists, began to develop the theme of criticism of sensationalism and came to the conclusion that truth is unknowable. Nothing has reached us from Carneades and Arcesilaus either. A proponent of academic skepticism is the ancient Roman orator and philosopher Cicero. He has a number of works where he presents his views on academic skeptics. We can also familiarize ourselves with academic skepticism in the work of Blessed. Augustine's "Against the Academicians", where he criticizes their teaching.

Pyrrhonism was later revived by Aenesidemus and Agrippa and then by Sextus Empiricus, a systematizer and perhaps the most talented interpreter of Pyrrhonism. Sextus Empiricus wrote 2 works - “Three Books of Pyrrho’s Propositions” and “Against the Scientists”.

Ancient skepticism, like all Hellenistic philosophy, posed primarily ethical questions, considering the main solution to the problem of how to live in this world, how to achieve a happy life. It is usually believed that skepticism is primarily a doubt about the knowability of truth, and they reduce skepticism only to the theory of knowledge. However, this is not at all true with regard to Pyrrhonism. Sextus Empiricus divides all philosophical schools into 2 classes: dogmatic and skeptical. He also divides dogmatists into dogmatists and academicians. Dogmatists and academicians believe that they have already decided the question of truth: dogmatists, i.e. followers of Aristotle, Epicurus, the Stoics, etc., claim that they have found the truth, and academics claim (also dogmatically) that it is impossible to find the truth. Only skeptics seek the truth. Hence, as Sextus Empiricus says, there are three main types of philosophy: dogmatic, academic and skeptical. Diogenes Laertius writes that, in addition to the name “skeptics” - from the word “to look out”, they were also called aporetics (from the word “aporia”), zetics (from the word “to seek”) and effektiki (that is, doubters).

As Sextus Empiricus pointed out, the essence of skeptical philosophy boils down to the following: “The skeptical faculty is that which, in the only possible way, contrasts the phenomenon with the conceivable, from here, due to the equivalence in opposite things and speeches, we come first to abstinence from judgment, and then to equanimity.” I note that Sextus speaks about the skeptical ability, and never about the dogmatic one, showing that being a skeptic is natural for a person, but being a dogmatist is unnatural. At first, skeptics try to consider all phenomena and everything conceivable, find out that these phenomena and concepts can be perceived in different ways, including the opposite, prove that in this way everyone will contradict each other, so that one judgment will balance another judgment. Due to the equivalence of judgments in opposing things and speeches, the skeptic decides to refrain from judging anything, and then comes to equanimity - ataraxia, i.e. to what the Stoics were looking for. And each of these stages was carefully developed by the skeptics. Abstinence from judgment is also called “epoch”.

So, the first task of the pyrrhonist is to oppose everything to each other in the best possible way. Therefore, the skeptic contrasts everything: the phenomenon with the phenomenon, the phenomenon with the conceivable, the conceivable with the conceivable. For these purposes, Aenesidemus developed ten tropes, and Agrippa five more. Considerations of skepticism are often limited to these tropes, and for good reasons. Here, indeed, are the foundations of ancient Pyrrhonism. But before we consider the paths, let's try to understand whether it is really possible to live following the philosophy of ancient skepticism?

The dispute about this philosophy arose during the lifetime of the skeptics themselves; they were reproached that their philosophy was not viable, that it had no life guide. Because in order to live, you need to accept something as truth. If you doubt everything, then, as Aristotle said, a person going to Megara will never reach it, because one must be sure at least that Megara exists.

Skepticism was reproached for this kind of sin by Pascal, Arno, Nicole, Hume and other philosophers of modern times. However, Sextus Empiricus writes something completely opposite - that the skeptic accepts his philosophy in order not to remain inactive, because it is dogmatic philosophy that leads a person to inactivity, only skepticism can serve as a guide in life and activity. A skeptic focuses primarily on phenomena, refuses to know the essence of things, because he is not sure of this, he is looking for it. What is certain to him is a phenomenon. As Pyrrho said: I am sure that honey seems sweet to me, but I refrain from judging that it is sweet by nature.

The dogmatist, on the contrary, asserts certain propositions about the essence of things, but they may be erroneous, which shows the difference between dogmatic schools. And what happens if a person begins to act in accordance with an erroneous philosophy? This will lead to dire consequences. If we rely in our philosophy only on phenomena, only on what we undoubtedly know, then all our activities will have a solid foundation.

This position of Sextus Empiricus has other roots. In the 1st century after R.H. In Greece there were three medical schools: methodical, dogmatic and empirical. The physician Sextus belonged to the school of empiricists, hence his name “Empiricist”. The doctor Galen belonged to the same school. These doctors argued that there is no need to search for the origins of diseases, there is no need to determine what is more in a person: earth or fire, there is no need to bring all four elements into harmony, but you need to look at the symptoms and relieve the patient from these symptoms. When treating patients, this method gave good results, but empirical doctors wanted to treat not only the body, but also the soul. The main diseases of the soul are dogmatism and academicism, for they prevent a person from achieving happiness, and dogmatism must be treated. A person must be treated for what he is mistaken about, and he is mistaken in the fact that it is possible to know the essence of things. We must show him that this is wrong, show that the truth is sought by trusting the phenomenon. In the chapter “Why Does a Skeptic Make Weak Arguments?” Sextus Empiricus writes about this. Indeed, when we read his works, we often see weak arguments, even sometimes funny. Sextus Empiricus himself knows this and says that skeptics deliberately do this - they say that one can be convinced by a weak argument, for another it is necessary to build a solid philosophical system. The main thing is the goal, the achievement of happiness. However, for the sake of fairness, it must be said that skeptics have very few weak arguments.

So, let's consider the skeptical arguments that Sextus Empiricus puts forward. First, about the trails of Enysidem. There are ten of them, they mainly cover the sensory side of knowledge, and the five paths of Agrippa cover the rational side.

The first trope is based on the diversity of living beings and says the following. Philosophers claim that the criterion of truth is man, i.e. he is the measure of all things (Protagoras) and he alone can know the truth. The skeptic rightly asks, why, in fact, a person? After all, a person knows the world around us thanks to the senses. But the diversity of the animal world shows that animals also have sense organs and they are different from humans. Why do we think that human senses provide a truer picture of the world than animal senses? How can those with a narrow hearing organ and those with a wide one, those with hairy ears and those with smooth ones, hear equally? And we have no right to consider ourselves the criterion of truth. Therefore, we must refrain from judgment, since we do not know whose senses we can trust.

The second trope: the philosopher makes an assumption (narrowing the question): let’s say a person is the criterion of truth. But there are many people, and they are different. There are Scythians, Greeks, Indians. They tolerate cold and heat differently; food is healthy for some and harmful for others. People are diverse, and therefore it is impossible to say which particular person is the criterion of truth.

The third trope further narrows the scope of exploration. The skeptic assumes that we have found a person who is the criterion of truth. But he has many sense organs that can give a different picture of the world around him: honey tastes sweet, but is unpleasant in appearance, rainwater is good for the eyes, and the respiratory tract becomes coarse from it, etc. - this also implies abstinence judgments about the environment.

The fourth trope is about circumstances. Let's say there is a sense organ that we can trust most of all, but there are always some circumstances: there are tears in the eyes that more or less influence the idea of ​​​​the visible object, or an uneven state of mind: for a lover a woman seems beautiful, for another - nothing special. The wine seems sour if you eat dates before, and if you eat nuts or peas, it seems sweet, etc. This also entails abstention from judgment.

The fifth trope is about dependence on position, distances and places. For example, a tower appears small from afar, but large up close. The same lamp flame is dim in the sun and bright in the dark. Coral in the sea is soft, but in the air it is hard. Facts again force us to refrain from making judgments about what a subject is in its essence.

The sixth trope is dependent on admixtures, writes Sextus. We never perceive any phenomenon in itself, but only in conjunction with something. It is always air or water or some other medium. The same sound is different in thin or thick air, aromas are more intoxicating in a bathhouse than in ordinary air, etc. Same conclusion as before.

The seventh trope concerns the size and structure of the subject objects. The same object can look different depending on whether it is large or small, whether it is broken into its component parts or whether it is whole. For example, silver filings by themselves appear black, but together as a whole they appear white; wine consumed in moderation strengthens us, and in excess it relaxes the body, etc.

The eighth trope is about attitude towards something. It echoes the sixth. The skeptic argues that since everything exists in relation to something, then we will refrain from saying what its separate nature is.

The ninth trope concerns something that is constantly or rarely encountered. The sun should, of course, amaze us more, writes Sextus Empiricus, but since we see it constantly, and a comet rarely, we are so amazed by the comet that we consider it a divine sign, but we are not surprised by the sun at all. What occurs less often amazes us, even if in essence the event is very ordinary.

The tenth trope is associated with the issue of morality and is dependent on beliefs and dogmatic positions different nations, their customs. Sextus gives examples where he shows that different peoples have their own ideas about good and evil. Some Ethiopians tattoo small children, but we don’t. The Persians consider it decent to wear long, colorful clothes, but we don’t, etc.

The first trope is about inconsistency. It testifies to the fact that there is a huge variety of philosophical systems, people cannot agree and find the truth, it follows that if there is still no agreement, then we must withhold judgment for now.

The second trope is about moving away into infinity. Based on it, the skeptic argues: in order to prove something, you need to be based on a statement that must also be proven, it must be proven on the basis of again some statement, which in turn must also be proven, etc. - we go to infinity, i.e. we don't know where to start the justification, and so we reserve judgment.

The third trope is called “relative to what,” in which the subject thing appears to be this or that in relation to the one who judges or contemplates the object. He who judges an object is at the same time the subject and object of knowledge. When we judge something, we interfere in the process of cognition, therefore we cannot judge the object in itself, since it does not exist in itself, but exists only for us.

The fourth trope is about assumption. If a philosopher wants to avoid going into infinity, then he dogmatically assumes that some proposition is true in itself. But the skeptic does not agree to such a concession, believing that this is precisely a concession, the position is accepted without proof and therefore cannot claim to be true.

The fifth trope is about interprovability, which says: in order to avoid infinity in proof, philosophers often fall into the fallacy of interprovability. One position is justified with the help of another, which in turn is justified with the help of the first.

Skeptics use all these paths when considering any philosophical question.

Skeptics argued with their contemporaries; their main opponents were the Stoics. In the books of Sextus Empiricus there are objections to ethicists, rhetoricians, geometers, astrologers (arguments from this book will be found in the works of the Church Fathers). Here, for example, is the problem of causation. In particular, Sextus Empiricus considers the question, does a cause exist or does not exist? First he proves that there is a cause, for it is difficult to suppose that there is any effect without its cause, then everything would be in complete disorder. But with no less convincing, he proves that there is no reason. For before we think of any action, we must know that there is a cause that gives rise to this action, and in order to know that this is a cause, we must know that it is the cause of some action, i.e. we cannot think of either cause or effect separately, i.e. they are correlative with each other. Therefore, in order to conceive the cause, one must first cognize the effect, and in order to cognize the effect, one must first cognize the cause. From this mutual proof it follows that we cannot know either the cause or the effect.

A few words about how ancient skepticism interacted with emerging Christianity. Can we say that skepticism hindered or helped the spread of Christianity? Most historians of philosophy believe that ancient skepticism prepared the way for the seed of Christianity to fall on favorable soil thanks to the preaching of the apostles. Skeptical views in the first years after Christ. were so widespread among ancient thinkers that any statement could be perceived as completely reliable and worthy. And skepticism prepared the ancient world to say: “I believe, because it is absurd.” Therefore, we can say that skepticism played a preparatory role for the spread of Christianity in Europe.

Skepticism was developed in the works of Lactantius, who considered skepticism a good introduction to Christianity. After all, skepticism shows the futility and weakness of our reason, it proves that reason cannot know the truth on its own, this requires revelation. On the other hand, blessed. Augustine shows another way for a Christian to relate to skepticism - the way to overcome it. In his works he proves that skepticism is not a true philosophy. According to Augustine, skepticism destroys faith in truth, and since God is truth, skepticism leads to atheism. Therefore, any Christian must wage an irreconcilable fight against skepticism.

Submitting your good work to the knowledge base is easy. 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/

WITH specific and ancient skepticism

Introduction

1. Historical reasons and theoretical background for the emergence of skepticism

1.1 How did skepticism arise?

1.2 Dogma of the ancient skeptic

1.3 Three periods of skepticism

2. Pyrrho - founder of skepticism

3. Founder of an ancient skeptical school

4. Skepticism as a theoretical justification for individualism

Conclusion

Literature

Introduction

Antique philosophy is historically the first form of European theoretical thought, which became the basis for development and the cultural horizon for all subsequent forms of thinking. The philosophy of antiquity is divided into the ancient Greek and Roman eras (late 7th century BC - 6th century AD).

Traditionally, Thales is considered the first ancient philosopher, and Boethius the last. Ancient philosophy was formed under the influence and influence of the pre-philosophical Greek tradition, which can conditionally be considered as the early stage of the ancient philosophy, as well as the views of the sages of Egypt, Mesopotamia, and ancient Eastern countries.

Relevance of the topic test work is that at the end of the 4th century. BC Greek slave-owning democracy is strengthening. This crisis in Athens led to the loss of political independence. As a result, problems in the economic and political sphere of Greece are reflected in Greek philosophy. Efforts aimed at understanding the objective world, which appeared among the Greek philosophers, are gradually being replaced by the desire to reduce philosophical and scientific questions only to what is sufficient to substantiate the simple, i.e. capable of ensuring happiness, personal behavior.

Gradually, widespread disappointment is being noticed in all types and forms of socio-political life. Philosophy from theoretical system turns into a state of mind and expresses the self-awareness of a person who has lost himself in the world. Over time, interest in philosophical thinking generally declines sharply. The period of mysticism, the fusion of religion and philosophy is coming.

Metaphysics as a philosophy predominantly gives way to ethics; the main question of philosophy of this period becomes not what things are in themselves, but how they relate to us. Philosophy increasingly strives to become a doctrine that develops rules and norms human life. All three main philosophical trends of the era are similar in this early Hellenism-- Stoicism, Epicureanism and Skepticism.

In the Hellenistic era, the main purpose of philosophy was seen in practical life wisdom. Ethics, oriented not at social life, but at the inner world of the individual, acquires paramount importance. The theories of the universe and logic serve ethical purposes: developing the correct attitude towards reality to achieve happiness.

Having different understandings of the paths to happiness, they all similarly saw human bliss in a serene state of mind, achieved by getting rid of false opinions, fears, internal passions leading to suffering. Loss of self and self-doubt gave rise to such a direction of Hellenistic philosophy as skepticism.

The purpose of the work is to identify the specifics of ancient skepticism and establish its place, role and significance in the history of philosophy and philosophical thinking. The set goal involves solving the following problems: to trace the philosophical and historical background of the emergence of ancient skepticism, and who its founder was; find out what the specific worldview of skepticism is.

1. Historical reasons and theoretical background for the emergence of skepticism

Skepticism (from Greek origin skeptikos, literally - examining, exploring). This is a philosophical position based on doubt about the existence of any reliable criterion of truth. An extreme form of Skepticism, based on the assertion that there is nothing in our knowledge that corresponds to reality and reliable knowledge is in principle unattainable, is agnosticism.

In ancient Greek philosophy, Skepticism was represented by a special school, the development of which is distinguishedthree periods :

1. Early Skepticism, whose founder was Pyrrho;

2. Skepticism, developed at the Platonic Academy under its leaders Arcesilaus and Carneades;

3. Late Skepticism, represented by Aenesidemus, Agrippa, Sextus Empiricus, etc.

Skeptics had their own point of view on religion, explaining their position with general philosophical judgments, the basis of which was " hope for equanimity" . Skeptics insisted on refraining from any final judgments, seeing this as a fundamental guarantee of equanimity. They developed methods, or, in other words, paths of abstaining from judgment.

The meaning of these paths is as follows:

1. The futility of trying to find a criterion of truth, like sensory knowledge, and thinking.

2. Emphasizing the differences in moral standards among different peoples.

3. Diversity of religious beliefs.

4. Finding out how different theories refute each other.

5. The idea that every truth is proven by another, and this leads either to a vicious circle in the proof, or to an arbitrary choice of axioms, or to an infinite regress.

6. Arguments showing that the existence of causality cannot be proven.

7. The need to act, making certain decisions, forces the ancient skeptics to admit that although there may be no criterion of truth, there is a criterion of practical behavior. This criterion should be based on " reasonable probability" (Arkesilaus).

Based on the above, it should be noted that everyone knows that the same things different people cause different sensations. A person in different states in relation to the same object receives different ideas. Objects appear different depending on position, distance and location; their quality changes with quantity.

It is no less significant that the difference in judgments about objects is determined by whether they are rare or common and private. For example, a comet strikes us more than the sun, thunder in winter more than thunder in summer, etc. This depends on the fact that our perception is mixed with imagination, which represents the thing together with the activity of the mind, and not in its pure form.

The paths of skeptics also capture the dependence of human judgments " from behavior, customs, laws, fabulous beliefs and dogmatic provisions" . Not wanting to admit the complex nature of knowledge, moreover, considering this very complexity to be proof of the impossibility of true knowledge, they called for abstaining from judgments about the nature of things, even asserting that the best is " abstinence in research" .

Seeking not truth, but intellectual equanimity and peace, skeptics sacrificed everything except all-consuming irony and criticism. Skepticism had a restraining influence on development scientific knowledge. But at the same time, it was precisely this property that skepticism had a corrupting effect on religious thinking, calling into question the reality of the existence of gods and beliefs.

Ancient skepticism calls for following what sensations and feelings attract us to (eat when we feel hungry, etc.). Follow the laws and customs of the country, engage in certain activities (including scientific ones), etc. Leaving a position that equally distrusts sensation and thinking, ancient skepticism gives preference to feelings, knowledge, coming closely to empiricism and experimental science.

1.1 How did skepticism arise?

The period of the highest rise in the material and spiritual culture of Athens is the “golden age” of Pericles, 5th century BC. It's time active work state representative of Athens Pericles, who initiated the construction of the Parthenon, Propylaea, Odeon and Acropolis. The amazing successes achieved by the Greeks instill in thinkers who witnessed these successes the confidence that almost limitless possibilities open up before the human mind.

However historical reason for the emergence of skepticism lies in the fact that in the 3rd century BC the decline and decomposition of those existing in Greece began public relations. The upheavals experienced by Greek society are causing deep disillusionment with the existing socio-political institutions and the views and ideals associated with them. At the same time, it remains not at all clear what orders, views, and ideals are not only necessary, but also possible to replace those that have become obsolete.

As we see, this historical moment favored the emergence of skepticism as an independent philosophical trend. Beginning with Alexander's campaign to the East Hellenistic era was characterized by extreme instability of both economic, political, social and cultural realities. Historical life and individual existence were characterized at this time, first of all, by gloomy unpredictability and the loss of all previous guarantees and guidelines.

Such historical conditions contributed to the emergence of skepticism in two ways.

Firstly, the universal relativity and instability of life naturally caused pessimism, unbelief, doubt, that is, they gave rise to the so-called everyday skepticism or skepticism of mood. And any state or mood inevitably begins to create theoretical justification and confirmation for itself. Thus, the skepticism of the mood, provoked by a specific historical situation, gave rise to or stimulated philosophical skepticism.

Secondly, already known historical realities, in the ethical sphere, characterized by the loss of any external, generally valid foundations, guidelines, principles and guarantees for the individual, inevitably forced him to look for postulates no longer outside, but within himself, turned human thought mainly to ethical issues, causing life, the need for a theoretical justification of subjectivism, the ethical and philosophical search for individual happiness.

The philosophical schools that emerged at this time followed different paths towards the same cherished goal. Self-sufficient happiness (eudaimonia) for the Epicureans is the result of deviation from the world, for the Stoics, on the contrary, it is the result of following it, for the skeptics it is neither one nor the other, but a decisive doubt in everything.

The emergence of skepticism is also closely connected with the fact that, as a result of the crisis that society is experiencing, the center of interests of thinkers, who were so much previously engaged in the theoretical study of being and thinking, nature and society, now turns out to be practical and ethical issues. What should a person’s behavior be like so that he is protected from everything that can disturb him?

The search for an answer to this question and its theoretical justification are given the most attention. Interest is falling not only in public life, but also to a comprehensive study of all reality in general, to knowledge of the world. This is one of the most important circumstances that contributed to the emergence and spread of skepticism.

The emergence and spread of skepticism is due to another very important circumstance - the speculative nature of the doctrines developed in Greece in the VI-III centuries. B.C. Creating their systems long before the emergence of experimental natural science, the great Greek thinkers relied on extremely meager material accumulated through rather primitive observations.

" The highest achievements of ancient philosophy are bold, brilliant guesses, none of which, given the level of knowledge at that time, could be convincingly substantiated by the data of experimental science, since the level of production and practical activity achieved at this stage of history did not provide conditions for the experimental study of nature" (Boguslavsky V.M. “At the origins of French atheism and materialism.” - M., 1964).

The lack of opportunity to conduct experimental experiments, the thinking and views of philosophers on the surrounding nature have advanced amazingly far, but thereby ensured the weakness of their construction without a scientific foundation. By putting forward various philosophical propositions, skepticism emerged.

Criticism of various philosophical schools occupied a particularly large place in the reasoning of skeptics, the essence of which is that one cannot subscribe to any of the opinions defended by them. The comparison and contrast of various currents of Greek philosophy, their research and criticism carried out by the Pyrrhonists and “academics” largely determines the significance that Greek skepticism really had in the history of ancient philosophy.

" Skeptics are scientists among philosophers. Their job is to contrast, and, consequently, to collect various previously expressed statements. They cast a leveling, smoothing scientific glance at the previous systems and thus discovered a contradiction and opposition" (Marx K., Engels F. From early works. - M., 1956).

Skepticism was preceded by the Sophists, led by Protagoras. They prepared skepticism with their relativism and conventionalism. The Sophists, according to skeptics, provided models of argumentation. But other philosophers also prepared skepticism as a critical part of their theories. Democritus, who presents sensory qualities as subjective, and even Plato, the severe critic of sensory knowledge, put weapons into the hands of skeptics.

1.2 Dogma of the ancient skeptic

The skeptic rejected the knowability of life. To maintain inner peace, a person needs to know a lot from philosophy, but not in order to deny something or, conversely, affirm something (every statement is a negation, and, conversely, every negation is an affirmation). The ancient skeptic is by no means a nihilist; he lives as he wants, fundamentally avoiding the need to evaluate anything. He is in constant philosophical search, but he is convinced that true knowledge is, in principle, unattainable. Being appears in all the diversity of its fluidity. In this regard, the skeptic points to time itself, it exists, but it is not there, you cannot “grasp” it. There is no stable meaning at all, everything is fluid, so live the way you want, accept life in its immediate reality.

Having known a lot, he cannot adhere to strictly unambiguous opinions. A skeptic can be neither a judge nor a lawyer. The skeptic Carneades, sent to Rome to petition for the abolition of the tax, spoke before the public one day in favor of the tax, another day against the tax. It is better for the skeptic sage to remain silent. His silence is a philosophical answer to the questions put to him.

By refraining from making certain judgments, the skeptic remains equanimous. The skeptic’s silence can be considered a wise way out of the situation, but one cannot help but see in it the emptiness of thought.

Let us list the main provisions of ancient skepticism:

A) the world is fluid, it has no meaning and no clear definition;

b) every affirmation is at the same time a negation, every “yes” is at the same time a “no”; the true philosophy of skepticism is silence;

V) follow the "world of phenomena."

1.3 Three periods of skepticism

Ancient skepticism went through many changes and phases in its development. At first it was of a practical nature, that is, it acted not only as the most true, but also as the most useful and profitable life position, and then it turned into a theoretical doctrine; initially he questioned the possibility of any knowledge, then he criticized the knowledge, but only that obtained by previous philosophy.

Practical and radical skepticism was proclaimed by the Pyrrhonists, and theoretical and critical skepticism by representatives of the Academy.

Three periods can be distinguished in ancient skepticism:

1. Early Skepticism or Older Pyrrhonism - developed by Pyrrho himself and his student Timon from Phlius, this period dates back to the 3rd century. B.C.

At that time, skepticism was purely practical. Its core was ethics, and dialectics was only the outer shell; from many points of view, it was a doctrine similar to primitive Stoicism and Epicureanism; however, Pyrrho, who was older than Zeno and Epicurus, came up with his teachings before them and, most likely, he influenced them, and not vice versa.

2. Academicism - during this period, when a number of Pyrrho’s students were interrupted, the skeptical trend dominated the Academy; this was in the 3rd and 2nd centuries. BC BC "In the Middle Academy", the most prominent representatives were Arcesilaus (315-240) and Carneade (214-129 BC). skeptic criterion truth individualism

3. Late skepticism or Younger Pyrrhonism- found his supporters when skepticism left the walls of the Academy. Studying the works of representatives of the Academy of a later period, one can see that they systematized skeptical argumentation. The original ethical position faded into the background, and epistemological criticism came to the fore. The main representatives of this period were Aenesidemus and Agrippa. Skepticism gained many supporters in this last period among doctors of the “empirical” school, among whom was Sextus the Empiricist.

2. Pyrrho - founder of skepticism

The founder of ancient skepticism is Greek philosopher Pyrrho. Originally from Elis, lived approximately 376-286. BC e. At first, Pyrrho was engaged in painting, even a painting survived, painted rather ordinary, and only later, in adulthood, he took up philosophy.

Pyrrho lived in solitude, rarely appearing even at home. The inhabitants of Elis respected him for his intelligence and elected him high priest. Moreover, for his sake it was decided to exempt all philosophers from taxes. More than once he left home without telling anyone anything and wandered around with just anyone. One day his friend Anaxarchus fell into a swamp, Pyrrho passed by without shaking hands, everyone scolded him, but Anaxarchus praised him. He lived with his sister and midwife, and went to the market to sell chickens and piglets.

From the history of the formation of the ancient Greek philosopher, there is a story that tells how one day Pyrrho was sailing on a ship with his companions and got caught in a storm, then everyone began to panic, only Pyrrho alone, pointing to the ship’s pig, which was serenely slurping from its trough, said, that this is exactly how you should behave true philosopher.

The formation of Pyrrho's views was most influenced by the teachings of Democritus (ancient Greek philosopher), then he was influenced by Indian magicians and ascetics whom he met when he took part in the campaign of Alexander the Great in Asia.

In the indifference of these philosophers to life and suffering, Pyrrho saw the best remedy to achieve happiness. He developed this idea not only in theory, but was also guided by it in his own life. The attitude of indifference, the basis of the wisdom of the East, was that alien motive which, with the help of Pyrrho, was introduced into the philosophy of the Greeks.

Pyrrho refrained from any judgment, since he had doubts about the knowability of the world. Being a consistent philosopher, he strove throughout his life to be a supporter of this teaching. Pyrrho did not move away from anything, did not shy away from anything, did not avoid any danger, in nothing, without being exposed to the feeling of danger.

He considered sensations to be reliable (if something seems bitter or sweet, then it will be a true statement). Misconception arises when we try to move from a phenomenon to its basis, essence. However, any statement about an object (its essence) can with equal right be contrasted with a statement that contradicts it. We must refrain from making final judgments - (skepticism). Pyrrho took his doubts to the limit, to the maximum imaginable limit. Neither ideas nor concepts are possible.

Like Epicurus (ancient Greek philosopher, founder of Epicureanism in Athens), Pyrrho sought the secret of happiness, understanding it as freedom from the shackles of the world. Having recognized that feelings do not provide a true picture of existence, and reason is not capable of providing indisputable evidence, skeptics elevated doubt to principles, completely denying the objective value of any theoretical statement.

Skeptics believed that we are doomed to live by “opinions” alone, that there is no rational criterion that would be a sufficiently solid foundation for a worldview. This is the indisputable merit of the Pyrrhonists in the history of thought.

3. Founder of an ancient skeptical school

Pyrrho was of the opinion that nothing in reality is neither beautiful nor ugly, nor just nor unjust, since in itself everything is the same, and therefore it is not more one than the other. Everything that is unequal and different is human institutions and customs.

Things are inaccessible to our knowledge - the method of abstaining from judgment is based on this. As a practical-moral ideal method, “equanimity”, “serenity” (ataraxia) is derived from this.

The ethical area occupied an important place in Pyrrhonian skepticism. There are a number of terms that, with the light hand of Pyrrho, became widespread throughout subsequent philosophy. For example:

· term "epoch", denoting “abstinence” from all judgment. Since we don’t know anything, then, according to Pyrrho, we should refrain from making any judgments.

· term "adiaphoron", as Pyrrho said, for all of us everything is “indifferent.” As a result of abstaining from all judgments, we must act only as everyone usually does, according to the morals and orders in our country.

· term "ataraxia"- "equanimity", and "apathea"- “insensitivity”, “dispassion”. This is exactly what should be the internal state of a sage who has abandoned a reasonable explanation of reality and a reasonable attitude towards it.

Pyrrhonism - Pyrrho's teachings, Pyrrhonists are followers of Pyrrho's teachings. The name Pyrrhonism is identified in meaning with skepticism. Skeptics doubted everything, refuted the dogmas of other schools, but did not affirm anything themselves. Skeptics denied the truth of any knowledge and rejected any evidence.

Pyrrhonists come to the conclusion that feelings in themselves do not carry truth. The senses cannot judge themselves, and therefore they cannot determine whether they are true or false. That is, we can say that this or that object is red or green, sweet or bitter, but we do not know what it really is. He's like that only for us.

According to Piron, any statement we make about any subject can be countered with equal right and with equal force by a statement that contradicts it.

From the impossibility of making any statements about any objects, Pyrrho concludes that the only appropriate way for a philosopher to relate to things can only be to refrain from making any judgments about them.

According to Pyrrho - if we refrain from any judgments about things, then we will achieve equanimity (ataraxia), which is the highest degree of happiness available to a philosopher.

4. Skepticism as a theoretical justification for individualism

The search for individual happiness leads to the fact that ethics begins to dominate and becomes philosophy par excellence, as a moral teaching, the science of happiness, of true life. Responding to the practical, moral needs of society, philosophy is popularized.

Philosophers form a special class, which in the era of empire everywhere receives special rights, privileges and distinctions. Rich men, noble ladies, kings and cities support philosophers and sophists - sworn teachers of “virtue and education.” The moral crisis, which worsened already in the Hellenistic era and was caused by the deep decomposition of ancient morals, state and religion, gave rise to the need for morality based on true knowledge.

Is the nature of things knowable, what is it and how should we behave in accordance with the true nature of things? - these are the three main questions of logic, physics and ethics, which have the highest practical significance. Speculative creativity has weakened; authoritative morality presupposes either a decisive dogmatic teaching about the nature of things, or complete skepticism in relation to any kind of knowledge.

The extreme development of individualistic subjectivism in morality is represented by the ancient skeptics of the school of Pyrrho, who, in contrast to the Stoics and Epicureans, tried to base the rules of behavior on the consciousness of the absolute impossibility of objective knowledge. Skeptical abstinence from any judgment about things, actions and their goals gradually leads us to true wisdom, that is, to the same complete indifference and indifference.

IN philosophical system Pyrrho, as in the systems of the Stoics and Epicureans, theory was subordinate to practice, although there was a fundamental difference between these teachings. While the Stoics and Epicureans believed that science or positive knowledge was the means to achieve peace of mind, skeptics sought to achieve the same thing by denying knowledge and distrusting science.

Skepticism and the resulting distrust of judgment extended to the practical life of people. Nothing in itself can be ugly or beautiful, right or false, or at least we cannot be sure of anything - all external things in our life are completely indifferent to us.

The goal of a sage's life is to achieve peace of mind and try to maintain it.

According to Pyrrho's student Timon, one cannot trust sensory perception, no reason. Therefore, we must be suspicious of all judgments, not allow ourselves to believe any theoretical statement, and then we can achieve true ataraxia or equanimity.

Pyrrho's skepticism is clearly of practical rather than dialectical interest. He tries to give a person complete independence from knowledge. Knowledge is attributed little importance, because it can be erroneous, and therefore, the benefit of knowledge for the happiness of people - this goal of life - is doubtful. You cannot learn to live correctly; there are no definite rules for the art of living.

The most expedient thing is a greater limitation in knowledge and its role in life, but it is impossible to completely get rid of knowledge. While a person lives, he experiences coercion from sensations, from external nature and society. All the “paths” of skeptics, therefore, do not have meaning in themselves, but represent only indirect indications.

The purpose of Pyrrho's philosophizing -- establish yourself in a state of complete indifference, absolute independence, inner freedom, dispassion, similar condition Pyrrho considers it divine. For him, everything is indifferent, with the exception of indifference to indifferent things, which, in the final analysis, is virtue and, therefore, absolute value. Achieving such indifference is not an easy task: for this, according to Pyrrho, it is necessary " completely renounce human characteristics" , i.e., completely abandon the human point of view.

Perhaps these words imply that, " renouncing human qualities" , the philosopher radically changes his worldview, overcoming the limitations of the human point of view and rising to a comprehensive view.

Soon after Pyrrho, Arcesilaus developed theoretical skepticism at the Academy, developing the skeptical elements of Platonic and Socratic dialectics in polemics against the Stoics. A century later, Carneades gave new luster to this reformed Academy as a powerful dialectician and philosophical critic. His destructive work greatly contributed to the disintegration of dogmatic teachings and the development of eclecticism. His criticism of rational theology cleared the way for religious speculation in subsequent centuries.

Conclusion

Summing up the test work, it should be added that during the Hellenistic period the worldview orientation of philosophy changes, its interest is increasingly focused on the life of an individual.

Skeptics substantiate the principles of their philosophy only by a critical analysis of sensations, emotions, concepts, judgments, conclusions, evidence, various philosophical and scientific theories. All the attention of skeptics, all their research is focused on examining the phenomena of our consciousness.

Ancient skeptics, refuting the dogmas of other schools, sought not to express their own judgments, they argued that theoretical constructions on absolute truth were invalid, and the truth of all knowledge of antiquity was only probable and relative. It is obvious that these ideas are worthy of the attention of philosophers of all times. Ancient skepticism, with its research, seeking aspiration and disappointment in the results, invites the knower to be equanimous, to refrain from judgments about truth, theory, to follow experience, customs, common sense and prudence.

Today there are an increasing number of people to whom the word “skeptic” can be applied. The immorality of society, crime, the growth of epidemics, wars, the economic crisis, and neglect of spiritual values ​​prompt many to take the path of skepticism. These people believe that in this way they protect themselves from an uncomfortable and unsightly reality. The ancient Greeks were tormented by similar questions, one of whose famous philosophical schools was called" skeptics" .

Literature

1. Zeller E. "Essay on the history of Greek philosophy." - M., 1996

2. Pereverzentsev S.V. "Workshop on the history of Western European philosophy (Antiquity, Middle Ages, Renaissance)." - M., 1997

3. Asmus V.F. "Ancient Philosophy". - M., 1998

4. Gaidenko P.P. "The history of Greek philosophy in its connection with science." - M., 2000

5. Losev A.F. "Story antique aesthetics". - M., 2000

6. V. M. Boguslavsky. "Skepticism in Philosophy". - M.: Science, 1990

7. Gusev D.A. "Ancient skepticism and philosophy of science: dialogue through two millennia." - St. Petersburg: Prometheus, 2015

8. Asmus V.F. "Ancient Philosophy". - M.: Higher School, 1996

Posted on Allbest.ru

...

Similar documents

General principle of skepticism. 10 tropes of Aenesidemus. Lack of evidence of reasoning. Systematization of the skepticism of Sextus Empiricus. Separation of the sensory and mental. The dependence of perception on external conditions, on the structure of the body and on the characteristics of individuals.

presentation, added 02/19/2015


The essence and structure of the cognitive process. The role and place of the sensual, rational and irrational in knowledge. The concept of truth and its criteria. Epistemological relativism and its supporters. Agnosticism as an exaggerated form of skepticism.

abstract, added 04/24/2009


Classification of epistemological programs. Skepticism is one of the most ancient cognitive programs. The essence of skepticism is the denial of the possibility of achieving the true. Agnosticism is a position that denies the possibility of knowing the essence of things.

abstract, added 03/30/2009


General provisions of skepticism in the works of Sextus Empiricus. The essence of ethical relativism. Sextus Empiricist's critique of the concept of “good” in the concepts of various philosophers. Criticism of the provisions put forward by Sextus Empiricus, and skeptics’ objections to this criticism.

course work, added 12/29/2016


Features of the philosophy of the ancient stage of development, its originality and main problems. The leading ideas of Socrates' philosophy. The philosopher's belief in the existence of objective truth. Fundamental philosophical teachings and the basic traditions of social life.

abstract, added 12/19/2014


Sides of really existing knowledge. Problems of the nature and possibilities of knowledge, the relationship of knowledge to reality. Philosophical positions on the problem of knowledge. Principles of skepticism and agnosticism. Basic forms of knowledge. The nature of the cognitive attitude.

presentation, added 09/26/2013


Provisions of philosophical schools of the Hellenistic era. Statements of Piron - ancient Greek philosopher, founder of skepticism. Stages of development and the concept of stoicism. Pleasure as the main one ethical principle Epicureanism. Essence and characteristic features Neoplatonism.

presentation, added 05/17/2014


A brief biographical sketch of the life and work of the influential French thinker, Protestant Pierre Bayle. The origins of Bayle's ideology of religious tolerance and famous works on this topic. Features of Bayle's skepticism, historical significance.

abstract, added 11/23/2009


Periodization of ancient philosophy. Achievement of the philosophy of Democritus. Antisthenes as the founder of the school of cynics. The Stoic school is the most popular in Ancient Greece. Types of worldview: mythological; religious; philosophical. Atheism, skepticism, pantheism.

test, added 11/22/2010


The criterion of truth is understood as a resolving procedure that allows one to evaluate knowledge as true or false. The most important aspects of the criteria of truth. Practice as a criterion of truth. Empirical criteria of truth. The problem of universal criteria of truth.

A special place in the philosophy of Hellenism belongs to the teachings of skeptics, for skepticism also penetrates into other theories of the Hellenistic world. The founder of skepticism was Pyrrho(365-275 BC). Skepticism and doubt regarding sensory knowledge worried Greek philosophy already from an early stage of development (the philosophical teachings of Parmenides, the Sophists and Plato).

Ancient skepticism presented by:

1. Pyrrho,

2. secondary academy (Arcesilaus)

3. late skepticism (Aenesidemus, Agrippa, Sextus Empiricus).

1. Pyrrho of Elis (c. 360 BC - 270 BC) formulated and systematized old doubts, added moral and logical skepticism to skepticism in the field of feelings. On this basis, the philosopher tries to solve the most important problem for practical philosophy about the conditions for the possibility of happiness. Happiness, according to Pyrrho, may consist of undisturbed calm and the absence of suffering. Anyone who wants to achieve it must, first of all, answer three questions: what things are made of, how we should treat them and what benefits we will get from our attitude towards them. To these questions, according to the skeptical attitude towards the sensory and rational knowledge, we can't give a definite answer. Based on this, it is true the philosophical way of relating to things is in abstaining from any judgments about them. The benefit from abstaining from all judgments will be equanimity or serenity, in which skepticism sees the highest degree of bliss for the philosopher. A “practical” person should know that there can be no rational basis for preferring one course of action to another. In practice, this meant that you must obey the customs of any country if you live in it, because it is impossible to prove that the existing order of things is wrong.

2. The skeptical concept was taken up by Plato's Academy, which continued to exist after Plato's death. Arcesilaus He also used skepticism as a pedagogical device. He did not assert any theses, but refuted any that the student put forward. Sometimes he put forward two opposing positions and successively showed how one can argue in favor of each of them. The method taught dexterity of thinking and instilled indifference to the truth. The Academy was skeptical for about two centuries. Academics have developed a positive doctrine of degrees of probability: one must act on the most probable hypothesis possible.

3. Aenesidemus- Greek philosopher of the 1st century BC. e., head of the Alexandrian school of skeptics. He called himself a follower of Pyrrho. Aenesidemus reproaches the Academy for basing their reasoning on dogmas, that is, on arbitrary statements presented as truth without any reason.

The meaning of skepticism Aenesidemus sees not in the denial of knowledge, but in the discovery of its relativity: “What is knowable for one is not knowable for another”. One cannot speak either of achieving the truth or of the impossibility of knowing anything. To show the impossibility true knowledge based on perception or observation, Aenesidemus sequentially sets out ten arguments (“ten tropes”):

1. different living beings feel differently, and it is completely impossible to understand who feels “correctly”;

2. There is also no unity among people. Their feelings and their attitudes towards the same things are so different that there is no point in trusting either your own or someone else's judgment;

3. one person has several different senses, the evidence of which is different, and it is not clear which one should be given preference;

4. a person’s state is constantly changing, and depending on this he makes different judgments;

5. Judgment or assessment of a situation also depends on the customs of the people to which a person belongs. These estimates may be directly opposite;

6. Not a single thing appears in its pure form, but is always perceived mixed with other things. Therefore, nothing can be said to be what it really is;

7. things appear different depending on the place they occupy;

8. things vary depending on their quantity and quality;

9. the perception of things also depends on how often they occur;

10. Judgments about a thing do not express it itself, but its relationship to other things and to the perceiver.

All ten tropes indicate the need to refrain from judgment, since judgments made on the basis of feelings have only relative value and can be neither uniquely true nor unambiguously false.

From the doctrine of abstinence from judgment, Aenesidemus draws important ethical conclusions. In life, one should refrain from judging anything as good or evil. There is no basis for asserting anything about virtue, wisdom or happiness. A person cannot even say about himself whether he is good or bad, whether he is virtuous or evil, happy or unhappy. But in this case, there is no need to torment yourself with meaningless aspirations, but should be satisfied with any state of affairs and achieve complete equanimity (ataraxia) in all life circumstances.

Skeptics took up arms against beliefs in deity, magic, astrology, which became more and more widespread. The arguments they put forward are still used today.

Ethics

Theory

Concept

In carrying out its program, cynicism started from generally accepted views and developed new ones, directly opposite to existing ones, using the method of “negative filiation of ideas” (παραχᾰράττειν τό νόμισμα, “re-minting of coins”). Certain elements characteristic of Cynic ethics were “in the air” and were found, in addition to Socrates, for example, in the philosophy of the Sophists and in Euripides. But specifically these ideas were formalized as a system precisely by the school of cynicism:

• Askesis(ἄσκησις), the ability to self-denial and endure difficulties. The askesis of the Cynics is an extreme simplification; limiting your needs to the limit; detachment from what is not absolutely necessary for the function of man as a living being; "strength of spirit, character."

• Apedeusia(ἀπαιδευσία), the ability to free oneself from the dogmas of religion and culture. Cynic apedeusia - detachment from culture and society. Cynics believe that culture (in particular writing) makes knowledge dead; thus, lack of education, bad manners and illiteracy are considered [cynic] virtues.

• Autarky(αὐτάρκεια), the ability for independent existence and self-restraint. Cynic autarchy - independence and self-sufficiency, renunciation of family, renunciation of the state.

The founder of the school, Antisthenes, opposed the division of the world, traditional since the time of the Eleatic school, into intelligible (“in truth”) and sensible (“in opinion”) existence, and thus against Plato’s teaching about incorporeal “species” or “ideas” comprehended by the mind ( which anticipated Aristotle’s criticism of Plato’s ideas).

The reality of the general does not exist, but only individual things exist; a concept is only a word that explains what a thing is or what it is. Therefore, application to individual items general concepts impossible; neither a combination of different concepts (in the unity of a judgment), nor a definition of concepts, nor even a contradiction is possible - since only a judgment of identity can be expressed about a thing (a horse is a horse, a table is a table). Plato’s doctrine of intelligible “species” is untenable, since a single, sensually perceived copy kind, but not the “view” or “idea” itself.

This position contains the principle of wisdom as practical knowledge of the good. Wisdom consists Not out of reach of humans theoretical knowledge. Only practical reason integrated with worldly wisdom is recognized; “correct” science is considered one of the most harmful phenomena. True good can only be the property of each individual, but not common to many, and the goal of a virtuous life can accordingly be not wealth, which can be disparate, but health (peace, tranquility, etc.). The absence of general “types” posits good as detachment from everything that makes a person dependent on the (illusory) common: property, pleasures, artificial and conventional concepts.

The main task of philosophy, Antisthenes argued, is to study the inner world of man, to understand what is the true good for man. Therefore, cynicism does not create abstract theories, in abstraction from the abstract it strives for the limit and as a system it is a complex practical ideals.

Cynic ethics proceeds from a fundamental frontal denial and rejection of the moral code of the average individual. Such ethics, first of all, are negative, “crosses out” generally accepted values ​​and requires “unlearning from evil,” that is, a break with established moral norms. The concept of cynic virtue boils down to this. to four points:

• Naturalism, based on the priority of nature; not from the maximum nature, but from the minimum nature, which presupposes the lowest level of needs and only the economically necessary rate of consumption.

• Subjectivism, based on “free will”; on the strength of spirit, character, ability for independent existence, self-restraint, self-denial, enduring difficulties, liberation from the shackles of religion, state, family, etc.

• Individualism, orienting human behavior towards achieving independence from society, which imposes on him alien and hostile responsibilities that induce properties alien to him.

• Eudaimonism, suggesting salvation and happiness in poverty, moderation, detachment, which are natural for a reasonable, virtuous person who understands the true price of things. [ source?]

Thus, the ethical ideal of cynicism is formed as:

• extreme simplicity bordering on a pre-cultural state;
• contempt for all needs except the basic ones, without which life itself would be impossible;
• a mockery of all conventions;
• demonstrative naturalness and unconditionality of personal freedom.

As a sum, at the center of Cynic philosophy is man with his natural worries. The cynic seeks the norm in the nature of man as a species and an individual, and does not wait for divine instructions to decide his own life. At the same time, the individualistic protest of the Cynics does not degenerate into egoism, ready to satisfy ego one at the expense of others. The individualism of the Cynics leads to the principle of internal freedom, which is achieved by fighting oneself, but not against “social evil.” Thus, the denial of the Cynics was not nihilism.

20. Skepticism

(from ancient Greek σκεπτικός - examining, exploring) - philosophical direction, putting forward doubt as a principle of thinking, especially doubt about the reliability of truth. Moderate skepticism limited to knowledge of facts, showing restraint in relation to all hypotheses and theories.

Sextus Empiricus in his work “Three Books of Pyrrhonian Propositions” noted that skepticism does not consider doubt as a principle, but uses doubt as a polemical weapon against dogmatists, the principle of skepticism is a phenomenon. One should distinguish between ordinary skepticism, scientific and philosophical skepticism. In the ordinary sense, skepticism is abstention from judgment due to doubt. Scientific skepticism is consistent opposition to teachings that do not have empirical evidence. Philosophical skepticism is a direction in philosophy that expresses doubt about the possibility of reliable knowledge. Philosophical skepticism considers philosophy, including skeptical philosophy, as a kind of scientific poetry, but not science. Distinctive feature [source not specified 931 days] philosophical skepticism - the statement “Philosophy is not science!”

Ancient skepticism as a reaction to metaphysical dogmatism, it is represented first of all by Pyrrho, then by the middle academy (Arkesilaus), and the so-called. late skepticism(Aenesidemus, Agrippa, Sextus Empiricus). Aenesidemus points out ten principles (tropes) of skepticism: the first six are the distinction of living beings; people; sense organs; states of the individual; positions, distances, places; phenomena according to their connections; the last four principles are the mixed existence of the perceived object with other objects; relativity in general; dependence on the number of perceptions; dependence on the level of education, morals, laws, philosophical and religious views.

features of the style of philosophical thinking of the Middle Ages:

1. If the ancient worldview was cosmocentric, then the medieval one was theocentric. For Christianity, the reality that determines everything in the world is not nature, the cosmos, but God. God is a person who exists above this world.

2. The originality of the philosophical thinking of the Middle Ages lay in its close connection with religion. Church dogma was the starting point and basis of philosophical thinking. The content of philosophical thought acquired a religious form.

3. Introduction real existence the supernatural principle (God) forces us to look at the world, the meaning of history, human goals and values ​​from a special angle. The medieval worldview is based on the idea of ​​creation (the doctrine of the creation of the world by God out of nothing - creationism).

Christianity brought into the philosophical environment the idea of ​​linear history. History moves forward to Judgment Day. History is understood as a manifestation of the will of God, as the implementation of a predetermined divine plan for the salvation of man (providentialism).

Christian philosophy seeks to comprehend the internal personal mechanisms of assessment - conscience, religious motive, self-awareness. The orientation of a person’s entire life towards the salvation of the soul is a new value preached by Christianity.

4. The philosophical thinking of the Middle Ages was retrospective, looking to the past. For the medieval consciousness, “the more ancient, the more authentic, the more authentic, the truer.”

5. The style of philosophical thinking of the Middle Ages was distinguished by traditionalism. For the medieval philosopher, any form of innovation was considered a sign of pride, therefore, excluding subjectivity as much as possible from the creative process, he had to adhere to the established pattern, canon, tradition. What was valued was not creativity and originality of thought, but erudition and adherence to tradition.

6. The philosophical thinking of the Middle Ages was authoritarian and relied on authorities. The most authoritative source is the Bible. Medieval philosopher turns to biblical authority for confirmation of his opinion.

7. Philosophy of the Middle Ages - commentary philosophy. A significant part of medieval works was written in the form of commentary. The commentary was mainly on the Holy Scriptures. The preference given in religion to authority, to statements sanctified by tradition over opinions expressed on one’s own behalf, encouraged similar behavior in the sphere of philosophical creativity. The leading genre of philosophical literature in the Middle Ages was the genre of commentary.

8. As a feature, the exegetical nature of medieval philosophizing should be noted. For a medieval thinker, the starting point for theorizing is text Holy Scripture. This text is the source of truth and the final explanatory authority. The thinker’s task is not to analyze and criticize the text, but only to interpret it. The text, sanctified by tradition, in which not a word can be changed, despotically rules the philosopher’s thought, sets its limit and measure. Therefore, Christian philosophizing can be understood as philosophical exegesis (interpretation) of the sacred text. The philosophy of the Middle Ages is the philosophy of the text.

9. The style of philosophical thinking of the Middle Ages is distinguished by the desire for impersonality. Many works of this era have reached us anonymously. The medieval philosopher does not speak on his own behalf, he argues on behalf of “Christian philosophy.”

10. Philosophical thinking of the Middle Ages was characterized by didacticism (teaching, edification). Almost all the famous thinkers of that time were either preachers or teachers of theological schools. Hence, as a rule, the “teacher”, edifying character of philosophical systems.

11. Medieval philosophy, in contrast to the ancient one, highlights:

Being (existence) - existence;

Essence - essence. 2

Existence (being, existence) shows whether a thing exists at all (that is, exists or does not exist). Essence (essence) characterizes a thing.

If ancient philosophers saw essence and existence in an indissoluble unity, then, according to Christian philosophy, essence can take place without being (without existence). To become an existent (being), an entity must be created by God.

Medieval philosophical thought went through three stages in its development:

1. Patristics (Latin pater - father) - works of the church fathers.

Initially, the “father of the church” was a spiritual mentor with recognized teaching authority. Later this concept was clarified and began to include four characteristics: 1) holiness of life; 2) antiquity; 3) orthodoxy of teaching; 4) official recognition of the church.

The works written by the church fathers laid the foundations of Christian dogmas. True philosophy, from the point of view of the church fathers, is identical to theology, faith always takes precedence over reason, and truth is the truth of Revelation. Patristics, based on the role it played in society, is divided into apologetic and systematic. According to the language criterion - into Greek and Latin, or (which is somewhat more conventional) into Western and Eastern. In the East, systematics prevailed, in the West - apologetics.

The pinnacle of Latin patristics is the work of Aurelius Augustine; the classics of Greek patristics are represented by Basil the Great, Gregory of Nazianzus and Gregory of Nyssa.

2. Scholasticism - type religious philosophy, characterized by a fundamental subordination to the primacy of theology, a combination of dogmatic premises with rationalistic methodology and a special interest in formal logical problems.

The greatest scholastic of Western European philosophy was Thomas Aquinas. For example, the debate between Thomas Aquinas and Albertus Magnus in the courtyard of the University of Paris on the topic “Does a mole have eyes” was essentially scholastic? This verbal tournament lasted for several hours - and all to no avail. Everyone stood their ground, earnestly and unshakably. But then a gardener happened to overhear this learned debate and offer his services. “If you want,” he says, “I’ll bring you a real live mole this very moment. This will resolve your dispute.” “No way. Never! We are arguing in principle: does a principled mole have principled eyes.”

By scholasticism is meant (this is obvious from the example given) also formal knowledge, fruitless reasoning, divorced from life, from practice. This is where the expression “scholastic theorizing” comes from. An example of scholastic thinking can be questions of this kind: can God create a stone that he himself cannot lift? Or: which came first - the chicken or the egg? How many devils can fit on the tip of one needle? (The last question sounds especially relevant today, during the rampant drug addiction).

3. Mysticism is a philosophy that comprehends religious practice the unity of man with God, the immersion of the contemplating spirit in the ocean divine light. If in scholasticism the speculative-logical aspect prevailed, then in mysticism the contemplative aspect prevailed. All mystical teachings tend to irrationalism, intuitionism, deliberate paradoxicality; they express themselves not so much in the language of concepts as in the language of symbols. A bright representative of mysticism late Middle Ages V Western Europe was the German thinker Meister Eckhart.

Definition 1

Skepticism – philosophical movement, which is based on doubt, which acts as a principle of thinking. This doubt was directed at the concept of the reliability of existing truth.

The Key Point of Skepticism– requirement of confidence in knowledge.

Skepticism is perhaps one of the most tolerant directions in philosophy, he does not deny any ideology or teaching, but only points out that one cannot blindly follow what they study.

By focusing on the relativity of human knowledge, skepticism plays a positive role in the fight against dogmatism in philosophy and knowledge. The negative consequences of this trend can be considered pluralism of opinions and knowledge, which ultimately led to even deeper doubt and immorality.

Thus, skepticism is a complex and contradictory phenomenon.

In his work “The Three Books of Pyrrhon’s Propositions” the philosopher Sextus Empiricus believed skepticism as a tool for polemics with dogmatists.

Skepticism is divided into:

• Ordinary.
• Methodological.
• Religious.
• Scientific.
• Philosophical.

Skepticism in philosophy has manifested itself as a direction that expresses doubt about the reliability of knowledge.

In scientific skepticism, any knowledge that does not have empirical evidence is called into question.

Definition 2

Everyday skepticism– avoiding judgments that are caused by doubts.

Ancient Greek Skepticism

At the origins of ancient skepticism stood the ancient Greek philosopher - Xenophanes. The main basis of ancient skepticism was developed by Pyrrho, speaking out against metaphysical dogmatism.

Pyrrho asked the following questions:

• what are things by nature?
• How should we treat them?
• What does this mean for us?

Later, a secondary academy with Arkesilaem continued his line.

Late skepticism was introduced Enexidemus, Agrippus, Sextus Empiricus. Aenesidemus developed ten tropes or principles of skepticism. From the first to the sixth, he included discussions about animals, humans, sense organs, and phenomena. The remaining principles were aimed at the study of mixed existence, the perception of objects by each other, the relativity of perception.

Ancient Roman skepticism

Note 1

Another equally important movement in ancient Roman philosophy is ancient Roman skepticism. Representative - Aenesidemus of Knossos. His teaching was influenced great influence ancient Greek skepticism of Pyrrho. The main motive for Aenesidemus' skepticism was opposition to the dogmatism of early philosophical concepts.

He paid attention to the contradictory theories of other philosophers. His skepticism concluded that it was impossible to make any judgments about reality that were based on sensations. This is a doubt about the correctness of the most influential theories of all ancient philosophy.

During the period of younger skepticism, the figure is distinguished Sexta Empirica , who followed the same path of doubting both Greek philosophy and mathematics, rhetoric, and grammar.

Basic Attempts at Skepticism- prove that this direction is the original path of philosophy, not mixed with other philosophical trends

Medieval Skepticism

In the 16th-17th century in the Middle Ages, a new interest in skepticism began to arise, largely due to interest in ancient knowledge and the writings of early skeptics. A new Pyrrhonism begins to develop, which later resulted in new European agnosticism. Representatives - , Erasmus of Rotterdam, Nicholas of Ortrekur.

Virgo