Add to favorites

The main philosophers of modern times. Philosophy of the New Age

Introduction. 3

Philosophy of the New Age. 4

Conclusion. 9

References.. 10

Introduction

Relevance of the research topic:

European philosophy of modern times covers the 17th - 19th centuries. Each of the three centuries that make up the New Age has its own historical face. The 17th century is the century of “revolutionary criticism” of feudalism and rationalistic criticism of scholasticism. The 18th century is the century of Enlightenment with its cult of Reason, historical optimism, confidence in the meaningful grace of renewal and arrangement of the world. The 19th century is the era of the heyday of modern culture and at the same time the beginning of its crisis associated with the discovery of dead ends in man’s purely rational and instrumental relationship to the world.

This is a time of merciless criticism of metaphysical dogmas, religious superstitions and moral prejudices, faith in changing the inhumane nature of relations between people and deliverance from political tyranny. This is the time of the scientific revolution, which began with the discoveries of N. Copernicus, I. Kepler, G. Galileo, and was completed by I. Newton. This is the time of transformation into independent scientific branches of physics, chemistry, biology, mathematics, mechanics, and other search and research practices. The time when the philosophy of science arose, the center of which became the theory of knowledge, the laws of thinking that operate in all sciences. New times have brought (not least thanks to the rapid development of science) even greater diversity, and significant philosophical ideas have increasingly begun to be put forward.

The purpose of this work is to give a general description of the modern era in terms of the development of philosophical thought, and to analyze the contribution of individual great philosophers of the era to the creation of new philosophical teachings, schools and doctrines.

Philosophy of the New Age

The philosophy of the New Age, which expressed the essential features of this era, changed not only value orientations, but also the way of philosophizing. It is usually called classic. This concept is used to designate a period of development of philosophy that has continuity and unity of values, which retained their normative character regardless of the change of eras and subordination in relation to science and theology. The main attitude of this period is the recognition of reason as the highest authority, at least within philosophy.

Also in the philosophy of the New Age a number of specific problems and attitudes appear: 1) complete secularization of science. The synthesis of science with religion, faith with reason is impossible. No authorities are recognized except the authority of reason itself (T. Hobbes), 2) promotion of science to the rank of the most important occupation of humanity. It is science that can enrich humanity, save it from troubles and suffering, raise society to a new stage of development, and ensure social progress (F. Bacon); 3) the development of science and man's ultimate subjugation of nature. Perhaps when the main method of thinking is formed, the method of “pure” reason, capable of operating in all sciences (R. Descartes) The theory of knowledge becomes the center of modern philosophy.

Of course, other problems of philosophy do not disappear, but develop, including problems related to religion, morality, human problems, etc. But they are pushed to the periphery of the interests of philosophers.

Thinkers of the 17th century were interested in the problem of determining the source of human knowledge and the cognitive role of sensory and rational forms of knowledge. Discrepancies in the assessment of the role of these forms of knowledge gave rise to the main directions of modern European philosophy: rationalism and empiricism (most personified by the names of their founders and developers: R. Descartes and T. Hobbes).

Empiricism is a direction in philosophy that considers sensory experience to be the main source of knowledge (T. Hobbes: there is nothing in the mind, no matter what is in the feelings). A special form is sensationalism, which derives all knowledge from sensations. Rationalism is the opposite direction to empiricism, emphasizing the autonomy of the mind from the senses, the limitations of sensory experience and, on this basis, the priority of reason in knowledge. Table 1 gives a clearer idea of the basic epistemological concepts of the New Age:

Table 1

Basic epistemological concepts of the New Age: empiricism and rationalism

The philosophy of the "Modern Time" began with the astronomical revolution of Copernicus, which changed the image of the world. Copernicus places the Sun at the center of the world instead of the Earth. Kepler develops a theory of the circular rotation of planets. Newton confirmed many of these ideas experimentally.
Secondly, the image of science is changing. The scientific revolution is not only about creating new theories that are different from previous ones. This is also a new idea of knowledge, of science. Science is no longer the product of the intuitions of the individual magician. This knowledge is open to everyone, the reliability of which can always be confirmed through experiment.
Thirdly, scientific ideas, since they become a fact accessible to public control, are socialized. Academies, laboratories, and international scientific contacts emerge.
As commodity-money relations gradually develop in the depths of feudalism and the beginnings of capitalist production take shape, the need for a new vision of the world is maturing. Feudal privileges, class boundaries, as well as numerous barriers between feudal kingdoms and principalities, reveal their incompatibility with the development of capitalist industry and trade. Freeing himself from the shackles of feudal relations, a person strives for self-affirmation, self-awareness, and a more correct understanding of his place in the world.
A new era of culture is associated with this desire - the era of the European Renaissance or Renaissance. Although the philosophers of the Renaissance (XIV-XVII centuries) believed that they were simply reviving interest in ancient philosophy and science, they, often without seeing it, created a new worldview. For Christianity and the Middle Ages, the only creative force is God. Even a person who has a god-like soul is only a worm of the earth. Emerging capitalism developed the initiative and activity of the individual, and the thinkers of the Renaissance placed man at the center of the universe, emphasizing that it was man who was the main figure and the supreme judge of his own rationality and purpose.
Hence the interest in human dignity, in human freedom and reason. Gradually freeing themselves from the authority of medieval philosophy, Renaissance thinkers created an anthropocentric (from the Greek 2.0 anthropos - man) worldview, welcoming and justifying humanism and individualism.
The most important distinguishing feature of the Renaissance worldview is its focus on art. If the Middle Ages can be called a religious era, then the Renaissance can be called an artistic and aesthetic era. And if the focus of attention in antiquity was nature, the cosmos, in the Middle Ages - God and the associated idea of salvation, then in the Renaissance the focus is on man.
During the Renaissance, the value of the individual person increased as never before. Neither in antiquity nor in the Middle Ages was there such a burning interest in man in all the diversity of his manifestations. The originality and uniqueness of each individual is placed above all else in this era. Refined artistic taste is able to recognize and appreciate this uniqueness everywhere. Originality and difference from others here become the most important sign of a great personality. It was the Renaissance that gave the world a whole galaxy of outstanding individuals, great humanists with a bright temperament, comprehensive education, who stood out among the rest with their will, determination, and enormous energy. But the philosophy of the Renaissance was a transitional stage to the philosophy of a mature bourgeois society. In the XVII-XVIII centuries. The next period in the development of philosophy began, which is commonly called the philosophy of the New Age.
At this time, due to the intensive development of industry, navigation, trade and great geographical discoveries, the flow of information increased sharply, as a result of which the horizons of European scientists expanded enormously. Thanks to the great discoveries of N. Copernicus (1473-1543), G. Galileo (1564-1642) and I. Kepler (1571-1635), a new natural science emerges. Its distinctive feature is the combination of a theory formulated in the language of algebra and geometry with pre-planned observation and experiment. New branches of natural science are developing rapidly - mechanics, physics, chemistry, experimental biology. The more complex scientific problems accumulate, the more acute the need for a philosophical analysis of knowledge—for a general methodology of knowledge—is felt. At the same time, new knowledge radically changes the scientific picture of the world. Cognition becomes the central problem of philosophy, and its relationship to the material objects being studied becomes the core of new philosophical directions. This period in the development of philosophy was called gnosecentric (from the Greek gnosis - knowledge, cognition). One of these directions is rationalism (from the Latin ratio-reason) - highlights the logical foundations of science. Ideas are considered the main source of knowledge, i.e. thoughts and concepts that are supposedly inherent in a person or are his innate abilities. But rationalism cannot answer the question of how these ideas can provide true, correct knowledge about the world around us, which guarantees truth. The most prominent representatives of rationalism at that time were R. Descartes (1596-165O), B. Spinoza (1632-1677), G. Leibniz (1646-1716) and a number of other thinkers.
Another philosophical direction - empiricism (from the Greek empiria - experience) claims that all knowledge arises from experience and observations. At the same time, it remains unclear how scientific theories, laws and concepts arise that cannot be obtained directly from experience and observations. The most prominent representatives of this trend were F. Bacon (1561-1626), T. Hobbes (1588-1679) and D. Locke (1632-1704).
Within each of these directions, in an obvious or hidden form, there is a complex struggle between materialistic and idealistic views. Both rationalism and empiricism approach the process of cognition one-sidedly. Idealists strongly emphasize the active role of thinking and clearly do not pay enough attention to the processes and phenomena occurring in the real world. The materialists of that time, in turn, underestimate the active, creative nature of human thinking. In the last third of the 16th - early 17th centuries, the first bourgeois revolutions took place (in the Netherlands, England), which marked the beginning of the development of a new social system - capitalism. The development of a new, bourgeois society gives rise to changes not only in the economy, politics and social relations, but also in people's consciousness.
This is reflected in the development of philosophy. Already during the Renaissance, philosophers paid great attention to criticizing medieval scholasticism. This criticism gained even greater scope in the 17th-18th centuries.
The development of science and social life reveals the limitations of all previous philosophical systems, their ideological and methodological attitudes. As the capitalist mode of production develops, the contradictions between the emerging capitalist system and the remnants of feudalism become more acute. Therefore, bourgeois philosophy of modern times, reflecting profound changes and contradictions in social life itself, comes out with sharp criticism of feudalism. This was reflected primarily in the struggle between materialistic views and idealistic views. Progressive thinkers of the 17th-18th centuries, relying on the achievements of contemporary natural science, ideologically prepared revolutionary changes in social life and advanced philosophical science. The struggle between materialism and idealism during this period acquired an even more acute character than in antiquity. In the XVII-XVIII centuries. the struggle against religion as the dominant ideology of the outdated feudal system met the most pressing needs of the progressive development of society.
Already during the period of early bourgeois revolutions in the most developed countries of Western Europe, a number of materialist theories were put forward, which developed in the struggle against theology and scholasticism. At the end of the sixteenth and beginning of the seventeenth centuries. A strong materialist trend arose in England, which developed fruitfully throughout the seventeenth and partly eighteenth centuries. English materialism of the 17th century. represented by the philosophical theories of F. Bacon, T. Hobbes and D. Locke. A brilliant representative of advanced scientific thought in France in the 17th century. there was an outstanding naturalist, mathematician and philosopher R. Descartes. A place of honor among the leading thinkers of the 17th century belongs to the Dutch philosopher B. Spinoza.
The materialist thought of the era of early bourgeois revolutions was based on the achievements of natural science. However, during this period, of all areas of scientific knowledge, such disciplines as mathematics, mechanics, and physics received the greatest development. This met the needs of production development, but at the same time left its mark on the philosophical understanding of the world. Thus, in particular, philosophers of that time tried to explain many phenomena in the field of biology from the standpoint of mechanics. This determined the specific form of materialism of that time, namely its mechanical nature.
Along with this, it is necessary to note the following circumstance. The most important acquisition of natural science in the 17th-18th centuries. an experimental method and a method of analysis emerged. The application of the method of analysis and the use of experiment determined the great discoveries of natural science of that time. However, the method of analysis gradually began to reveal its one-sidedness and limitations. The study of natural phenomena purely analytically, without the use of synthesis, has given rise to the habit among scientists of considering natural processes and phenomena in isolation from each other, outside their universal connection and interaction, i.e. not dialectically, but metaphysically. Therefore, in natural science, and then in philosophy, the metaphysical method of thinking began to dominate.
At the end of the 17th and beginning of the 18th centuries, after the completion of the cycle of early bourgeois revolutions, a wave of religious reaction and idealism arose in the countries of Western Europe. One of its most active representatives was Bishop D. Berkeley (1685-1753). But all attempts by Berkeley and other idealist philosophers to stop the spread of materialist ideas were unsuccessful. In the 18th century, the protests of materialism against religion and idealism became even more acute. France became the main center of the struggle in Western Europe.
French materialism of the 18th century was an advanced worldview that ideologically prepared the French bourgeois revolution. Its most prominent representatives were J. Meslier (1664-1729),
J.O. La Mettrie (17O9-175O), D. Diderot (1713-1784), P. Holbach (1723-1789), C. Helvetius (1715-1771). French materialists of the 18th century. came out with sharp criticism of religion, relying on a solid foundation of a materialistic understanding of nature.
It is no coincidence that the 18th century in the history of human civilization is called the Age of Enlightenment. Scientific knowledge, which was previously the property of a narrow circle of people, is now spreading widely, going beyond the boundaries of laboratories and universities. Confidence in the power of the human mind, in its limitless possibilities, in the progress of science - this was the most important feature of the views of advanced philosophers of that time. On the banner of the enlighteners there are two main slogans: “Science and progress.” In England, the philosophy of the Enlightenment found its expression in the works of D. Locke and D. Toland (167O-1722). In France, the galaxy of enlighteners was represented by F.M. Voltaire (1694-1778), J.J. Rousseau (1612-1778), D. Diderot, M.D. Alembert (1717-1783), P. Holbach, J. Lametrie . In Germany, the bearers of the ideas of the Enlightenment were I. Herder (1744-18O3) and the young I. Kant (1724-18O4).

Bacon's empiricism

Reflecting on the sources of true knowledge, Bacon came to the conclusion that these could only be experience and observation. He became convinced that the real cause and root of all the evils in science, which by his time were so clearly revealed in the scholastic metaphysics that had reigned until then, was that “erroneously exalting and exaggerating the powers of the mind, we do not seek proper aids for it.” With these aids, the only ones capable of leading to knowledge of the truth, he recognized experience. “Stop,” he said, “to work in vain, trying to extract all the wisdom from one mind; ask nature, it stores all the truths, and it will answer your questions without fail and in the affirmative.” The important thing is not that he noted the importance of experience for obtaining accurate knowledge, but that he developed a whole theory of what experience can give and how it should be used - a theory that was called the “theory of guidance or induction.” The method of induction, in its elementary form, was also known to the ancient Greeks and consisted of a conclusion through a simple listing of observational facts, but Bacon, who gave this name to a technique practiced since antiquity, recognized it as insufficient and laid the foundation for a more rigorous scientific method of induction: he taught, how to carry out experiments and observations and how to use them in order to obtain, in his opinion, universal and necessary truths, and not ordinary, often erroneous conclusions from observations of random, even numerous phenomena. He pointed out the signs of scientific induction that distinguish it from dubious, everyday induction, on those grounds that characterize strict induction and give it the character not of chance, but of universality and necessity. It requires verification of any conclusion from facts through repeated experiments and observations constructed in a certain direction, and a gradual, constantly controlled by experience, ascent to general provisions, while at the same time warning against those delusions of the mind that are introduced through habit and education and have their source age-old prejudices (idola), unconsciously passed on from generation to generation. He outlined all his philosophical reflections in a number of works and especially in detail in the treatise "Novum" organon." Francis Bacon, thus laid the foundation for a special philosophical school, which is known under the name of empiricism (sensualism) and received special development in England. But Bacon , who so persistently refused to trust pure reason, had too little factual material for his conclusions, guided exclusively by the insignificant data that physics, which was in its infancy, could provide in his time, which he nevertheless called the mother of all sciences. He was, as mentioned, little familiar with the richest material that the already highly developed mathematical sciences, mechanics and astronomy could provide for the theory of knowledge. Therefore, his judgments, although very thoughtful and largely correct, were built on abstract principles, without sufficient factual justification, i.e. mainly on the principles of the same pure reason, which he himself did not allow to be trusted. Warning against deceptive ideas, which he divided into 4 categories: 1) idola tribus, which lie in the nature of every person, 2) idola specus, depending on the special mentality of individuals, 3) idola fori, arising from shortcomings of human speech and relationships between people to each other and 4) idola theatri, based on tradition. He himself fell into the category of idola specus, ignoring the mathematical sciences and not understanding the value of the deductive method only because he himself was not sufficiently educated.

Descartes' rationalism

The philosopher René Descartes (1596–1650) was at the origins of the rationalist tradition. Descartes was educated at the Jesuit College of La Flèche. He early began to doubt the value of book learning, since, in his opinion, many sciences lack a reliable foundation. Leaving his books behind, he began to travel. Although Descartes was a Catholic, at one time he participated on the side of the Protestants in the Thirty Years' War. At the age of 23, while staying in winter quarters in Germany, he formulated the basic ideas of his method. Ten years later, he moved to Holland to do his research in peace and quiet. In 1649 he went to Stockholm to see Queen Christina. The Swedish winter was too harsh for him, he fell ill and died in February 1650.
His major works include "Discourse on Method" (1637) and "Metaphysical Meditations" (1647), "Principles of Philosophy", "Rules for the Guidance of the Mind".
According to Descartes, there is disagreement in philosophy on any issue. The only truly reliable method is mathematical deduction. Therefore, Descartes considers mathematics as a scientific ideal. This ideal became the defining factor of Cartesian philosophy.
Descartes is the founder of rationalism (from ratio - reason) - a philosophical movement whose representatives considered reason to be the main source of knowledge. Rationalism is the opposite of empiricism.
If philosophy is to be a deductive system like Euclidean geometry, then it is necessary to find true premises (axioms). If the premises are not obvious and dubious, then the conclusions (theorems) of a deductive system are of little value. But how can one find absolutely obvious and definite premises for a deductive philosophical system? Methodological doubt allows us to answer this question. It is a means of eliminating all positions that we can logically doubt, and a means of searching for positions that are logically certain. It is precisely such indisputable provisions that we can use as prerequisites for true philosophy. Methodical doubt is a way (method) of eliminating all statements that cannot be prerequisites of a deductive philosophical system.
With the help of methodical doubt, Descartes puts various types of knowledge to the test.
1. First he considers the philosophical tradition. Is it possible in principle to doubt what philosophers say? Yes, answers Descartes. This is possible because philosophers have indeed disagreed on many issues.
2) Is it possible to logically doubt our sense perceptions? Yes, says Descartes and gives the following argument. It is a fact that sometimes we are subject to illusions and hallucinations. For example, a tower may appear to be round, although it is later discovered to be square. Our senses cannot provide us with absolutely obvious premises for a deductive philosophical system.
3) As a special argument, Descartes points out that he has no criterion for determining whether he is fully conscious or in a state of sleep. For this reason, he can, in principle, doubt the real existence of the external world.
Is there anything that we cannot doubt? Yes, answers Descartes. Even if we doubt everything, we cannot doubt that we doubt, that is, that we have consciousness and exist. We therefore have the absolutely true statement: “I think, therefore I exist” (cogito ergo sum).
A person who formulates the statement cogito ergo sum expresses knowledge that he cannot doubt. It is reflective knowledge and cannot be refuted. He who doubts cannot, as a doubter, doubt (or deny) that he doubts and, therefore, that he exists.
Of course, this statement is not enough to build an entire deductive system. Descartes' additional claims relate to his proof of the existence of God. From the idea of the perfect, he draws the conclusion about the existence of a perfect being, God.
A perfect God does not deceive people. This gives us confidence in the method: everything that seems to us as self-evident as the statement cogito ergo sum must be knowledge as certain. This is the source of Cartesian rationalistic theory of knowledge: the criterion of the truth of knowledge is not empirical justification (as in empiricism), but ideas that appear clear and distinct before our mind.
Descartes claims that for him, as self-evident as his own existence and the presence of consciousness, is the existence of thinking being (soul) and extended being (matter). Descartes introduces the doctrine of a thinking thing (soul) and an extended thing (matter) as the only existing (besides God) two fundamentally different phenomena. The soul is only thinking, but not extended. Matter is only extended, but not thinking. Matter is understood through mechanics alone (mechanical-materialistic picture of the world), while the soul is free and rational.
Descartes' criterion of truth is rationalistic. What the mind, as a result of systematic and consistent reasoning, regards as clear and distinct can be accepted as true. Sense perceptions must be controlled by the mind.
It is important for us to understand the position of the rationalists (Descartes, Leibniz and Spinoza). Roughly speaking, it lies in the fact that we have two types of knowledge. In addition to experimental knowledge of individual phenomena of the external and internal world, we can receive rational knowledge about the essence of things in the form of universally valid truths.
The debate between rationalism and empiricism is mainly centered around the second type of knowledge. Rationalists argue that through rational intuition we gain knowledge of universal truths (for example, we understand God, human nature and morality). Empiricists deny rational intuition, which gives us such knowledge. According to empiricism, we gain knowledge through experience, which they ultimately reduce to sensory experience. Experience may be interpreted as a passive process of perception in which the subject is provided with simple impressions of external things. The subject then combines these impressions according to their appearance together or separately, according to their similarities and differences, resulting in knowledge of these perceived things. The exception is knowledge obtained through conceptual analysis and deduction, as is the case in logic and mathematics. However, these two types of knowledge, according to empiricists, do not tell us anything about the essential features of being.
It can be said that rationalists think that we are able to know reality (something real) with the help of concepts alone, while empiricists derive all knowledge of reality from experience.
Descartes' methodology had an anti-scholastic orientation. This focus was manifested, first of all, in the desire to achieve knowledge that would strengthen man's power over nature, and would not be an end in itself or a means of proving religious truths. Another important feature of Descartes' methodology is the criticism of scholastic syllogistics. Scholasticism, as is known, considered the syllogism the main instrument of human cognitive efforts. Descartes sought to prove the inconsistency of this approach. He did not abandon the use of syllogism as a method of reasoning, a means of communicating already discovered truths. But, in their opinion, syllogism cannot provide new knowledge. Therefore, he sought to develop a method that would be effective in finding new knowledge.

This period in the life of society is characterized by the decomposition of feudalism, the emergence and development of capitalism, which is associated with progress in the economy, technology, and growth in labor productivity. People's consciousness and worldview as a whole are changing. Life gives birth to new geniuses. Science, primarily experimental and mathematical natural science, is developing rapidly. This period is called the era of the scientific revolution. Science is playing an increasingly significant role in the life of society. At the same time, mechanics occupies a dominant place in science. It was in mechanics that thinkers saw the key to the secrets of the entire universe.

Modern philosophy owes its development partly to an in-depth study of nature, partly to the ever-increasing combination of mathematics and natural science. Thanks to the development of these sciences, the principles of scientific thinking have spread far beyond the boundaries of individual branches and philosophy itself.

Rene Descartes- put reason first, reducing the role of experience to a simple practical test of intelligence data. He sought to develop a universal deductive method for all sciences, based on the theory of rationalism. The first question of philosophy for him was the question of the possibility of reliable knowledge and the problem he defined of the method by which this knowledge could be obtained.

Francis Bacon- unlike Descartes, he developed a method of empirical, experimental knowledge of nature. He believed that this could only be achieved with the help of science, which comprehends the true causes of phenomena. This science must be a rational processing of the facts of experience.

The philosophy of modern times, in short, developed during a difficult period of the rapid rise of technology and the formation of capitalist society. The time frame is the 17th and 18th centuries, but sometimes the 19th century is also included in the philosophy of this period. Considering the philosophy of the New Age, briefly outlined, it should be noted that the most authoritative philosophers lived during this period, who largely determined the development of this science today.

Two philosophical directions of the New Age

The great minds of philosophy of the 17th and 18th centuries were divided into two groups: rationalists and empiricists.
Rationalism was represented by Rene Descartes, Gottfried Leibniz and Benedict Spinoza. They put the human mind at the head of everything and believed that it was impossible to obtain knowledge only from experience. They held the view that the mind originally contained all necessary knowledge and truths. Only logical rules are needed to extract them. They considered deduction to be the main method of philosophy. However, the rationalists themselves could not answer the question of why errors in knowledge arise if, according to them, all knowledge is already contained in the mind.

Representatives of empiricism were Francis Bacon, Thomas Hobbes and John Locke. For them, the main source of knowledge is human experience and sensations, and the main method of philosophy is inductive. It should be noted that supporters of these different directions of modern philosophy were not in harsh confrontation and agreed with the significant role of both experience and reason in knowledge.
In addition to the main philosophical movements of that time, rationalism and empiricism, there was also agnosticism, which denied any possibility of human knowledge of the world. Its most prominent representative is David Hume. He believed that man is not able to penetrate into the depths of the secrets of nature and understand its laws.

Since the 17th century. Natural science, astronomy, mathematics, and mechanics are rapidly developing; the development of science could not but influence philosophy.

In philosophy, the doctrine of the omnipotence of reason and the limitless possibilities of scientific research arises.

Characteristic of modern philosophy is a strong materialistic tendency, arising primarily from experimental natural science.

Major philosophers in Europe in the 17th century. are:

R. Descartes;

B. Spinoza;

G. Leibniz.

In the philosophy of modern times, much attention is paid to the problems of being and substance - ontologies, especially when it comes to movement, space and time.

The problems of substance and its properties are of interest to literally all philosophers of the New Age, because the task of science and philosophy led to an understanding of the need to study the causes of phenomena, their essential forces.

In the philosophy of this period, two approaches to the concept of “substance” appeared:

Ontological understanding of substance as the ultimate basis of being, founder - Francis Bacon;

Epistemological understanding of the concept of “substance”, its necessity for scientific knowledge, the founder is John Locke.

According to Locke, ideas and concepts have their source in the external world, material things. Material bodies have only quantitative features, there is no qualitative diversity of matter: material bodies differ from each other only in size, shape, motion and rest . Smells, sounds, colors, tastes are... secondary qualities, they, Locke believed, arise in the subject under the influence of primary qualities.

English philosopher David Hume looked for answers to being, opposing the materialistic understanding of substance. He, rejecting the real existence of material and spiritual substance, believed that there is an “idea” of substance, under which the association of human perception is subsumed, inherent in everyday, not scientific knowledge.

The philosophy of modern times has made a huge step in the development of the theory of knowledge, the main ones being:

Problems of philosophical scientific method;

Methodologies of human cognition of the external world;

Connections between external and internal experience;

The task of obtaining reliable knowledge. Two main epistemological directions have emerged:

- empiricism ;

- rationalism. Basic ideas of modern philosophy:

The principle of an autonomously thinking subject;

The principle of methodological doubt;

Intellectual intuition or rational-deductive method;

Hypothetico-deductive construction of scientific theory;

Development of a new legal worldview, justification and protection of civil and human rights. The main task of modern philosophy was an attempt to realize the idea autonomous philosophy, free from religious preconditions; build a coherent worldview on reasonable and experimental foundations identified by research into human cognitive ability.

Rationalism- a philosophical and epistemological direction where the basis of knowledge is reason.

Descartes- The main work of Discourses on the Method. The task of philosophy is to help people in their practical affairs.

Ways of human knowledge

a person knows himself and his mind, which means he knows nature.
When a person gets to know nature, he gets to know himself in it.

New scientific method

Deduction- a way of reasoning from the general to the specific.

Rule of Methods

accept as true what is perceived in a clear and distinct form; everything doubtful is cut off.
Every complex problem needs to be analyzed and broken down to the simplest and most obvious truths.
go from simple and accessible things to things more difficult to understand.
it is necessary to compile a complete list of facts and discoveries, systematize everything known and determine the boundary of the unknown.

Discussing a person’s ability to know, Descartes distinguishes 2 types of ideas inherent in a person: innate and ideas of sensory experience. A person has a certain predisposition to thinking. Some truths, the simplest ones, are initially laid in the human consciousness: the ideas of being, God, numbers. Descartes assumes the existence of a God who puts innate ideas into human consciousness.

3 degrees of knowledge:

truth
reasoning of the mind
sensory knowledge

A special part of the discussion is the place of a person in society. Society and the state are created for the sake of mutual assistance and safety of people. The state is a contract between people. 3 forms of government:

monarchy
aristocracy
democracy is an ideal

Sources: filosof.historic.ru, antiquehistory.ru, e-reading.club, 900igr.net, zubolom.ru

Ereshkigal and Nergali - gods of the underworld

In the minds of the ancients, the Universe was divided into three parts: the upper one - the sky, where the gods and heavenly ones lived...

Valkyries in Scandinavian myths

Scandinavian myths tell about Valkyries - warlike beautiful maidens who are companions and executors of Odin's will. These creatures are good...

The philosophy of modern times covers the period from the 16th to the 18th centuries. This, as you know, is the time of formation of Western bourgeois society, its economy, politics, culture and spiritual values. After the Renaissance, the time came for the establishment of new scientific and philosophical principles and the definition of new social ideals. In philosophy, this is reflected in new approaches to eternal philosophical problems - the problems of interpreting nature, the possibilities of its knowledge, the interpretation of society and man, the possibilities of changing society and the methods of this change.

As has always been the case in philosophy, philosophers of this time sought to understand the world, the possibility of knowing it, ultimately, in order to better understand man and realize his potential strengths, the importance of his mind and practical social life for achieving happiness. The philosophical discoveries and conclusions that preceded this period, of course, in one form or another were comprehended by thinkers of the New Age.

Natural scientific ideas of this time were the prerequisites for the formation of a new picture of the world, nature, new aspects in the interpretation of the concepts of matter and movement. The historical limitations of the scientific capabilities of the era in the knowledge of nature influenced, of course, the content of philosophical conclusions about the natural world, the scale of metaphysics and mechanism in the first place, which were inherent in the philosophers of this time.

At the same time, the successes in the development of science instilled a certain optimism in many philosophical ideas about knowledge, about truth and the possibility of achieving it.

In philosophy, the problem of the method of cognition has come to the fore, embodying the desire for orderliness and systematicity in methods of cognition. Philosophers sought to identify points of support in knowledge that ensure its reliability, and most importantly, the ability to achieve true knowledge, without which the successful development of mankind is impossible. In this, many of them saw, first of all, the practical significance of philosophy as opposed to, as they believed, medieval scholasticism. Various philosophical perspectives on understanding the problem of the method of cognition and, accordingly, the criterion of truth are reflected in the difference in the positions of philosophical empiricism and philosophical rationalism.

One cannot fail to take into account the fact that belonging to the position of empiricism, or sensationalism, or the position of rationalism never meant an absolute opposition to the role of reason and feelings in knowledge, and in modern times philosophers also differed in their views, mainly in search of the final foundations authenticity and reliability of true knowledge. It is also important to understand what new facets in the interpretation of the sensual and rational were revealed by the philosophers of this time.

The philosophy of this era is characterized by the search for reasonable foundations of individual and social life, the development of ideas of humanism and progress, the problems of the meaning of life and happiness. Some philosophers were characterized by the desire to create concrete and even detailed pictures of the happiest social life. The image of a happy life was inextricably linked with the idea of social justice, and therefore ideas about social justice found their further and in many ways profound development in the philosophical works of thinkers of the Modern Age.

It was at this time that the still relevant teachings about the state, about power in general, about historical progress and methods of its implementation, about man as an individual were formed. Modern thinkers were deeply aware of the danger of civil wars and revolutions.

Some of the outstanding philosophers of modern times were also outstanding scientists. These are, first of all, R. Descartes and G. Leibniz.

The philosophy of this time is optimistic in its views on knowledge, the development of science, and the future in the development of man and society. A careful reading of the works of modern philosophers shows that many of their ideas and conclusions are so profound that they have not lost their relevance today. Moreover, turning to the spiritual values of the modern era, their study and comprehension contributes to further comprehension of the meaning and purpose of philosophy in the development of society. It would allow our contemporaries to more intelligently solve the pressing problems of our days.

FRANCIS BACON (1561 - 1626)

Spinoza's theory of knowledge is rationalistic in nature. If God is a single substance from which all things and concepts of the world come, then the individual human soul is part of the divine attribute of thinking. Thus, by knowing things, we come to know God himself as the cause of these things. But for this it is necessary to arm ourselves with a genuine way of knowledge.

Spinoza distinguishes three main types of human knowledge:

1. Opinion and imagination. This is the knowledge we receive from everyday experience, sensory perception of the world around us. It gives us only general vague and unclear images, without any connection between active causes and effects. It is fragmentary and fragmentary, so that it only allows us to formulate the most general concepts about the world. Therefore, it is of no use to a person seeking true knowledge.

2. Rational knowledge. This knowledge comes from reason ( ratio) and is a purely scientific way of thinking. He already grasps the logical relationship of things and causes in the world process, therefore he gives a person the opportunity to distinguish the genuine from the false and, therefore, will come as close to the truth as possible.

3. Intuitive cognition. This is the highest form of knowledge, which makes it possible to see things that come from God himself. It no longer relies on any forms operating in earthly existence, but immediately penetrates into the essence of the ideas of divine attributes, into the very essence of things. This level of thinking is accessible only to sages, who alone are capable of true knowledge.

Ethics of Spinoza. In nature, everything is expedient and practical, every thing is in its place and corresponds to its purpose. Therefore, in the world of physical nature there is no, and there cannot be, a place for the concepts of “good” and “bad”, “kind” and “evil”. In fact, is it possible to call, for example, a tiger a bad animal, and a crocodile ugly, imperfect? All these are our human concepts transferred to the world of things. But not a single thing, Spinoza is convinced, is in itself either good or bad - it is just what it is, and nothing more. As for “good” or “evil,” a person judges this from the point of view of his own benefit: “I understand by good that which we reliably know as useful. By bad, on the contrary, we mean that which, as we reliably know, prevents the possession of good.”

Man is a special part of the world. Man is a natural being, says Spinoza, and therefore he must be considered from the point of view of Nature. All the passions that sometimes overwhelm us are ordinary natural phenomena. They are not derived from the essence of man, but are some vague desires caused by corresponding ideas in the human mind. The main goal of a person is to find happiness, and this requires complete liberation from passions.

“Clarify your thoughts - and you will cease to be a slave to passions,” this is Spinoza’s main idea in man’s struggle against his own vices. Only in intellectual and spiritual tension does a person find true happiness, for he gets used to looking at everything that happens in life, sub specie aeternitatis(“from the point of view of eternity”), understands the deep interconnection of things and events, perceiving them in the light of divine necessity.

Spinoza's outstanding merit is his study of the relationship between freedom and necessity. In Spinoza’s understanding, necessity and freedom merge in substance (God). God is free, because everything he does comes from his own necessity. Determinism, that is, necessity, dominates nature. Man is a mode of two attributes. Human freedom consists in the unity of reason and will. Therefore, the extent of real freedom is determined by the level of rational knowledge (reason and knowledge). Freedom and necessity are not opposite to each other; on the contrary, they condition each other. Spinoza comes to understand freedom as a recognized necessity. The opposite of necessity is not freedom, but arbitrariness.

Spinoza on religion. Spinoza outlined the doctrine of the origin, essence and role of religion in public life in his “Theological-Political Treatise.” Although the idea of God dominates throughout his philosophy, theologians accused Spinoza of atheism, since Spinoza's God is not a personal God with will and reason, creating the world by free choice as something different from himself. He does not act as an externally acting cause, but as an “immanent” one, and is inseparable from the things emanating from him.

Spinoza showed that philosophy and religion are fundamentally different. If philosophy operates at the level of the second and especially the third kind of knowledge of truth (reason and reason), then religion operates exclusively within the first kind (imagination, representation). The goal of philosophy is truth, and religion seeks only submission and obedience. Philosophy relies on the arguments of reason, and religion uses fear and superstition for obedience. Spinoza is the founder of scientific criticism of the Bible.

Spinoza on the State. Spinoza could only take refuge from the persecution of religious fanaticism and feel safe in a free, religiously tolerant and legal society. Hence Spinoza’s main thoughts about what an ideal state should be. First of all, Spinoza says, every person has a set of natural, inalienable rights, without which he, in essence, ceases to be a person. Spinoza compared these natural human rights with certain properties of natural beings: “By the law and order of nature, I understand the natural rules inherent in every being.

For example, fish are by nature determined to swim, the larger ones are determined to devour smaller ones. Consequently, natural law acts as the highest law, requiring fish to constantly live in the water and larger individuals to feed on the rest. People, also doomed by nature itself to live in constant fear and enmity among themselves, must agree on acceptable living conditions, i.e. conclude a social contract. The result of this agreement is the creation of a state whose main goal is to ensure individual freedoms and rights. In addition, Spinoza considered it necessary to have religious and political freedoms in the state.

Spinoza's enormous historical merit is his substantiation of the thesis about the substantial unity of the world in the spirit of pantheism. The central formula of his ontology is God, or substance, or nature.

His views are characterized by dialectical ideas regarding the relationship between the finite and the infinite, the one and the many, necessity and freedom. There is a deep meaning in his conclusion about freedom as a recognized necessity.

Spinoza was convinced of the possibility of achieving reliable, comprehensive knowledge with the help of human reason.

Spinoza saw the highest goal of philosophy in man's acquisition of happiness, mental peace and tranquility. Spinoza’s motto was: “don’t laugh, don’t cry, don’t turn away, but understand.” At the same time, Spinoza’s philosophy is characterized, as we noted, by a number of contradictions that cannot be resolved within the framework of his system.

JOHN LOCKE (1632 - 1704)

John Locke is an outstanding English philosopher and teacher.

Locke's philosophical teaching embodied the main features of modern philosophy: opposition to scholasticism, focus on knowledge and practice. The goal of his philosophy is man and his practical life, which is expressed in Locke’s concepts of education and the social structure of society. He saw the purpose of philosophy in developing means for a person to achieve happiness. Locke developed a method of cognition based on sensory perceptions and systematized the empiricism of the New Age. Locke outlined his philosophical teachings in the works: “An Essay Concerning Human Understanding”, “Two Treatises on Government”, “Essays on the Law of Nature”, “Letters on Toleration”, “Thoughts on Education”.

Philosophy of knowledge. Locke considers the main instrument of knowledge intelligence, which “puts man above other sentient beings.” The English thinker sees the subject of philosophy primarily in research laws of human understanding. To determine the capabilities of the human mind, and, accordingly, to determine those areas that act as the natural limits of human knowledge by virtue of its very structure, means directing human efforts to solve real problems associated with practice.

In his fundamental philosophical work, The Essay Concerning Human Understanding, Locke explores the question of how far can a person's cognitive ability extend? And what are its real boundaries?. He poses the problem origin ideas and concepts through which a person comes to know things.

The challenge is establishing the basis for the reliability of knowledge. To this end, Locke analyzes the main sources of human ideas, to which he refers sensory perceptions And thinking. It is important for him to establish how the rational principles of knowledge relate to the sensory principles.

The only object of human thought is idea. Unlike Descartes, who stood in the position of “ innateness of ideas"Locke argues that all ideas, concepts and principles (both particular and general) that we find in the human mind, without exception, originate in experience, and one of their most important sources is sensory impressions. This cognitive attitude is called sensationalism, although we immediately note that in relation to Locke’s philosophy this term can only be applied to certain limits. The point is that Locke does not attribute immediate truth to sensory perception as such; He is also not inclined to derive all human knowledge only from sensory perceptions: along with external experience, he also recognizes interior experience.

Almost all pre-Lockean philosophy considered it obvious that are common ideas and concepts (such as God, man, material body, movement, etc.), as well as general theoretical judgments (for example, the law of causality) and practical principles (for example, the commandment of love for God) are initial combinations of ideas that are a direct property of the soul, on the basis that the general can never be the subject of experience. Locke rejects this point of view, considering general knowledge not primary, but, on the contrary, derivative, logically deduced from particular statements by reflection.

The idea, fundamental to all empirical philosophy, that experience is the inseparable limit of all possible knowledge, is enshrined by Locke in the following provisions:

There are no ideas, knowledge or principles innate to the mind; the human soul (mind) is " tabula rasa"("clean slate"); only experience, through individual perceptions, writes any content on it;

No human mind is capable of creating simple ideas, nor is it capable of destroying existing ideas; they are delivered to our minds by sensory perceptions and reflection;

Experience is the source and inseparable limit true knowledge. “All our knowledge is based on experience; from it, in the end, it comes.”

Giving an answer to the question of why there are no innate ideas in the human mind, Locke criticizes the concept of “ universal consent", which served as a starting point for supporters of the opinion about “the presence in the mind of knowledge preceding [experience] from the moment of its existence”.

Locke's main arguments here are:

1) in reality imaginary“universal consent” does not exist (this can be seen in the examples of small children, mentally retarded adults and culturally backward peoples);

2) the “universal agreement” of people on certain ideas and principles (if admitted) does not necessarily stem from the factor of “innateness”; it can be explained by showing that there is another, practical way to achieve this.

So, our knowledge can extend as far as experience allows us.

As already mentioned, Locke does not identify experience entirely with sensory perception, but interprets this concept much more broadly. In accordance with his concept, experience includes everything from which the human mind, originally similar "an unwritten piece of paper", draws all its content.

The experience consists of external And internal:

1) we feel material objects or

2) we perceive the activity of our mind, the movement of our thoughts.

From a person’s ability to perceive external objects through the senses come Feel- the first source of most of our ideas (extension, density, movement, color, taste, sound, etc.). The perception of the activity of our mind gives rise to the second source of our ideas - internal feeling, or reflection.

Locke calls reflection the observation to which the mind subjects its activity and the methods of its manifestation, as a result of which ideas of this activity arise in the mind. The internal experience of the mind over itself is possible only if the mind is stimulated from the outside to a series of actions that themselves form the first content of its knowledge. Recognizing the fact of the heterogeneity of physical and mental experience, Locke asserts the primacy of the function of the ability of sensations, which gives impetus to all rational activity.

Thus all ideas come from sensation or reflection. External things provide the mind with ideas of sensory qualities, which are all different things caused in us. perception, and the mind supplies us with ideas of its own activities associated with thinking, reasoning, desires, etc.

The ideas themselves content of thinking person ( “what the soul can be occupied with while thinking”) are divided by Locke into two types: ideas simple and ideas complex.

Every simple idea contains only one uniform idea or perception in the mind, which is not divided into various other ideas. Simple ideas are the material of all our knowledge; they are formed through sensations and thoughts. From the combination of sensation and reflection, simple ideas arise sensory reflection, for example, pleasure, pain, strength, etc.

Feelings first give impetus to the birth of individual ideas, and as the mind becomes accustomed to them, they are placed in memory. Every idea in the mind is either a present perception, or, called up by memory, it can become one again. An idea that never existed perceived the mind through sensations and reflections cannot be detected in it. Accordingly, complex ideas arise when simple ideas take on a higher level through the actions of the human mind.

The activities in which the mind exercises its powers are:

1) combining several simple ideas into one complex one;

2) bringing together two ideas (simple or complex) and comparing them with each other so that they can be seen at once, but not combined into one;

3) abstraction, i.e. separation of ideas from all other ideas that accompany them in reality and receive are common ideas.

Lokkovskaya theory of abstraction continues the traditions that had developed before him in medieval nominalism and English empiricism. Our ideas are preserved with the help of memory, but then abstract thinking forms from them concepts that do not have a directly corresponding object and represent distracted representations formed using word mark.

Considering the philosophy of the New Age, briefly outlined, it should be noted that the most authoritative philosophers lived during this period, who largely determined the development of this science today.

Great philosophers of modern times

One of them is Immanuel Kant, who is called the founder of German philosophy. In his opinion, the main task of philosophy is to give humanity answers to four basic questions: what is a person, what should he do, know, and what to hope for.

Francis Bacon - created the methodology of experimental natural science. He was one of the first to point out the importance of experience in the matter of comprehending the truth. Philosophy, as Bacon understands it, must be practical.

Rene Descartes considered reason to be the starting point of research, and experience for him was only a tool that should either confirm or refute the conclusions of reason. He was the first to come up with the idea of the evolution of the living world.

Two philosophical directions of the New Age

The great minds of philosophy of the 17th and 18th centuries were divided into two groups: rationalists and empiricists.

Rationalism was represented by Rene Descartes, Gottfried Leibniz and Benedict Spinoza. They put the human mind at the head of everything and believed that it was impossible to obtain knowledge only from experience. They held the view that the mind originally contained all necessary knowledge and truths. Only logical rules are needed to extract them. They considered deduction to be the main method of philosophy. However, the rationalists themselves could not answer the question - why errors in knowledge arise if, according to them, all knowledge is already contained in the mind.

In addition to the main philosophical movements of that time, rationalism and empiricism, there was also agnosticism, which denied any possibility of human knowledge of the world. Its most prominent representative is David Hume. He believed that man is not able to penetrate into the depths of the secrets of nature and understand its laws.

7.German classical philosophy: Kant, Hegel, Feuerbach

German classical philosophy developed mainly in the first half of the 19th century. The sources of this philosophy were the teachings of Plato, Aristotle, Rousseau, and its immediate predecessors were I. Goethe, F. Schiller, I. Herder. In the German classics, dialectics received great development as a theory of the development of all things and a method of philosophical thinking. Its essence lies in a comprehensive consideration of the world as a single, contradictory and dynamic whole. German classical philosophy became the pinnacle of dialectical thought. She also made a significant contribution to the understanding of man as a spiritual and active being, an active creator of a new reality - the world of culture.
German classical philosophy represents a large and influential movement in the philosophical thought of modern times, summing up its development in this period of Western European history. Traditionally, this movement includes the philosophical teachings of I. Kant, I. Fichte, F. Schelling, G. Hegel and L. Feuerbach. All these thinkers are brought together by common ideological and theoretical roots, continuity in the formulation and resolution of problems, and direct personal dependence: the younger ones learned from the elders, contemporaries communicated with each other, argued and exchanged ideas.
German classical philosophy made a significant contribution to the formulation and development of philosophical problems. Within the framework of this movement, the problem of the relationship between subject and object was rethought and reformulated, and a dialectical method of cognition and transformation of reality was developed.

Immanuel Kant born in 1724 in Kenicksburg. He was not only a philosopher, but also a major scientist in the field of natural science.

Phil K.'s development is divided into 2 periods. In the first period (until the beginning of the 70s) tried to solve f problems - about being, the philosophies of nature, religion, ethics, logic based on the conviction that f. M.B. developed and justified as speculative science. (without reference to experimental data)

In the 2nd lane (critical) tries to strictly separate phenomena from things in themselves. The latter cannot be given in experience. Things are unknowable. We know only phenomena or that method, cat. these things in themselves affect us. This doctrine is agnosticism

Knowledge begins with the fact that “things in themselves” are airy. on our senses and evoking sensations, but neither the sensation of our sensuality, nor concepts and judgments. our reason, nor the concept of reason can give us a theory. knowledge about “things in themselves” (vs). Reliable knowledge of entities is mathematics and natural science.

The doctrine of knowledge. Knowledge is always expressed in the form of judgment. There are 2 types of judgments: 1) analytical beliefs. Example: all bodies have extensions

2) synthetic judgments. Ex: some bodies are heavy.

There are 2 classes of synth judgments. 1. discovered in experience (some swans are black) - a posteriori 2.this connection cannot be based on experience - a priori judgments (everything that happens has a reason). Apr. K. gives judgments b. Meaning

Sensory cognition. In K, space and time cease to be forms of the essences of things. They become a priori forms of our sensuality.

A priori forms of reason. Condition is possible Apr. synth of judgment in the theory of natural science categories. These are independent of the experience-delivered content. concepts of reason, under the cat the mind brings every content obtained from experience. Those. categories are not forms of being, but concepts of reason. Categories are a priori. According to K, neither sensations nor concepts themselves provide knowledge. Feelings without concepts are blind, and concepts without sensations are empty.

Ethics. The contradiction between necessity and freedom is not real: a person acts necessarily in one respect and freely in another. It is necessary, since man is a phenomenon among other phenomena of nature and in this respect is subject to necessity. But man is also a moral being, a subject of moral consciousness, and therefore free.

The highest achievement of German classical philosophy was the dialectic of Hegel (1770-1831). whose great merit is that he was the first to present the entire natural, historical and spiritual world in the form of a process, i.e. in continuous movement, change, transformation and development, and made an attempt to reveal the internal connection of this movement and development...

Hegel formulated the laws and categories of dialectics. Categories of quality and quantity. Quality is something without which an object cannot exist. Quantity is indifferent to the object, but up to a certain limit. Quantity plus quality is the measure.

Three laws of dialectics (the essence of the history of development). 1. The law of the transition of quantitative relations into qualitative ones (when quantitative relations change after a certain stage, a change in quality occurs due to the non-destruction of the measure). 2. Law of direction of development (negation of negation). Naked negation is something that comes after a given object, completely destroying it. Dialectical negation: something from the first object is preserved - a reproduction of this object, but in a different quality. Water is ice. To thresh grain is bare negation, to plant grain is dialectical negation. Development occurs in a spiral. 3. The law of unity and struggle of opposites. The contradiction between form and content, possibility and reality. The struggle leads to three outcomes: mutual destruction, illumination of one of the parties, or compromise.

The German philosopher Ludwig Feuerbach (1804 - 1872) was initially interested in Hegel's philosophy, but already in 1893 he sharply criticized it. From Feuerbach's point of view, idealism is nothing more than a rationalized religion, and philosophy and religion by their very essence, Feuerbach believes, are opposite to each other. Religion is based on belief in dogma, while philosophy is based on knowledge, the desire to reveal the real nature of things. Therefore, Feuerbach sees the primary task of philosophy in the criticism of religion, in exposing those illusions that constitute the essence of religious consciousness. Religion and idealistic philosophy, which is close to it in spirit, arise, according to Feuerbach, from the alienation of human essence, through the attribution to God of those attributes that actually belong to man himself. “The infinite or divine essence,” writes Feuerbach in his essay “The Essence of Christianity,” “is the spiritual essence of man, which, however, is isolated from man and is presented as an independent being.” This is how an illusion that is difficult to eradicate arises: the true creator of God - man - is considered as the creation of God, is made dependent on the latter and is thus deprived of freedom and independence.

According to Feuerbach, in order to free oneself from religious errors, it is necessary to understand that man is not a creation of God, but a part - and, moreover, the most perfect one - of eternal nature.
This statement is the essence of Feuerbach's anthropology. The focus of his attention is not the abstract concept of matter, as, for example, with most French materialists, but man as a psychophysical unity, the unity of soul and body. Based on this understanding of man, Feuerbach rejects his idealistic interpretation, in which man is viewed primarily as a spiritual being, through the prism of the famous Cartesian and Fichtean “I think.” According to Feuerbach, the body in its entirety constitutes the essence of the human self; the spiritual principle in a person cannot be separate from the physical; spirit and body are two sides of that reality, which is called the organism. Human nature, thus, is interpreted by Feuerbach primarily biologically, and for him a separate individual is not a historical-spiritual formation, as with Hegel, but a link in the development of the human race.
Criticizing the interpretation of knowledge by previous German philosophers and being dissatisfied with abstract thinking, Feuerbach appeals to sensory contemplation. Thus, in the theory of knowledge, Feuerbach acts as a sensualist, believing that sensation is the only source of our knowledge. Only what is given to us through the senses - sight, hearing, touch, smell - has, according to Feuerbach, true reality. With the help of our senses we perceive both physical objects and the mental states of other people; not recognizing any supersensible reality, Feuerbach also rejects the possibility of purely abstract knowledge with the help of reason, considering the latter an invention of idealistic speculation.
Feuerbach's anthropological principle in the theory of knowledge is expressed in the fact that he reinterprets the very concept of “object” in a new way. According to Feuerbach, the concept of an object is initially formed in the experience of human communication, and therefore the first object for every person is another person, You. It is love for another person that is the path to recognition of his objective existence, and thereby to recognition of the existence of external things in general.
From the internal connection of people, based on the feeling of love, altruistic morality arises, which, according to Feuerbach, should take the place of an illusory connection with God. Love for God, according to the German philosopher, is only an alienated, false form of true love - love for other people.
Feuerbach's anthropologism arose as a reaction primarily to the teachings of Hegel, in which the dominance of the universal over the individual was taken to the extreme. To such an extent that the individual human personality turned out to be a vanishingly insignificant moment that had to be completely overcome in order to take the world-historical point of view of the “absolute spirit.” Feuerbach came out in defense of the natural-biological principle in man, from which German idealism after Kant largely abstracted, but which is inseparable from man.