Home Flowers The problem of the relationship between faith and knowledge was central to philosophy. The problem of knowledge and faith in European scholasticism. The concepts of the world and man in the philosophy of the Middle Ages

Flowers

The problem of the relationship between faith and knowledge was central to philosophy. The problem of knowledge and faith in European scholasticism. The concepts of the world and man in the philosophy of the Middle Ages

Already in the first centuries of the existence of Christianity, two main positions began to form in theology (Scheme 80): some theologians believed that one should simply believe and not even try to understand God, because the human mind is in principle not capable of this, others believed that the main goal of any believer - maximum

Scheme 80.

come closer to understanding God. And since the world is a creation of God, then, comprehending this world, we thereby comprehend the Creator. In their study of the world, they relied on ancient philosophy, trying to adapt it to Christian doctrine. But the use of rational methods of cognition inevitably led to the discovery of a number of contradictions both within religious teachings and between the results of scientific research and the religious ideas set forth in the Bible (similarly in the Koran). Hence the problem of knowledge and faith is born, which is equally relevant in both the Muslim and Christian worlds, namely, a hundred higher: the truths of science or the truths of religion ?

This problem can be formulated as a question about the ways of cognition: do we need to have faith in order to cognize the world and the Creator with the help of reason? Or is it the rational development of the world that leads us to faith? A positive answer to the first question was given by Aurelius Augustine, Anselm of Canterbury ("I believe in order to understand"), etc., on the second - Pierre Abelard and his followers ("I understand in order to believe"). In the teachings of Thomas Aquinas, these two points of view were synthesized . In particular, he proclaimed the thesis about the harmony of reason and faith, which cannot contradict each other (and if such a contradiction is found, it means that we simply made a mistake in reasoning). All these views are united by the idea that reason can and should serve faith (“Philosophy is the servant of theology”).

The Muslim philosopher Averrois (Ibn Rushd) proposed the theory of "two truths" to solve the problem of knowledge and faith. According to her, the truths of science are higher than the truths of religion, but few can understand the truths of science, but for everyone else, religious ideas are useful, poet) "they have the right to exist and they should not be publicly refuted. In the XIII-XV centuries. The theory of two truths became widespread in Europe: Seeger of Brabant, Duis Scott, William of Ockham defended the point of view that reason and faith have nothing in common and reason cannot help faith in any way.

Of particular acuteness was the controversy on the questions: does the world exist forever or was it once created? Is the individual human soul immortal or mortal? Is there free will, or is every human action determined by God?

The problem of universals in medieval philosophy

Universals - this is something common that is inherent in all specific objects of a certain type or genus. For example, as already mentioned, all specific horses, despite the many individual

Scheme 81.

dual differences, have a certain common "horseness", due to which they, in fact, are horses.

The medieval concept of universals arose on the basis of Plato's doctrine of ideas, which, being "inherent" in specific things of a certain kind, determine their nature, being their ideal model, and in addition - the cause and purpose of these things; close to this is Aristotle's doctrine of forms. In the form in which it was discussed in the Middle Ages, the problem of universals was first posed in the works of the Neoplatonist Porphyry, although it entered medieval scholasticism through Boethius and his commentaries on the works of Porphyry.

Porfiry posed three questions.

1. Do universals (i.e., genera and species: animal, man, horse, etc.) exist independently (i.e., outside of concrete things)?
2. If so, are they then corporeal or incorporeal?
3. If they are incorporeal, do they have the same nature with sensible things?

Porphyry himself did not give any answers to them, but these three questions, and especially the first of them, became the subject of fierce disputes in the Middle Ages. In addressing the question "Do universals exist on their own?" all philosophers were divided into two large camps: realists and nominalists (Scheme 82).

Realists- these are philosophers who considered universals to exist really outside of concrete things.

Nominalists(from the Latin "nomen" - "name") - these are philosophers who believed that outside of specific things, the general (universal) exists only in words (names) that name things of a certain type.

Thus, from the point of view of realists, besides concrete horses and outside of them, there really exists "horseness", inherent in all horses as such, outside of specific bulls - "bullness", outside of any four-legged animals - "four-footedness", etc. And from the point of view of nominalists, outside of specific objects there is no “horseness”, “bullness” and “four-leggedness”, but only the words (names) “horse”, “bull”, “four-legged”, applicable, respectively, to any horse, bull, quadruped.

The struggle was not only between realists and nominalists, but also within each camp, among both of them one can single out "extreme" and "moderate" (Scheme 83).

To extreme realism many representatives of early scholasticism of the 9th-12th centuries can be attributed: Eriugena, members of the Chartres and Saint-Victorian schools, as well as Anselm of Canterbury. Proponents of extreme realism, relying primarily on Plato and the Neoplatonists, are characterized not only by the recognition of the real existence of universals outside and to specific things; universals are also understood as mediating links between God the Creator and specific created things.

Universals were understood as patterns contained in the mind of God, according to which specific things are created; at the same time, more general - generic - universals are contained in less general - species (for example, the universal "four-legged" is contained in the universals "horse", "bull", "dog"), and species universals are contained in specific objects (universal "horse" - in all specific horses). At the same time, universals are considered to be entities of a higher order and, in a sense, more real than individual objects.

moderate realism closer to the teachings of Aristotle and the Peripatetics, in which the general (form) is understood as contained in specific things (as any concrete thing is a combination of matter and form). Accordingly, moderate realists believed that universals exist only in specific things.

A peculiar version of moderate realism is the position of Thomas Aquinas, who, like Ibn Sina, recognizing the threefold existence of universals:

1) to concrete things (ante rem) - in the mind of God;
2) in specific things (in re);
3) after specific things (post rem) - in the mind of a person (as impressions from them) (diagram 81).

founder extreme nominalism was Roscellinus (c. 1050–1110). He argued that only concrete things exist, and everything that exists outside of them - in the form of a general inherent in these things - is only words, sequences of sounds ("breath of sound").

Supporters moderate nominalism most often recognized the existence of universals in the human mind (after specific things). His version of moderate nominalism - conceptualism - suggested Pierre Abelard: universals have a definite existence as concepts (concepts) in the human mind, arising on the basis of sensory perception of individual things due to the abstracting activity of the mind. However, Abelard recognized that these concepts exist in their pure form in the Divine mind, i.e., strictly speaking, this position can be regarded both as moderate realism and as an intermediate between realism and nominalism.

Scheme 82.

Scheme 83.

The most important representatives of moderate nominalism are Duns Scotus and William of Ockham. The most interesting doctrine of Occam, called "terminism". Occam believed that only concrete individual objects really exist. Since the power of the Creator is infinite, He does not need any intermediate links in the form of universals, but is able to create many specific things by a direct act of His Divine will. There are no universals in things and before things, they are only terms, signs of things, fixing by means of words the similarity between all objects called by the same term. However, these terms are not accidental, they correspond to certain states of the human mind (soul), and they are born as some contracting signs (abbreviations) during mental operations on similar objects.

The problem of universals in the Middle Ages was given particular urgency by the fact that it was discussed not as a purely philosophical problem of the relationship between the general and the separate (private, individual), but in connection with certain theological problems. Both extreme realism and extreme nominalism represented the same danger for the teaching of the Catholic Church, especially in connection with the dogma of the trinity of God. Thus, extreme nominalism led to the rejection of the idea of the unity of the three hypostases of God, and extreme realism - from the idea of the trinity of the one God.

Averrois adhered to the same point of view on universals.

Medieval philosophy on the relationship between faith and knowledge

The problem of the correlation of faith and reason is one of the main ones in the philosophy of the Middle Ages. If God is the ultimate reality, then, accordingly, the main attention should be paid to his knowledge. But those methods, means, ways of cognition that are at the disposal of man cannot be applied to the cognition of God. God is not given in the sensory experience of man, is inaccessible to his mind. Knowledge of God is possible only with the help of faith, through divine revelation. At the same time, faith was not opposed to reason.

Aurelius Augustine proclaimed "I believe in order to understand", thus laying the foundations of rationalistic theology, the ideas of which were most fully perceived and developed by Thomas Aquinas. Not by human teaching, Augustine argued, but by inner light, as well as by the power of the highest love, Christ could turn people to the saving faith. Religious faith, according to his views, does not imply a mandatory understanding of certain provisions of religion. It does not require any evidence. You just have to believe.

At the same time, Augustine was clearly aware of the important role played by rational knowledge. Therefore, he did not deny the need to strengthen faith with evidence of reason, he advocated an internal connection between faith and reason. Reason obedient to religion and faith supported by reasonable arguments - such is the ideal of the Augustinian apologetics (from the Greek apologeomai - I protect, it means the defense of Christian doctrine). However, the theory presented by Augustine about the Harmony of faith and reason excluded any possibility of making faith dependent on reason. The decisive role in his system, without any doubt, was played by revelation (in the view of believers, the discovery by a deity in a supernatural way - a sign, vision, etc. - of his will or any divine truths).

The ideology of medieval freethinking found its highest expression in the theory of two truths or "dual truth". This theory transferred the problem of the relationship between faith and reason in the area of the relationship between theology and philosophy. Its essence boiled down to the doctrine of the separation of philosophical and theological truths, according to which what is true in philosophy can be false in theology and vice versa. In other words, it was an attempt to affirm the independence of science and philosophy from theology, to recognize their equal existence.

Considering two kinds of truths - the truths of reason and the truths of faith, Thomas Aquinas points out the need for their coordination and harmony. Human experience and reason give man the truths necessary in life. And in this respect the value of knowledge for Aquinas is indisputable. But to an even greater extent, a person needs faith, because the weakness, the limitations of the human mind do not give him the opportunity to comprehend all the greatness of God and the hidden meaning of the universe. But this, from the point of view of Aquinas, does not mean that Christian dogmas, which cannot be understood and explained by reason, are unreasonable, irrational in nature. Not a weak human, but an almighty divine mind is able to reveal their secrets, their deep, inner meaning.

The divine mind nourishes the faith of man, illuminates his thought with the life-giving light of divine revelation. Consequently, where reason is powerless, faith that knows no barriers comes into its own. But faith is not something immutable, static, given once and for all. It can not only ignite, ignite the human soul, but also fade away. A person, and only he, according to Thomas Aquinas, is responsible for how strong or weak his faith is, to strengthen which it is necessary to use all the abilities of the mind, will, turn to the authority of science and philosophy.

Thomas thus recognized the value of a scientific title, rational proof, but at the same time retained the control of theology over science and philosophy. Theology, according to him, comes from God and descends to his creations. Philosophy, on the other hand, ascends to God from his creations, i.e., like theology, it leads in its own special way to the knowledge of God and, therefore, complements theology. The knowledge of God given by philosophy is indirect and relative, while the knowledge of God given by theology is absolute.

And only at the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th century, representatives of religious philosophy came to the conclusion that it is necessary to consider reason and faith through the prism of man, where the intellect and religious revelation, merging together, form the highest cognitive synthesis.

Aquinas found harmony and unity between faith and knowledge. According to Aquinas, faith perfects reason, theology perfects philosophy, philosophy serves theology.

Simultaneously with Aquinas, Bonaventure (1217-1274) explores the relationship between faith and knowledge. But if with St. Thomas faith leads knowledge, then with Bonaventure the mind sees only what faith illuminates. “Leave feelings and rational inventions, being and non-being, leave all this and surrender to the One who is on the other side of any essence and any science” - these are the conclusions of Bonaventure.

After Aquinas and Bonaventure, the correlation of faith and knowledge in scholasticism was studied by Duns Scotus (1266-1308). The latter advocated the delimitation of faith and knowledge, philosophy and theology. According to Scot, philosophy has its own object and its own methodology, different from the object and methodology of theology. Scott believed that there are truths that elude the mind - for example, the beginning of the world in time, the immortality of the soul. A person comes to these truths only through personal spiritual experience, but not through evidence. To understand these truths, ordinary knowledge is useless.

A blow to the harmony of knowledge and faith established by Aquinas is also dealt by the head of the nominalists, William of Ockham (1280-1349). For him, the auxiliary character of knowledge in relation to faith is obvious. From Occam's point of view, the domains of the human mind and the domains of faith do not intersect and will be separated forever. Ockham states that it is impossible to look for a logical and rational basis for what is given by faith in Revelation. Philosophy in Ockham is no longer the servant of theology. As, however, theology for him is no longer a science, but a certain complex of provisions interconnected by faith.

A certain sequence in which the positions of the scholastics are stated above does not mean that their views succeeded each other. In the era of Erasmus, all the above directions of scholastic thought find their place in theology.

medieval realism.

Realism went along the path of declaring the reality of abstract concepts (universal). Realists believed that true reality possess not isolated things but only general concepts(lat. universalis - universals). Universals exist outside of consciousness, independently of it and the material world (recall the world of ideas, Plato's eidos). Realism is a Platonic trend. Hence the name of the direction of realism does not coincide with the usual modern meaning of the concept of real. Medieval realism means the real existence of concepts or universals, i.e. universal. Universals were placed between the human mind, thinking and the material Universe as an independent world.

Supporters of the Platonic line represented the so-called extreme realism. Bright representative - Anselm of Canterbury(1033-1109), famous for having developed the first logical proof of the existence of God ( ontological proof of the existence of God). Developing Platonic views about eternal, absolute, perfect ideas that exist as models of the material world, extreme relaists argued that universals form a special ideal world, abiding in its self-sufficiency and in isolation from the world of concrete things.

The Church was against extreme realism, because, according to the dogma, God absolutely rises above the material Universe created by him and the non-material world, and in this case he is on the same level with universals, as if identified with them.

More moderate wing of realism represented Thomas Aquinas. Representatives of moderate realism were partly based on the ideas of Aristotle, who asserted the connection between the individual and the general. They also recognized the reality of universal concepts, but believed that universals exist not only as a separate independent world, but are also associated with individual things; universals also exist in concrete (single) things. According to Thomas Aquinas, universals exist in three ways:

“before things” - as ideas of the Divine mind;

"in things" - as integral forms of the individual;

“after things” - as concepts of the human mind, i.e. as a result of abstract thinking.

medieval nominalism.

Nominalism ( arose in the XI-XII centuries, received a special development in the XIV-XV centuries. ) – it is a theoretical protest against speculation in abstract terms. This is a direction of medieval scholastic philosophy, which, in contrast to realism, denied the real existence of general concepts (universals), considering them only names (lat. nomen - name, nominalis - nominal, hence the name). Those. nominalists believed that the common exists only after things. Nominalists argued that when a person forms concepts or universals through abstract thinking, then these are only names, a product of thought, a generalization. The formation of concepts or the universal is a thought process, a process of logical generalization, logical thinking. According to nominalism, objectively, in reality, only “single things” exist, and general concepts (universals) are nothing more than denominations, names denoting things and existing only in the language.

Extreme tendencies also emerged in nominalism. One of the brightest representatives of extreme nominalism, Roscelinus (1050-1120), believed that universals are nothing more than “voice sounds”, “air tremors”. From the point of view of extreme nominalism, unviersalia is only a name, a denomination, only an individual and nothing more.

Pantheism

Idealistic(nature dissolves in God (representatives. N. Kuzansky; J. Boehme))

Materialistic(God dissolves in nature (representatives: D. Bruno; T. Campanella.))

Ideas:

N. Kuzansky

* God and nature are equal

* God is identical to the universe, as an absolute being and an absolute maximum.

* The doctrine of the coincidence of minimum and maximum (Absolute maximum is one, it has everything and nothing is opposite to it, it follows that it is in everything)

J. Boehme

*God is unknowable by man

* God cannot know himself

D. Bruno

* In the world, matter and form are merged together, hence it follows that the Universe is one, infinite and immovable, there is a constant change in it.

* The idea of the One pervades all other provisions of his philosophy.

* true knowledge is infinite, because the object of knowledge is infinite - nature.

United is the essence of being and the form of its existence.

Matter is a divine thing

Rejects the idea of creation and nature by God

Matter consists of atoms, the universe is animated, it has an inherent vital principle, it is the soul of the world

He denied the immortality of the soul. Conclusion: Selfless goal on earth

Bruno opposed dogmatic religiosity to philosophical religiosity, which did not receive recognition from the Catholic Church, and he was burned.

10 question! The Political Philosophy of Machiavelli.

Labor: "Sovereign" (everything that will happen next, all from this work)

*The best form of government is the Republic (because it is better adapted to the person)

1) The rule of the majority of the people is united, the consequence prevents the possibility of abuse of power.

2) Minorities of the nobility

3) One elected head of state. (allows you to make quick decisions if necessary)

* it is easier to exercise freedom and equality in the republic

* Individual freedom is not possible always and everywhere

* Religion is a good means of politics (Needed to establish a civil life)

* If there is no religious fear, the state will fall apart (the state must support religion and rituals)

* Christianity negatively affects the modern state

Cause: Decline of Christianity --- The Church keeps the country in discord

We need a reforming monarch, elected by the people, to create a nation-state

All means are good for this (Only the results are important, not the methods)

A prince must be more courageous than a lion and more cunning than a fox

The sovereign must study human nature - use this knowledge in practice

The sovereign, under certain circumstances, can act harshly

11 questions! Religious and cultural context. Formation of the philosophy of the new time

17th century - the beginning of the philosophy of the new time. The prerequisites for the formation of the philosophy of the New Age are associated with the transfer of the interest of thinkers from the problems of scholasticism (a type of religious philosophy characterized by a combination of theological and dogmatic premises with a rationalistic methodology and an interest in formal logical problems) and theology (a set of religious doctrines and teachings about the essence and action of God. Assumes the concept absolute God, informing man of knowledge about himself in revelation) to the problems of naturalistic philosophy. In the same period, there are attempts by philosophers to re-found natural science, combining experiment and reflection as the basis of the theoretical method. In the 17th century, the interest of philosophers was directed to questions of knowledge. In the first place are the problems of epistemology.

Man's worldview is changing (science and Protestantism)

The Age of Scientific Discovery

Formation of deism

Criticism of speculative philosophy and theology (speculative - the truth is revealed not as a result of experience, but through reflection)

Martin Luther:

Rejection of the need for intermediaries.

Conclusion:

Reformation

The Renaissance prepared the ground (Philosophical thought freed itself from scholasticism)

Anthropocentrism Wins (Human Orientation)

The basis of the worldview is the principle of rationality --- the subject of philosophy in the field of epistemology (a branch of philosophy that studies the problems of the nature of knowledge and its capabilities)

Protestant ethics is based on the idea of a person's personal responsibility

12 question! Bacon's empiricism.

*Science should be based on experience, experiment. In his research, he embarked on the path of experience and drew attention to the exceptional significance and necessity of observations and experiments to discover the truth. Bacon distinguishes between 2 types of experiments:

1. "fruitful" - the goal, bringing direct benefit to a person; (beneficial)

2. "light-bearing" - the goal, not immediate benefit, but the knowledge of the laws and properties of things. (gives pure knowledge)

Bacon formulated the inductive method of cognition. (general laws should be derived from the results, specific experiments (from the particular to the general - inductively))

Formerly used deductively

To gain new knowledge about any phenomenon, you need to start with the presence table. Next, list all known inherent properties. From this follows the compilation of an absence table (an enumeration of properties similar to the first, but in which phenomena are absent.

Table of degrees (the same property is presented in different degrees)

Conclusion: By asking the right questions, one can comprehend the nature of the phenomenon.

Science and acquired knowledge should bear fruit in practice.

Bacon decisively rethinks the subject and tasks of science. Unlike antiquity, when nature was treated contemplatively, the task of turning scientific knowledge to the benefit of mankind becomes: “knowledge is power”, Bacon focuses on the search for discoveries not in books, like scholastics, but in the production process and for it. He substantiates the importance of the inductive method (from single facts to general propositions).

Idol kind

These are prejudices rooted in the nature of man as a generic being, in the imperfection of the sense organs, in the limitations of the mind. Sensations deceive us, they have boundaries beyond which objects cease to be perceived by us. To be guided only by sensations is naive. The mind helps, but the mind often gives a distorted picture of nature (likens a crooked mirror). The mind ascribes to nature its properties (anthropomorphism) and purposes (teleology). Hasty generalizations (for example, circular orbits).

The idols of the family are not only natural, but also innate. They proceed from the natural imperfection of the human mind, which manifests itself in the fact that "it implies a greater order and balance in things than those that are in them."

The idol of the clan is the most indestructible according to Bacon. One can hardly free oneself from one's nature and not add one's nature to ideas. The way to overcome the idols of the race lies in the realization of this natural property of the human mind and the consistent implementation of the rules of new induction in the process of cognition (this is a necessary, certainly, the main and most reliable means for overcoming other idols).

Cave Idol

If the idols of the race come from the natural defects of the human mind, which are more or less common, then the idols of the cave are also caused by the innate defects of the human mind, but of an individual nature.

"The idols of the cave are the idols of man as an individual. For each individual, apart from the errors generated by the nature of man as a species, has his own individual cave or lair. This cave refracts and distorts the light of nature, on the one hand, because each has a certain, own nature on the other hand, because each received a different upbringing and met other people.

It was also because everyone read only certain books, revered and adored different authorities, and finally, because his impressions were different from others, according to what kind of souls they had - prejudiced and full of prejudices, or souls calm and balanced, as well as for other reasons of the same kind. Similarly, the human spirit itself (since it is contained in individual people) is very changeable, confusing, as if random. "The human mind is the mind of a being belonging to the human race, but at the same time possessing individual characteristics: body, character, education, interest Each person looks at the world as if from his own cave.”Imperceptibly, passions stain and spoil the mind.” It is easier to get rid of this “idol” than the first one - collective experience levels out individual deviations.

Market Idol

Its danger lies in relying on collective experience. An idol is a product of human communication, mainly verbal. "There are, however, such idols that arise through mutual communication. We call them idols of the market because they arose by mutual agreement in society. People agree with the help of speech; words are determined by a common understanding. A bad and incorrect choice of words greatly interferes with the mind These hindrances cannot correct either definitions or explanations.

Words simply rape the mind and confuse everyone, and lead people to countless unnecessary arguments and ideas. People believe that their mind commands words. But they involuntarily enter the mind."

Harmfully misused. Mistaking words for things, people are mistaken. Here his criticism is directed against the scholastics. One can overcome an idol by realizing that words are signs of things. Realizing that there are single things - that is, you need to take the position of nominalism. Words do not represent reality, but only the generalizing activity of the mind.

Bacon pays more attention, but does not find (apart from the consistent implementation of the rules of new induction) an effective way to overcome them. Therefore, he defines the idols of the market as the most harmful.

theater idol

The product of a collective experience. If a person has blind faith in authorities, especially in the ancient ones. The older, the greater the illusion of authority causes. Like actors on a stage in the limelight, the ancient thinkers are in the halo of their glory. This is the result of "aberration of vision". And they are the same people as the readers. It must be understood that the older, the more naive the thinker, because he knew less.

“These are idols that have migrated into human thoughts from various philosophical teachings. I call them the idols of the theater, because all the traditional and still invented philosophical systems are, in my opinion, as if theatrical games that created worlds, fictional as if in a theater. I am not talking here about current philosophies and schools, nor about those old ones, because such games can be added up and many more can be played together. Therefore, the true causes of errors, which are completely different from each other, are more or less almost the same.

14. Bacon's social utopia.

In 1627, The New Atlantis was published - in this work the most important feature of his philosophical position is manifested. "New Atlantis" is a social utopia in which Bacon expresses his ideas about the optimal structure of society.

The genre of the book is reminiscent of "Utopia" by T. More. But if More and Campanella pay attention to the question of what will happen if there is no private property, then Bacon is not interested in this question at all. His ideal society on the legendary island of Bensalem is, in fact, an idealization of the then English society.

There is a division into rich and poor in it, a significant role in the life of people on the island is played by the Christian religion. And although Bacon in his utopia condemns certain negative phenomena typical of England at that time, he does not affect the essence of social relations, and in most cases condemns the violation of moral norms recognized by society. So, in Bensalem, for example, a frivolous life is condemned, theft and any offenses leading to a violation of the law are strictly prosecuted, there is no bribery of officials, etc.

The central point of the book is the description of the House of Solomon. This is a kind of museum of science and technology. There, the islanders study nature in order to put it at the service of man. Bacon's technical fantasy turned out to be quite non-trivial - artificial snow, artificially induced rain, lightning. It demonstrates the synthesis of living beings, the cultivation of human organs. Future microscope and other technical devices.

Bacon had enough political and legal experience to come to the conclusion that science and power must agree. Therefore, in the "New Atlantis" the "house of Solomon" as the center of the development of science has such an exceptional position.

The advice and instructions he issues are obligatory for the citizens of this utopian state (from the point of view of social coercion) and are taken seriously and with respect.

In connection with the high appreciation of science in the utopian Bensalem, Bacon shows how the science developed by the "house of Solomon" differs (both in its content and in terms of methods) from the European science of his time. Thus, this utopia affirms Bacon's view of science as the most important form of human activity.

The criticality of his social utopia is not directed against the prevailing social relations, but is aimed at their "recovery", cleansing from the negative phenomena that accompanied (naturally and with necessity) the development of capitalist production relations.

The significance of Bacon's philosophy is not determined by his social views, which, despite the relative progressiveness, do not transcend the boundaries of the era; it consists primarily in the criticism of the speculative contemplative approach to the world, characteristic of late medieval philosophy.

By this, Bacon significantly contributed to the formation of the philosophical thinking of the New Age.

Gnoseology R. Descartes

DECARTES RENE(1596, La Touraine - 1650, Stockholm) - French philosopher, mathematician, experimenter and natural theorist, founder of the philosophy of the New Age, one of the creators of the new European intellectual tradition.
He came from a noble noble family. He received a classical education for a developed Catholic country in the privileged Jesuit college La Flèche (1606–1615), where he acquired, in addition to the traditional preparation of the beginning of mathematical knowledge, information about modern scientific trends. At the end of the collegium, he studied the "book of the world", including as a civilian officer. He continued his studies at the universities of France and Holland. Major works: Rules for the Guidance of the Mind (1629), The World or a Treatise on Light (1634), Discourse on Method (1637), Meditation on First Philosophy (1641), Principles of Philosophy (1644) , "Passion of the Soul" (1649), were created in Holland, where D. lived very secluded ("The one who hid well lived"), in celibacy, because "it is impossible to find beauty comparable to the beauty of Truth", working hard. The result of his work is a qualitatively new picture of the world and the technology of thinking - D. takes the last step from medieval rationality to the rationality of humanistic culture.

In the range of questions of philosophy developed by Descartes, the question of the method of cognition was of paramount importance. Like F. Bacon, Descartes saw the ultimate goal of knowledge in the dominance of man over the forces of nature, in the discovery and invention of technical means, in the knowledge of causes and effects, in the improvement of the very nature of man. Descartes is looking for an unconditionally reliable original foundation for all knowledge and a method by which it is possible, based on this foundation, to build an equally reliable edifice of all science. He finds neither this principle nor this method in scholasticism. Therefore, the starting point of Descartes' philosophical reasoning is doubt about the truth of generally recognized knowledge, covering all types of knowledge. However, like Bacon, the doubt with which Descartes began is not an agnostic conviction, but only a preliminary methodological device. One may doubt whether the external world exists, and even whether my body exists, but my doubt itself, at any rate, exists. Doubt is one of the acts of thinking. I doubt as I think. If, therefore, doubt is a certain fact, then it exists only insofar as thinking exists, insofar as I myself exist as a thinker: "... I think, therefore I exist ...".

In the doctrine of knowledge, Descartes was the founder of rationalism, which was formed as a result of observation of the logical nature of mathematical knowledge. Mathematical truths, according to Descartes, are absolutely reliable, have universality and necessity, arising from the nature of the intellect itself. Therefore, Descartes assigned the final role in the process of cognition to deduction, by which he understood reasoning based on completely reliable starting positions (axioms) and consisting of a chain of also reliable logical conclusions. The reliability of the axioms is seen by the mind intuitively, with complete clarity and distinctness. For a clear and distinct representation of the entire chain of links of deduction, the power of memory is needed. Therefore, immediately obvious starting points, or intuitions, take precedence over deductive reasoning. Armed with reliable means of thinking - intuition and deduction, the mind can achieve complete certainty in all areas of knowledge, if only it is guided by the true method.

Thus, the important part of Descartes' plan is not the new science that he developed, but his conception of the methods by which he was to conduct research. In his part biographical, part philosophical work, published in 1637, entitled Discourses on the Method to Rightly Direct Your Mind and Seek Truth in the Sciences, he lays down four rules, which he claims are sufficient for to guide your mind:

“First, never accept as true anything that I would not recognize as such with obviousness, that is, carefully avoid haste and prejudice and include in my judgments only what is presented to my mind so clearly and distinctly that it cannot in any way give anyone cause for doubt (i.e., to admit as true only such provisions that seem true and distinct cannot cause any doubts about their truth).

The second is to divide each of the difficulties I am considering into as many parts as necessary in order to better solve them (that is, to break down each complex problem into its component particular problems or tasks).

The third is to arrange your thoughts in a certain order, starting with the simplest and easily cognizable objects, and ascend, little by little, as if by steps, to the knowledge of the most complex, allowing the existence of order even among those that in the natural course of things do not precede each other (i.e., .e., methodically move from the known and proven to the unknown and unproven). And the last thing is to make lists everywhere so complete and reviews so comprehensive that you can be sure that nothing is omitted” (i.e., do not allow any omissions in the logical links of the study). First of all, Descartes' method is a questioning method. In other words, it is a method of proving what you already know, or improving your knowledge by systematizing it. The rule for the mind of Descartes should serve as a guide for a person who is trying to solve any problem or analyze any phenomenon. In other words, he takes the point of view of a person who does not yet know something, but is trying to discover this something with his mind, and not from the point of view of a teacher or expert who is absolutely sure that they know something, and are just trying to explain it's for someone else.

Second, Descartes' method is the method of doubt. His first rule is "never accept as true anything that I would not clearly recognize as such." What Descartes means is that we must refuse to accept something, no matter how sure we are before, no matter how many people believe in it, no matter how obvious it may seem, until we can be absolutely sure that that is 100% true. If there is the slightest, the most vague, the weakest doubt about the truth of such a fact, then we should not accept it.

When the method of questioning is combined with the method of doubt, the very nature of philosophy begins to be transformed. This transformation, called by some the epistemological turn, took a century and a half to complete, until Kant's "critique of pure reason." After that, the whole philosophy changed so much that the very questions that the philosophers posed, as well as the answers that they gave, looked very little like what was written before the Meditations .... The epistemological turn is a very simple but tricky concept.

The heart of the epistemological turn is nothing more than a reversal of the two fundamental questions of philosophy. From the time of the first pre-Socratic cosmologists to the era of Descartes, philosophers have put first questions about what exists, about the nature of the universe, and only then asked what I can find out about what the nature of the universe is. This means that the philosophers believed that the questions of being were superior and more important than the questions of consciousness. Thus, in the philosophy that preceded Descartes, metaphysics took precedence over epistemology.

The two methods of Descartes - the method of questioning and the method of doubt - are the result of a revision of the previous state of affairs. Taken in the truest sense of the word, and carried out with a consistency and firmness that Descartes himself never achieved, these two methods have forced philosophers to put aside the questions of being until they have solved the questions of knowledge. And this very fact of changing the meaning of questions about being, so that by the time the revolution started by Descartes was underway, the old type of metaphysics had ended and the new type of epistemology had taken its place as the main philosophy.

As mentioned above, when Descartes summarized the evidence for his own being in Latin, he used the phrase: "Cogito, ergosum", which means "I think, therefore I am." Thus his proof became known in philosophical parlance as the cogito, the argument. The utterance or assertion of a proposition is the decisive moment, because it is the assertion that guarantees the truth. The bottom line is that if a statement is being asserted, then someone must be making the assertion, and if I am asserting it, that someone must be me. Needless to say, I cannot use this proof to assert the existence of anyone else. My assertion of any proposition, true or false about myself or about anyone else, ensures that I exist because I am the subject (that is, the one who asserts, that is, consciously thinks this proposition). And this is the key point - a statement is a statement, and, therefore, it must be approved by someone.

In his first Meditation... Descartes doubts everything that is not known with certainty. He goes so far as to adopt such a strict criterion of certainty that ultimately nothing but the assertion of his own existence can satisfy his requirements. Considering all the variety of his beliefs, Descartes further divides them into two large groups: those beliefs that, as he believed, he knew on the basis of the evidence of his own feelings, and those beliefs that, as he believed, were known to him on the basis of thinking with the help of general concepts. Thus, thanks to the argumentation in the first "Meditation ..." Descartes raises two main problems. The first is the issue of credibility. What criterion of truth should we adopt as the standard against which we measure our knowledge? The second problem is the problem of the sources of knowledge. If we know anything, then the question arises as to whether our knowledge is based on the sources of feelings, on abstract thinking, or on some combination of both? The philosophy of the next 150 years after the publication of the Meditations . . . was a variation on these two main themes.

Descartes himself offered preliminary answers to questions about the reliability and sources of knowledge in the final part of the second "Reflections ...". With regard to the problem of validity, he proposed two criteria, two tests of the validity of a speculation:

1. "... a clear and distinct feeling that I am making a statement, which in reality would not be enough to convince me that something I am saying is true."

2. "... all things that I feel, quite clearly and distinctly, are true."

As for the sources of our knowledge, Descartes honestly and directly takes the side of reason, and not the side of feelings. This is exactly what one would expect from someone who dreamed of creating mathematical physics. Instead of observing and collecting data based on sight, hearing, smell and touch, Descartes prefers to create a universal system of science based on logical and mathematical premises and justified by hard deduction. To convince his readers of the primacy of reason in the process of cognition, Descartes uses what is called a "thought experiment". In other words, he asks us to imagine together

Topic: Medieval philosophy: the problem of the relationship between knowledge and faith

Introduction

Medieval philosophy is a historical stage in the development of Western philosophy, covering the period from the fall of the Roman Empire (V century) to the beginning of the Renaissance (XIV-XV centuries)

In the European philosophical tradition, the transition from "pure" Antiquity to the "proper" Middle Ages was associated with the formation of Christian philosophy and stretched over many centuries. In specialized literature, it is customary to single out two main stages in the development of medieval Christian philosophy:

1) patristics (II - VIII centuries), when the formation and formation of the foundations of Christian philosophy took place;

2) scholasticism (XI - XIV centuries), which, revering patristics for the classics, became its continuation, taking the torch of the philosophical justification of Christian ideology.

In medieval Western philosophy, ancient cosmocentrism was replaced by Christian theocentrism. It was a radical shift in public consciousness, which was accompanied by a significant "revaluation of values." If before a person was considered as a particle of the cosmos, now he was evaluated and measured through the fundamental principles of religion with the idea of a personal absolute God, who communicates knowledge about himself in revelation. Hence, a completely understandable revision of traditional views on the essence and purpose of man, a rethinking of the ancient tradition.

Philosophy is the theoretical basis of the worldview, or its theoretical core, around which a kind of spiritual cloud of generalized everyday views of worldly wisdom has formed, which constitutes a vital level of worldview. But the worldview also has a higher level - a generalization of the achievements of science, art, the basic principles of religious views and experience, as well as the finest sphere of the moral life of society. In general, the worldview could be defined as follows: it is a generalized system of views of a person (and society) on the world as a whole, on his own place in it, understanding and evaluation by a person of the meaning of his life and activity, the fate of mankind; a set of generalized scientific, philosophical, socio-political, legal, moral, religious, aesthetic value orientations, beliefs, convictions and ideals of people.

1. The concepts of the world and man in the philosophy of the Middle Ages

The most important feature of medieval philosophy is theocentrism (from the Greek theos - God), which had a strong influence on the entire worldview of medieval philosophers, including their ideas about the world and man.

In the Middle Ages, a person is considered, first of all, as a part of the world order established by God. And the idea of himself, as it is expressed in Christianity, boils down to the fact that man is "the image and likeness of God." According to this point of view, in reality this person is internally divided due to his fall, therefore he is considered as a unity of divine and human nature, which finds its expression in the person of Christ. Since everyone initially possesses a divine nature, he has the possibility of internal communion with the divine "grace" and thereby become a "superman". In this sense, the concept of the superman is often developed in Russian religious philosophy as well.

In social terms, in the Middle Ages, a person is proclaimed a passive participant in the divine order and is a created being and insignificant in relation to God. Unlike the ancient gods, as if related to man, the Christian god stands above nature and man, is their transcendent creator and creative principle. The main task for a person is to join God and find salvation on the Day of Judgment. Therefore, the whole drama of human history is expressed in the paradigm: fall into sin - redemption. And each person is called to realize this by measuring his actions with God. In Christianity, everyone is responsible for himself before God.

The most capacious philosophical and anthropological views of the Middle Ages are presented in the works of Augustine the Blessed. Man is the soul that God breathed into him. The body, the flesh - contemptible and sinful. Only humans have souls, animals do not. Man is the opposite of soul and body, which are independent. However, it is the soul that makes a person a person. A person is completely and completely dependent on God, he is not free and not free in anything. Man was created by God as a free being, but having fallen into sin, he himself chose evil and went against the will of God. The main goal of man is salvation before the Last Judgment, the redemption of the sinfulness of the human race, unquestioning obedience to the church as "the city of God."

Augustine's worldview is deeply theocentric: in the center of spiritual aspirations is God as the starting and ending point of reflection. The problem of God and his relationship to the world appears in Augustine as central. Creationism (creation) formulated in the Holy Scriptures is comprehended and commented on by the largest thinkers. Like Plotinus, Augustine considers God as an extra-material Absolute, correlated with the world and man as his creation.

Unlike Augustine, Thomas Aquinas uses the philosophy of Aristotle to substantiate the Christian doctrine of man. Man is an intermediate being between animals and angels. It represents the unity of the soul and body, but it is the soul that is the "engine" of the body and determines the essence of man. Unlike Augustine, for whom the soul is independent of the body and identical with man, for Thomas Aquinas, man is the personal unity of both. The soul is an immaterial substance, but it receives its final fulfillment only through the body.

Thomas Aquinas at the same time maintains the position of the immortality of the individual soul, which can only be proved within the framework of Platonic philosophy. In Thomism, the soul is neither a substance that plays the role of a form, nor a form that has the nature of a substance, but a form that has a substantiality.

Man himself is neither soul nor body. He is the unity of the soul, which substantiates his body, and the body in which this soul resides. Man is not a simple, but a complex and yet indivisible substance. From this follows the Christian doctrine of the value of each individual as such, which none of the ancient philosophers, including the Stoics, could substantiate.

According to Thomas Aquinas, there is no particular source of morality. Subordinating human activity to the general metaphysical laws of motion, Thomas considers moral good to be a special case of good in general. The measure of the "humanity" of an action, according to the founder of Thomism, is the measure of its subordination to reason. So, to the extent that human action is rational, to that extent it is existential and, consequently, to the same extent it is moral.

An important place in the anthropological conception of Thomas is occupied by the doctrine of passions. Man, being a rational animal, is capable of experiencing states that are common to him and animals. Such states he calls passions. What is passion? This is a passive state of the soul, which is subjected to some test. Man is deprived of innate knowledge and must acquire it through sensory perception. The human capacity for intelligent desire depends on intellectual properties. Thus the faculty of rational desire is more passive than reason itself.

But in man there is an even more passive faculty, namely sensual desire. If rational desire is determined by what is good for the mind, then the faculty of sensual desire is determined by what is good in relation to the body. It is this passive part of the soul that is the seat of the passions. Thomas offers a classification of passions and virtues.

2. The problem of the relationship between knowledge and faith. The Essence and Significance of the Dispute about Universals in Medieval Philosophy

The problem of the relationship between knowledge and faith has a long history. It was actively discussed in medieval scholastic philosophy. Thomas Aquinas spoke about the harmony between faith and knowledge with the priority of faith. Turning again to the sources of ancient Greek philosophical thought, he, like Augustine, was skeptical of reason. Recognizing that he had much greater power than Augustine, he was convinced that a person can properly use his mind only through divine guidance and insight.

F. Bacon, putting forward the slogan "Knowledge is power", pointed out that the truth must be sought in the data of experience and observation, and not in the darkness of scholasticism and in quotations from sacred books. Already at the beginning of the XX century. The Catholic Church put forward the position that faith should not be a blind movement of the soul and that there can be no real discrepancy between faith and knowledge, reason, since all knowledge came from God. For example, Pope Pius XII repeatedly made statements that "the church is a friend of science", noting, however, that the church has to intervene in science in order to warn it against errors against faith.

The problem of combining faith and knowledge, theology and science occupies an important place in one of the most influential areas of modern philosophy - neo-Thomism, whose representatives sought to unite faith and reason in a single synthesis. The main task of philosophy is seen in the rational disclosure and justification of the truths of theology. At the same time, it must be guided by its own criteria of rationality and ultimately guided by the "light of faith."

The "Confession" of Augustine the Blessed makes it possible to follow every step of his path from Greek philosophy to Christian revelation. The medieval sage believed that all pre-Christian philosophy was subject to one error and infected with the same heresy: it extolled the power of reason as the highest power of man. Augustine's assertion that the first step on the path to the knowledge of God is the acceptance of Revelation on faith may seem paradoxical: thus it is proposed to accept without proof what we have to prove. But there is no contradiction here. This is evidenced by the experience of Augustine himself, who spent many years fruitlessly searching for truth by means of reason.

Reason, according to Augustine, is one of the most dubious and uncertain things in the world. It is not given to man to know until he is enlightened by a special divine Revelation. Reason cannot show us the way to clarity, truth and wisdom, for its meaning is obscure and its origin mysterious. This mystery can only be comprehended by Christian revelation. Faith is not something extraordinary and alien to human consciousness. On the contrary, it is one of the types of knowledge that differs from knowledge in the proper sense of the word only by the source (authoritative evidence), and not by the object.

Reason in Augustine is not simple and single, but rather a dual and composite nature. Man was created in the image of God, and in his original state, in which he left the divine hands, he was equal to his prototype. But all this was lost to him after the fall of Adam. And on his own, alone with himself and his own abilities, he is not able to find a way back, rebuild himself on his own and return to his originally pure essence. If such a return were possible, it would be only in a supernatural way - with the help of divine grace. Such is the new anthropology, as understood by Augustine and affirmed in all the great systems of medieval philosophy.

Whatever problems were discussed in medieval scholasticism, they were somehow connected with the question of the place and role of universals in the structure of being and in the process of cognition. The history of medieval philosophy cannot be reduced to the history of a dispute about the nature of universals.

According to the formulation of Thomas Aquinas, universals can have a threefold existence: ante rem (before the thing, i.e. in the Divine intellect), in re (in the thing) and post rem (after the thing, in the human mind). During the discussion of the nature of universals, three main approaches to solving the problem were formed: realism, conceptualism and nominalism. Realism recognizes the independent existence of universals; conceptualism claims that general concepts have a place in the human mind, but something corresponds to them in the things themselves; nominalism believes that general concepts arise in the process of cognition and outside the human mind, i.e. don't really exist. The concept of realism was shared by Anselm of Canterbury, Gilbert of Porretan, Thomas Aquinas, Bonaventure and others, the point of view of conceptualism was formulated in the works of Abelard and Duns Scotus; the rationale for the nominalistic position is presented in the doctrine of Occam.

Depending on how the question of the relationship between spirit and matter is resolved, the worldview can be idealistic or materialistic, religious or atheistic. Materialism is a philosophical view that recognizes the substance, the essential basis of being, matter. According to materialism, the world is a moving matter. The spiritual principle, consciousness, is a property of highly organized matter - the brain.

Idealism is a philosophical worldview, according to which true being does not belong to matter, but to the spiritual principle - reason, will.

3. Show continuity in the development of philosophy: ancient philosophy - Thomism - Neo-Thomism

Throughout its history, philosophy - one of the sources of development of human knowledge. Considering it historically, one can detect continuity in the development of philosophical knowledge, its problems, the commonality of the categorical apparatus and the logic of research.

One of the most prominent representatives of mature scholasticism was the monk of the Dominican Order Thomas Aquinas, the teachings of the famous medieval theologian, philosopher and naturalist Albert the Great.

Like his teacher, Thomas tried to substantiate the basic principles of Christian theology, based on the teachings of Aristotle. At the same time, the latter was transformed by him in such a way that it would not conflict with the dogmas of the creation of the world from nothing and with the teaching of the God-manhood of Jesus Christ. Like Augustine and Boethius, in Thomas the highest principle is being itself. By being, Thomas means the Christian God who created the world, as it is told in the Old Testament. Distinguishing being (existence) and essence. Thomas, however, does not oppose them, but, following Aristotle, emphasizes their common root. Essences, as substances, have, according to Thomas, an independent existence, in contrast to accidents (properties, qualities), which exist only due to substances. From this a distinction is drawn between the so-called substantial and accidental forms. The substantial form communicates to every thing a simple being, and therefore, when it appears, we say that something has arisen, and when it disappears, something is destroyed. The accidental form is the source of certain qualities, and not the existence of things. Distinguishing, following Aristotle, the actual and potential states, Thomas considers being as the first of the actual states. In every thing, Thomas believes, there is as much being as there is actuality in it.

The teachings of Thomas (Thomism) enjoyed great influence in the Middle Ages, the Roman Church officially recognized him. This teaching was revived in the 20th century under the name of neo-Thomism, one of the most significant currents of Catholic philosophy in the West.

The philosophy of Thomas Aquinas did not immediately receive universal recognition among the various scholastic currents. Thomism became the official philosophy of the Catholic Church only from the 14th century. But the rapid flowering of human thought in the Renaissance pushed the philosophy of Thomism into theological seminaries and orders schools.

This philosophy emerged from behind the walls of monasteries only at the end of the 19th century. The immediate impetus for its revival was the encyclical Aeterni Patris published in 1897 by Pope Leo 13, which recommended the philosophy of Thomas as the doctrine that best meets the needs of the social situation and best expresses the spirit of Catholicism. But the main reasons for the revival of Thomism, of course, were the rapid development of capitalism, the strengthening of labor movements, the development of historical materialism and the emergence of unorthodox movements (for example, modernism) in the bosom of the church itself. At the direction of Leo 13, translations of the works of Thomas Aquinas into modern languages were also made. At the initiative of the Pope, the Academy of St. Thomas, in Louvain - the Higher Philosophical Institute, which became the international center of neo-Thomism.

Neo-Thomism becomes the theological form of modern objective idealism. Objective-idealistic philosophy recognizes an external world independent of the subject. Neo-Thomism claims to be the "third way" in philosophy, above idealism and materialism. From the point of view of neo-Thomism, to be objectively - real does not mean at all to be material, to exist objectively - means something more than to exist sensually. It is real - non-material being, according to neo-Thomists, that is primary. Matter, being real, but devoid of the nature of substance (ie, independent being), is covered by non-material being.

Philosophy is a bridge that, according to the neo-Thomists, should connect the sciences with theology. If theology descends from heaven to earth, then philosophy rises from the earthly to the divine, and, in the end, will come to the same conclusions as theology.

In conclusion, I would like to note that at present, neo-Thomism continues to develop, including certain provisions of existentialism, phenomenology, philosophical anthropology and other currents of modern idealism. medieval philosophy theology Thomism.

Conclusion

Acquaintance with medieval philosophy shows, on the one hand, the cultural continuity of the epochs, on the other hand, their difference, a qualitatively new state of medieval philosophizing. One of the conclusions is this: one should not underestimate the philosophical thought of this time.

It cannot be argued that the philosophy of the Middle Ages is divorced from reality or based on wrong ideas. After all, these ideas did not arise from scratch, they also had a justification, it is another matter that today they will not be entirely appropriate for us. Again, it must be taken into account that they were put forward at a different time. And who knows, maybe in a couple of centuries the provisions of medieval philosophy will again become dominant.

Thus, in medieval philosophy, as emphasized by E. Cassirer, there was a complete denial of all the values defended in Greek philosophy. What seemed to be the highest privilege of man took on the appearance of a dangerous temptation. What fed his pride became his greatest humiliation. The Stoic prescription: a person must obey his inner principle, honor this "demon" within himself - has come to be seen as dangerous idolatry.

List of used literature

1. Lavrinenko V.N. Philosophy. Textbook for universities / prof. V.P. Ratnikov. - 4th ed., revised. and additional - M.: UNITI-DANA, 2011. - 498 p.

2. Ableev S.R. History of world philosophy. - M.: AST, 2010. - 325 p.

3. Alekseev P.V. Philosophy. Textbook for bachelors. - M.: Prospekt, 2015. - 334 p.

4. Sokolov V.V. European philosophy of the XV-XVII centuries. - M.: Higher school, 2012. - 327 p.

5. Spirkin A.G. Philosophy: textbook. - 2nd ed. - M.: Gardariki, 2012. - 474 p.

If the Control Work, in your opinion, is of poor quality, or you have already met this work, please let us know.

In medieval philosophy, the question of the relationship between faith and knowledge was the main epistemological problem. Christianity proceeded and proceeds from the fact that all truth is given by God in Holy Scripture. However, Scripture requires proper reading. Thus, the question inevitably arises - which reading is considered correct?

For the first time discussions on the reading of Scripture arise not as purely philosophical, but as a result of a discrepancy in the interpretation of texts. To solve this problem, appropriate tools were needed. And, as such tools, grammar, rhetoric and dialectics are used. Here they no longer act as "free arts", but as a means of penetrating into Christian truths. Thus, there is a conversion of faith to knowledge.

The use of knowledge for the cause of faith was also necessary for the conversion of non-believers to Christianity. They needed an argument. Moreover, the argument based on reason, on its rational principles. It is precisely such principles that were found in Platonic and Aristotelian philosophy.

The official Christian doctrine has always been trusted only by church hierarchs and, therefore, up to a certain point, the discussion of the question of the relationship between faith and reason remained the lot of a narrow circle of people. The situation changed with the emergence of monastic schools and the creation of universities. They became "catalysts" for the development in theology of the question of the relationship between faith and reason. At university seminars, where the church officially allowed discussions on any topic, as well as in monastic schools, the question of the relationship between faith and knowledge acquired a new audience and a new sound.

Western apologetics (Tertullian on the paradoxism of faith)

Tertullian is a representative of anti-gnosticism within orthodox Christianity, who devoted most of his writings to the refutation of gnosticism and the very pathos of rational knowledge. Especially great are his merits in the creation of Latin theological terminology. In the theological realm, Tertullian was the first to use the term "trinity" instead of "triad". It seemed to Tertullian that the latter means "three different", and the trinity is "a set of three". He explained his understanding of trinitarian monotheism as follows: the trinity of God is revealed only in the process of self-expression, when the transcendent is drawn into history. Only in the movement from the divine to the human, that is, in the process of revelation, is the whole reality of the trinity built. However, it has a single essence or substance, so that the same divine power of being is present in all three persons. Three faces, according to Tertullian, should not mean that there are three persons and three wills in God, but that the one God has three guises, three masks, to which he resorts in the course of his self-manifestation.

The main thesis of his teaching is the assertion of the unconditional primacy of faith over knowledge. Fanatic and temperamental by nature, he put all his abilities into substantiating his beliefs, often resorting to paradoxes. The formula about the presence of two natures in Christ, which became fundamental for Western Christianity, was also put forward by him. He said that Christ united in one person the eternal God and the mortal man Jesus, representing two natures independent of each other, neither mixed nor separated. This formulation formed the basis of the paradoxicalism that the church considers to be evidence of the reality of the incarnation of Christ.

Western patristics (philosophical problems in Aurelius Augustine)

Changes in the social state of Christianity could not but affect the nature of its ideology: the need to defend and justify one's right to life has disappeared, the time has come to show the way and lead the world to destruction, to salvation. The activity of the apologists was replaced by the activity of the church fathers, the stage of patristics (II-Xi) began. One of its representatives is considered to be Aurelius Augustine, or Augustine the Blessed.

In his works O City of God, Confession, Trinity, Augustine developed the philosophical doctrine of free will and believed that man, as a kind of microcosm, combines the nature of material bodies - plants and animals, a rational soul and free will. The soul is immaterial, immortal, free in its decisions. The philosopher gave preference to the volitional characteristics of the human soul over the mental ones. From this the undeniable primacy of faith over reason was derived (faith precedes understanding) and, finally, the unconditional authority of the church as the final authority in asserting any truth was affirmed. So, free will, according to Augustine, is not absolute. It is limited by the divine pre-eternal decision. God chose some for salvation and bliss in the future life, while condemning others to eternal torture (this is the essence of the Christian doctrine of divine predestination). Similarly, Augustine distinguished between science and wisdom. Science is subordinate to wisdom, since it teaches only the ability to use things, while wisdom focuses on the knowledge of divine deeds and spiritual objects.

Augustine gave a fundamentally new, linear interpretation of time, in contrast to its cyclical interpretation, inherent in the ancient worldview. The concept of time as a movement from the past to the future, and not as a constant repetition of what has once been, became the basis for the formation of historical consciousness.

35. The problem of the relationship between knowledge and faith.

Faith and Knowledge

The problem of the relationship between knowledge and faith has a long history. It was actively discussed in medieval scholastic philosophy. Thus, already Tertullian openly opposed reason, proclaimed the paradoxical

thesis: "I believe because it is absurd." Augustine the Blessed argued that the task of theology is to know in the light of reason that which has already been accepted by faith. Anselm of Canterbury replaced Tertullian's saying with his compromise formula: "I believe and understand." Thomas Aquinas spoke about the harmony between faith and knowledge with the priority of faith.

The integrity of human knowledge appears in the epistemology of neo-Thomism as possessing a hierarchical structure and by no means contradicting the revelation of faith. So, J. Maritain, proving the need for harmony of reason and faith, considered fruitful the primacy of theology and metaphysics over specific areas of theoretical reason, advocated the revival of a religiously oriented philosophy of nature.

The French scientist, philosopher and theologian Teilhard de Chardin tried to create a "scientific phenomenology" that would synthesize the data of science and religious experience in order to reveal the content of the evolution of the Universe, which led to the emergence of man. This process is subordinate, from his point of view, to its regulator and its ultimate goal -

"Omega point", the incarnation of which is Christ. He considered the idea of the unity of science and mysticism a panacea for all the ills of modern humanity. The most important condition for the implementation of this idea is technical progress and economic development. But the decisive role, according to Teilhard, should be played by the spiritual factor - a clear and conscious belief in the highest value of evolution.

B. Russell expressed original ideas about the relationship between knowledge (truth) and faith. He understood faith as a set of interconnected states of the body, fully or partially related to something external. Among the various types of faith, the British philosopher singled out recollection, expectation, non-reflexive faith and arising from a conscious conclusion, etc. Truth is a property of faith and, as a derivative, a property of sentences expressing faith. All faith, according to Russell, "has a figurative nature," combined with a sense of approval or disapproval. If approved, it is "true" if there is a fact that bears the same resemblance to the believed image as the prototype bears to the image. If disapproved, it is "true" if there is no such fact. Faith that is not true is called false.

The question of faith, its relationship with reason (knowledge) occupied a large place in Russian religious philosophy, one of the most important concepts of which is “whole knowledge”. The ideal of integral knowledge as an organic all-encompassing all-unity attracted many Russian thinkers, starting with A. S. Khomyakov and Vl. Solovyov. They believed that the whole truth is revealed only to the whole person. Only by gathering all his spiritual forces into a single whole - sensory experience, rational thinking, aesthetic and moral experience, and also - which is very important - religious contemplation, a person begins to understand the true existence of the world and comprehends super-rational truths about God.

Russian philosophers proceeded from the fact that faith is the most important phenomenon of the inner, spiritual world of a person, the direct acceptance by the consciousness of meaningful life positions as the highest truths, norms and values. It is based on authority, on an inner feeling (intuition), on respect for someone else's experience and tradition. Belief in the objective meaning of absolute values is religion (S. L. Frank). But even in the atheistic humanistic consciousness, faith as a conviction in justice, the rightness of goals and the reality of their achievement is a necessary condition and a powerful stimulus for creativity and progress. Such faith (as opposed to blind faith, or fanaticism) not only does not oppose or contradict reason, but also opens up space for the active activity of consciousness:

Correlating faith with reason, with knowledge, Russian thinkers understood the latter as an integral unity, which is formed as a synthesis of empirical knowledge (experimental sciences), abstract thinking (philosophy) and faith (theology). It cannot be only theoretical, but must meet all the needs of the spirit, satisfy the highest aspirations of man in will, reason and feeling.

Developing the idea of a comprehensive synthesis of theology, philosophy and science, Vl. Solovyov draws attention to the fact that this "great synthesis" is not someone's subjective personal need, but has certain objective grounds. They are due, in his opinion, both to the insufficiency of empirical science and the futility of a purely abstract philosophy, and the impossibility of returning to the theological system in its former exclusivity. The necessity of this synthesis is dictated by the real life process itself, comprehended by the human mind.

I. A. Ilyin emphasized that knowledge and faith are by no means mutually exclusive. On the one hand, because positive science, if it is at its best, does not exaggerate either its scope or its reliability and does not at all try to judge the objects of faith (for example, “God exists” or vice versa “God does not exist”). Its limit is sensory experience, its method is to explain all phenomena by natural laws and try to prove every judgment. She, according to I. A. Ilyin, clings to this experience and this method, by no means arguing that they are comprehensive and inexhaustible, and by no means denying that

that it is possible to reach the truth in another area with the help of a different experience and a different method.

On the other hand, as the Russian thinker notes, true faith grows precisely from this other experience and follows its own special path (method), without invading the scientific field, without crowding out or replacing it. Anyone who believes that faith is something arbitrary, frivolous and irresponsible, and that one can believe only without any reason in unreliable and fictitious - he, I. A. Ilyin is convinced, is cruelly mistaken.

Considering the relationship between faith and knowledge, N. A. Berdyaev noted that they do not interfere with each other, and none of them can replace or destroy the other. The Russian philosopher asserted the infinity of knowledge and faith, the complete absence of their mutual limitation. Scientific knowledge, like faith, is a penetration into reality, but partial, limited. Science correctly teaches about the laws of nature, but, according to Berdyaev, it is incompetent in resolving the issue of faith, revelation, idea, etc.

Distinguishing faith, on which knowledge rests, from religious faith, the philosopher points out that knowledge presupposes faith (in both aspects), turns out to be a form of faith. "In depth" knowledge and faith are one: knowledge is faith, faith is knowledge - both form a unity, but still these two phenomena are different.

The strengthening of the role of religion in modern society has intensified the attention of researchers to the question of the relationship between science and religion, knowledge and faith. The latter has two meanings: confidence (trust, conviction) - something that has not yet been verified, not proven at the moment, and religious faith. The contradiction between knowledge and religious belief can result in one of three main positions:

a) absolutization of knowledge and complete elimination of faith;

b) hypertrophy of the latter to the detriment of knowledge; c) attempts to combine both poles - in particular, the modern philosophy of religion.

Its representatives strive to give a philosophical analysis of religious beliefs, substantiate their epistemological status, determine the conditions for their rationality and truth, explicate the meaning of religious language, characterize the nature and functions of religious (especially mystical) experience, establish possible "models of faith", etc.

At the same time, it should be borne in mind that “faith is not only the basic concept of religion, but also the most important component of the inner spiritual world of a person, a mental act and an element of cognitive activity. It reveals itself in the direct acceptance of certain provisions, norms, and truths that does not require proof. As a psychological act, faith manifests itself in a state of conviction and is associated with a feeling of approval or disapproval... If faith was divorced from religious affiliation, then as part of the cognitive process it denoted conviction in the correctness of scientific conclusions, confidence in the hypotheses expressed, and was a powerful stimulus for scientific creativity.

In the reflections of philosophers of different directions and scientists of the late XX century. one can come across arguments that scientific thought needs faith, like the right hand needs the left, and the inability to work with both should not be considered a special advantage. This is justified by the fact that in principle different structures of a human being are involved in scientific and religious knowledge. In science, man acts as a "pure mind"; conscience, faith, love, decency - all this is "help" in the work of the mind of a scientist. But in the religious-spiritual life, on the contrary, "the mind is only the working force of the heart."

In modern, post-non-classical science, ideas are increasingly being expressed about the need to take into account the diverse spiritual experience of mankind, including religious experience. Attempts are being made by some foreign and domestic scientists to broadly holistic worldview understanding of reality by linking "rigorous sciences" (mathematics, theoretical physics, etc.) ) with philosophy, psychology, religious studies and mysticism.

The problem of the relationship between faith and knowledge was central to philosophy. The problem of knowledge and faith in European scholasticism. The concepts of the world and man in the philosophy of the Middle Ages

The problem of universals in medieval philosophy

Western apologetics (Tertullian on the paradoxism of faith)

Western patristics (philosophical problems in Aurelius Augustine)

New on site

Bill Kaulitz: 'I don't understand people who say, ''Oh la la, boys with boys, girls with girls'' Tokyo wanted bill kaulitz biography

Sam Smith Meets New Love Sam Smith's Personal Life

Green pearl. How to choose peas. Green peas - rating How to choose delicious green peas

What is jealousy, how to deal with it?

Marinated shrimp Korean marinated shrimp recipe

Most popular

Predatory Alla and passionate Zhanna

Grilled shrimp - step by step recipes for marinade and frying in a pan, electric grill or charcoal Marinated shrimp with lemon

How to quickly increase hemoglobin at home

Atrocities of the Crimean Tatars during the Great Patriotic War

Psychology of transitional age, or rather - the psychology of all "crises of age" in adult men and women Adolescence 18 years psychology

POPULAR SECTIONS