Home Fruit trees Reality exists independently of a person. Objective reality. The concept of "reality - reality"

Fruit trees

Reality exists independently of a person. Objective reality. The concept of "reality - reality"

In- second, it allows us to understand any kind of knowledge as a subjective image of the objective world, to reveal the dialectics of the subjective and objective in the process of cognition. It is the fact that knowledge is a product of the subject's activity that determines the presence of a subjective moment in knowledge. The subjective is what is inherent in the subject, derived from his activity. In this respect, the cognitive image, being a product of the subject's activity, always includes an element of subjectivity and not only in the form of the expression of knowledge, but also in its conceivable content. However, since the activity of the subject is aimed at the object and pursues its goal of an adequate reflection of the object, the content of knowledge necessarily includes an objective moment, which, due to the practical conditionality of the cognitive process, is ultimately decisive. "Since the cognitive image is the result of the interaction of the subject with the object, insofar as both impose mine imprint. On the one hand, the cognitive image cannot be isolated from the object of cognition, and on the other, from the cognitive activity of the subject. As a result, the opposition between the subjective and the objective penetrates into the very structure of the image. ”That is why, at all levels, the cognitive image can be characterized as a subjective image of the objective world.

And, finally, it is the subject-object relationship that makes it possible to reveal the mechanism of social conditioning of the cognitive process. Since it is the subject that acts as an active side of the cognitive process, and he himself has a social nature, cos the cognitive structures given to them carry not only information about the object, but also reflect the state of social development, reflect the needs and goals of society. The attitude of the subject to volume ect mediated intersubject good relationships. It is within the framework these relations are objectification of knowledge, its consolidation in the material shell, its transformation into the public domain.

Subjective reality is a reality that depends on the subject of perception of a given reality. Please note that it is from the subject, not his perception. Perception is a part of the subject, and reality depending on perception is only a special case of subjective reality. Objective reality, the exact opposite of subjective, i.e. independent of the subject of perception. The classical model of the world denies the existence of subjective reality (without denying, at the same time, subjective perception), based on the fact that reality or being is always objective. This does not necessarily mean denying the existence of God and the Creator. Buddhist philosophy, on the contrary, denies the existence of objective reality, based on the fact that all reality is a subjective concept.

This is where the paradoxes begin. Let's start with the classic model. First, it is worth determining the subject of perception. If we are talking about a person, then we can assume that in relation to him, reality is objective. Now let's remember about God. After all, he is also a subject of perception, regardless of the level of this very perception. Here we can safely assume that "our" reality for him is subjective. Perhaps in relation to Him there is another, objective reality. But perhaps there is, as well, another subject, in relation to which it again becomes subjective. There is an assumption that this chain is endless, and closes in on itself, representing a "unsteady circle of being."

Chapter 2. Description of research methods

2.1 Justification of the research methodology

For the study, one technique was chosen, a technique for determining the subjectness of an object.

2.2 Place of the method

Location of the study: Cooperative technical school in Cheboksary.

2.3 Description of the subjects

The study involved 45 3rd year students. Of these: 25 girls and 20 boys. Subjects' age: 17-18 years old.

2.4 Research method discussion

2.5 Research steps

The discussion was held with 45 students.

2.6 Description of specific research methods

Discussion methodology.

Methodology material: reasoning about the subjectness of the object.

Research progress: after reading different literature, students discuss, prove, ask questions on this topic, and finally summarize the result.

Chapter 3. Description and analysis of research results

Before embarking on the study of the subject, it seems expedient to show the presence of the object of the study, that is, the objectivity of the subject.

The proof of the subject's objectivity is his freedom, that is, the presence of a space of a priori distinction between him and the rest of the world. There could be no question of any freedom of the subject if the subject did not possess its own objectivity, being a part or a consequence of anything.

It seems possible to say that the subject is me (Katya Kirillova). As a subject, I can assert that freedom is a state that is natural to the subject, since I associate myself precisely with the state of freedom. The state of dependence is rejected by me as unacceptable for me in any form.

The same can be proved in a slightly different way. When I say that I am free and I don’t like the state of dependence, and I don’t tolerate the state of violence at all, then I am basing myself on some direct reality for me, which does not need proof. It remains only to say that the subject is the one who is unpleasant to the state of dependence and to whom violence is unbearable, because freedom is his natural state.

In fact, the strictest proof of the subject's objectivity is the direct nature of his experience of violence, where by “violence” I mean the experience of the impossibility of realizing freedom.

Strictly speaking, violence is the experience of the subject of oppression of its final causality, but until the concept of “final causality” is introduced, I will use the concept of “freedom” as identical to the concept of “final causality”; in this case, the difference between the two is irrelevant.

Proceeding from the fact that violence is a direct experience for the subject, which seems obvious, we can conclude that freedom is a state coexisting with the subject, since it is precisely the impossibility of realizing freedom that the subject experiences directly, as such.

Of course, the inability to see the subject can provide a reason to doubt its existence. But we can not see everything that exists, much of what we call objective reality is revealed by us only by the action we make. So, for example, we cannot see, or feel in any other way, radio waves. However, on this basis, we cannot deny their objective existence, devices based on their action do not give us such an opportunity. Likewise, a subject can be detected by a specific action.

Take, for example, and tell your colleague that he is a nonentity, or better, spit in his face and you will see the subject in all its glory. What actually happened? Where does so much aggression come from? Do you think a little saliva got on your cheek? It seems to be nonsense, but two hundred years ago you would have been dragged into duels, and in our time you are guaranteed to acquire an enemy for your life, with all the ensuing consequences. And this happens because insult, in its essence, is a denial of human freedom. The insulting person seems to be saying: “You dare not answer, because you are not a free person. You are a slave, fear is stronger than you, and I know that. " What is the difference between the situation when you were pushed and apologized from the situation when you were pushed and did not apologize. The effect on your body is the same, but your response is different. In the first case, you are recognized as freedom of action, that is, the possibility of an adequate response, and in the second, not.

It is characteristic that the reaction of the subject to the insult is reflex; if the subject realizes that a symbolic action has been performed against him, denying him as a free person, then he is involuntarily filled with aggression. Another thing is that this aggression can be delayed by them, for neurotic reasons.

Thus, in order to see a specific subjective reaction, it is enough to convey to the subject your doubts about his freedom.

What can we say about the subject as such. A. Tkhostov was the first to speak about the subject as such among psychologists in his work "Topology of the subject (the experience of phenomenological research)". Developing the thesis that the subjectness of the subject ("I") appears in the place of his contact with the impenetrability of the other, Tkhostov makes the following remarkable move. He speaks of the possibility of the development of the Cartesian maxim "where I think, there is."

“The question is whether I exist where I experience these sensations (true or false sensations do not matter - IV) or, in Descartes' terminology, ubi cogito - ibi sum (where I think, I exist there). If we recognize that the place of feeling or the place of the cogito is not the place of the subject, but the place of his collision with the other, the place of his transformation into something else, only in the form of which he can become muddied, having lost transparency, then it would be more accurate to assert that I, as a true subject I exist where I do not think, or I exist where I am not. "

In philosophy, reality is understood as everything that exists in reality. Distinguish between objective and subjective reality. Objective reality is what exists outside of human consciousness: space, time, movement; subjective reality can be defined as the phenomenon of consciousness, sensation, perception by a person of something and everything that is connected with it.

To describe matter, there are three objective forms of its existence: motion, space, time.

Here, movement is understood not only the mechanical movement of bodies, but also any interaction, any change in the states of objects - the forms of movement are diverse and can pass from one to another. Very often we talk about movement, opposed to it peace, considering them equal. Meanwhile, this is a deep delusion: rest is relative, while movement is absolute.

Space and time are forms of being of matter. The term space in philosophy denotes the structure of objects, their property to be extended, to take a place among others. When characterizing space, the term infinity is used. The term time denotes the duration of the existence of objects, the direction of their change. The last two categories: space and time are both relative and absolute. They are relative, since their properties are constantly changing, and they are absolute, since no object can exist outside of space and time.

Reality is a key concept in philosophy, the main question of philosophy is connected with it: what is primary matter or consciousness (objective or subjective reality); whether a person is able to cognize the reality surrounding him.

Matter- the fundamental initial category of philosophy, denotes objective reality, the only substance with all its properties, laws of structure and functioning, movement and development. Matter is self-sufficient and does not need anyone to be aware of it.

Space- means the structure of an object and matter as a whole, length, structure, coexistence, interaction and volume of objects. It is a form of being of matter. When characterizing, the concept of infinity is used. Space is multidimensional.

Time- a form of being of matter, characterized by such properties of change and development of systems as duration, sequence of changing states. Time is divided into three categories: past, present, future. When characterizing time, the concept of eternity is used.

Dialectic categories- general concepts that reflect the most essential regular connections and relationships of reality. We can say that philosophical categories reproduce the properties and relationships of being in the most general form. Regulating the real process of thinking, in the course of its historical development, they gradually isolate into a special system, and it is the system of categories that turns out to be the most stable in all transformations of philosophical knowledge, although it also undergoes changes, obeying the principle of development. The modern presentation of fundamental categories differs significantly from how they were thought in antiquity.

The essence- something intimate, deep, abiding in things, their internal connections and managing them, the basis of all forms of their external manifestation. Essence is always concrete, there is no essence at all.
Phenomenon- directly perceived properties of an object, one or another vision of which depends on the structure and action of the sense organs of the subject of cognition. A phenomenon is a manifestation of an entity.
Unity- a category that expresses the relative isolation, discreteness, delimitation from each other in space and time of objects, with their inherent specific features that make up their unique qualitative and quantitative certainty.
Accident- this type of connection, which is due to insignificant, external reasons for this phenomenon. It can be external and internal.
Need- a natural type of connection between phenomena, determined by their stable internal basis and a set of essential conditions for their emergence and development.
freedom- a person's ability to make decisions and act in accordance with their goals, interests, ideals.
And etc.

Dialectic laws.

Dialectic laws- the basic laws of the world, expressing the relationship between universal, everywhere existing properties or trends in the development of matter. They do not have a specific functional form and are not expressed mathematically. are not limited to any constants, parameters, certain conditions or specific groups of objects, but act as universal principles of all existence, somehow general, which is manifested in a variety of laws.

The basic laws of dialectics represent the connection and interaction of categories. Moreover, they are unfolded categories. Even the very concept of law is a category. This is on the one hand. On the other hand, some categories are also laws in themselves.

For example, the category of causality is the universal law of the world. In this case, the category law, in essence, expresses a fundamental philosophical principle. Reflecting the objective dialectic of reality, the categories and laws of dialectics, being cognized, act as a universal method of cognition and transformation of reality.

The history of cognition begins with the isolation of something in common in nature, subject to the abstractive activity of thinking. At first, this general is molded into the form of general concepts and categories, on the basis of which certain principles of both being and thought itself are formed. In the future, cognizing thought seeks, relying on the developed tools of cognition in the form of principles and categories and an increasingly enriching empirical base, to formulate the fundamental provisions that order our knowledge of the world - laws. The most general of these laws are the laws of dialectics.

Introduction

The relevance of the study of philosophy is due to the increasing complexity of social life, the development and complication of methods of scientific knowledge and engineering and technical activities. Philosophy forms the worldview and methodological culture of the individual, gives the most generalized ideas about the universe and the place of man in it, is the foundation of all other general scientific, humanitarian and special disciplines, arms with the methodology of cognition and practical transformative activity.

Solving the issues of being and cognition, the essence of a person and the meaning of his life, the nature of social reality and social ideal, philosophy makes it possible not only to form the foundations of a scientific worldview and professional culture, but also allows you to find the foundation for a conscious life position.

The relevance of this work is due to the practical need to optimize the system of subjective personal relationships of people in accordance with the new socio-economic conditions of life.

The subject of our research is the subject. The subject is unique as an object of research due to the fact that he is the only phenomenon to which we have direct access. The rest of the world is given to us in appearance, that is, indirectly, except for ourselves.

The subject of research is the individual and everything that happens around him.

objective reality social personal

Subjective and objective reality

From the earliest times in philosophy there was a problem of reality. The man realized that that world is presented to him in opinions. And that there are, as it were, two worlds, two realities - objective and subjective.

Objective reality is reality, everything that exists: the world around us, the universe.

Materialists usually represent objective reality as a kind of mechanism that works in accordance with its structure and on which people can only have a limited influence. Agnostics, on the other hand, believe that "objective reality", that is, the world in itself, is not accessible to human understanding. From the point of view of modern natural sciences, "objective reality" is fundamentally unknowable (in full, down to the smallest details), since quantum theory proves that the presence of an observer changes the observed (observer's paradox).

Subjective reality is how the world around us is presented to us, through the senses and perceptions, our idea of the world. And in this sense, each person develops his own idea of the world, of reality.

Thus, we can conclude that each individual person lives in his own world, created on the basis of his personal experience.

In the course of the evolution of human activity, its differentiation takes place. Cognitive activity is separated from practical and becomes an independent type of spiritual and practical human activity. Cognitive activity is directly aimed at reflection, reproduction of the properties of real objects with the help of a special system, artificially created by the subject of intermediary objects. The activity of the subject in the process of cognition is aimed at creating and operating with intermediary objects. Man designs devices, measurement instruments, creates scientific theories, models, sign systems, symbols, ideal objects, etc. All this activity is directed not directly at changing the cognized object, but at its adequate reproduction in cognition. In cognition, the activity of the subject turns into an ideal plan. The specificity of scientific-theoretical consciousness lies in the fact that it not only fixes the forms of knowledge, but makes them the object of its activity. Knowledge acts as a product of interaction between the subject and the object of knowledge. It is with the help of these categories that the active nature of cognitive activity is revealed and the true role of practice in cognition is shown.

What is the subject of knowledge? In its most general form, the subject of cognition is a person endowed with consciousness and possessing knowledge. In contemplative materialism, a person appears rather only as an object of the external world influencing him, and the active side of the subject remains in the shadows. Overcoming the limitations of contemplative materialism, enriching the materialist theory of cognition with an activity-based approach also made it possible to develop a new understanding of the subject of cognitive activity. The subject is a source of purposeful activity, a bearer of object-oriented practical activity, assessment and cognition.

The subject is, first of all, the individual. It is he who is endowed with sensations, perceptions, emotions, the ability to operate with images, the most general abstractions; he acts in the process of practice as a real material force that changes material systems. But the subject is not only an individual; it is both a collective and a social group, a class, society as a whole. The subject at the level of society includes various experimental installations, devices, computers, etc., but they appear here only as parts, elements of the “subject” system, and not by themselves. At the level of an individual or a community of scientists, the same devices turn out to be only means, conditions for the activities of subjects. Society is considered a universal subject in the sense that it combines subjects of all other levels, people of all generations, that outside of society there is no and cannot be any knowledge and. practice. At the same time, society as a subject realizes its cognitive capabilities only through the cognitive activity of individual subjects.

The object, on the other hand, is what opposes the subject, to which the subject-practical, evaluative and cognitive activity of the subject is directed.

In the concepts of "subject" and "object" there is a moment of relativity: if something in one relation acts as an object, then in another relation it can be a subject, and vice versa. The computer, being a part of the subject as a society, turns out to be an object when it is studied by an individual.

The object can be not only material, but also spiritual phenomena. So, for example, the consciousness of an individual is an object for a psychologist.

Each person is able to make himself an object of knowledge: his behavior, feelings, sensations, thoughts. In these cases, the concept of the subject as an individual is narrowed down to the subject as actual thinking, to “pure“ I ”(the corporeality of a person, his feelings, etc. are excluded from it); but even in these cases the subject acts as a source of purposeful activity.

The cognitive activity of the subject is aimed at reflecting the object, at reproducing it in consciousness, the latter always has points of contact with practical activity, which acts as the basis and driving force of the cognitive process, as well as a criterion for the truth of the knowledge obtained as a result of this activity. A person does not wait for the external world to be reflected in his consciousness. He himself, relying on the laws of subjective dialectics, generates cognitive structures and, in the course of practical activity, checks the extent to which they correspond to objective reality. Generating cognitive structures involves creativity, productive imagination and acts of free choice, appreciation, and self-expression. In the act of cognition, the essential forces of a person are always revealed, the cognitive and practical goals of the subject are realized. It is the fact that knowledge is a product of the subject's activity that determines the presence of a subjective moment in knowledge. The subjective is what is inherent in the subject, derived from his activity. In this respect, the cognitive image, being a product of the subject's activity, always includes an element of subjectivity and not only in the form of the expression of knowledge, but also in its conceivable content. However, since the activity of the subject is directed towards the object and pursues its goal to adequately reflect the object, the content of knowledge necessarily includes the objective moment, which, due to the practical conditionality of the cognitive process, is ultimately decisive.

And, finally, it is the subject-object relationship that makes it possible to reveal the mechanism of social conditioning of the cognitive process. Since it is the subject who acts as an active side of the cognitive process, and he himself has a social nature, the cognitive structures created by him carry not only information about the object, but also reflect the state of social development, reflect the needs and goals of society. The relationship of the subject to the object is mediated by intersubjective relationships. It is within the framework of these relations that the objectification of knowledge takes place, its consolidation in the material shell, its transformation into the public domain.

Subjective reality is a reality that depends on the subject of perception of a given reality. Perception is a part of the subject, and reality, which depends on perception, is only a special case of subjective reality. Objective reality, the exact opposite of subjective, i.e. independent of the subject of perception. The classical model of the world denies the existence of subjective reality (without denying, at the same time, subjective perception), based on the fact that reality or being is always objective. At the same time, not necessarily denying the existence of God and the Creator. Buddhist philosophy, on the contrary, denies the existence of objective reality, based on the fact that all reality is a subjective concept.

The conclusion, which suggests itself, is that the true, or "unclouded", subject precedes thought, the existence of which also proves its existence. However, Thostov makes a rather unexpected turn and says that the true subject is emptiness, nothing, that is, there is no subject at all.

“Here we are faced with a very important phenomenon of the self-for-myself ontology. If we pose the question of what will remain in consciousness if all points of resistance in the form of emotion, feelings, unsatisfied desires, conscience, guilt disappear, then we will again collide with the disappearance of I - for myself.

Of course, one cannot agree that the subject is nothing. Even if we remain in the logic presented by A. Tkhostov, it is necessary to recognize the existence of a true subject, at least as a possibility of "clouding". If the subject is nothing, then the "shagreen skin" of consciousness will not be able to unfold. How it disappears is still possible to imagine, but how it appears from nothing is impossible to imagine. It is also impossible to imagine consciousness without a subject.

The fact that in the consciousness of a true subject there is no other object other than himself does not speak of the illusory nature of self-consciousness. It is pertinent to note here that in addition to the fact that consciousness always has an object, consciousness always belongs to the subject, without which it is inconceivable. Thus, consciousness always has two poles. Consciousness always has a carrier, that is, a subject, and consciousness always has an object about which it is consciousness. Moreover, if the absence of an object other than the subject in consciousness can be conceivable, then the absence of a carrier, that is, a subject, in consciousness is incredible. From which we can conclude about the need for the presence of a subject of consciousness or a true subject.

Objective reality- these are things. phenomena and processes that exist outside and independently of our consciousness and are subject to the action of the fundamental laws of natural science. ... In philosophy, the content of a given reality is revealed through the concepts: movement, space, attribute, substrate, substance. There is only one reality in the world that affects our senses.

To determine the objective reality that a person can feel, copy, photograph, display (but which exists outside of his consciousness and sensations) in philosophy there is the concept of matter. Conditionally, matter can be divided into two groups: what is cognized by man and what is beyond the bounds of his cognition, however, this division is very conditional, meanwhile, its necessity is obvious: speaking of matter, we can analyze only what is cognized by man. To describe matter, there are three objective forms of its existence: motion, space, time. movement means not only the mechanical movement of bodies, but also any interaction, any change in the states of objects - the forms of movement are diverse and can pass from one to another. Very often we talk about movement, opposed to it peace, considering them equal. Meanwhile, this is a deep delusion: rest is relative, while movement is absolute.

Being- in the broadest sense there is an all-embracing reality, it embraces both the material and the spiritual. It is something that really exists. The category of being is one of the most ancient philosophical categories; all the teachings of antiquity contained it as central. The antithesis of being is nothing. Matter- the fundamental initial category of philosophy, denotes objective reality, the only substance with all its properties, laws of structure and functioning, movement and development. Matter is self-sufficient and does not need anyone to be aware of it.

Time- the form of being of matter, characterized by such properties of change and development of systems as duration, sequence of changing states. Time is divided into three categories: past, present, future. When characterizing time, the concept of eternity is used.

MAIN STAGES OF DEVELOPMENT OF MATERIALIST CONCEPTS ABOUT MATTER.
In all subjectively idealistic doctrines, the objective is denied, i.e. existence of matter independent of human consciousness. Berkeley argued: “there is no matter, and no one has ever seen it. The concept of matter can be used in the sense in which people use the word not what.” According to objective idealists, matter is generated by spirit over the world mind.
According to Hegel, the absolute idea, developing, gives rise to the material world. Materialists identified a number of stages in the development of materialistic concepts of matter: 1) This is a visual sensory representation of matter. Matter is considered as the material from which all things are "made". (Democrat, Thales) 2) Substantial concepts of matter, they developed in the 17-18th century and were associated with the development of classical mechanics. Matter was identified with matter, the properties of objects that are studied by natural science are attributed to it: mass, length, impenetrability, atoms, molecules. (Diderot, Rousseau) 3) Philosophical and epistemological. Philosophical ideas about matter, they cover all material reality, have the sign of universality, under matter in this case is understood all nature as an objective reality, according to Spinoza, nature is causa sui (the cause of the soma in itself). Philosophical ideas about matter were inherent in the classics of dialectical materialism, Marx and Engels did not identify matter with something concrete sensual or with the properties of matter. Lenin gave a philosophical definition of matter:"Matter is a philosophical category to designate an objective reality that is given to a person in his sensations, which are copied, photographed, displayed by our sensations, existing independently of them." Modern science testifies that objective reality exists in 4 forms: matter and field, vacuum, plasma. Modern science has brilliantly confirmed Lenin's idea of the inexhaustibility of matter. Disadvantage: the internal structure of matter is not investigated; its ontological aspect is not investigated.

- general theory of relativity;

- special theory of relativity;

22. The concept and content of subjective reality. The main approaches to solving the problem of the ideal in modern philosophy.

In philosophy, reality is understood as everything that exists in reality. Distinguish between objective and subjective reality. Subjective reality- this is a reality that exists in the form of possible manifestations of laws that exist in the human mind in the form of a set of archetypes, a system of ideas, a system of ideals. It affirms the pluralistic principle of the existence of subjective reality, the existence of the diversity of its types and forms. Historical practice suggests that the world around us has the properties of integrity and unity, has an internal source of development.

The problem of the Ideal and its solution in modern philosophy. M. Bohm writes “Modern science in many respects converges with mysticism, which develops on the basis of mythology. This property is most clearly manifested in the following: Both mysticism and science raise the question of the source. Both mysticism and science sacrifice the world, giving it a moment of spirituality. Since a person changes the world around him by influencing him through the system of his fundamental values. Modern man cannot do without the idea of beauty as omnipotent .. Beauty is always divine, therefore, any person spiritualizes nature in search of his truth.

The problem of the ideal:

This problem is a fundamental problem, it helps to understand the process of the emergence of figurative thinking and its transition to a system of abstractions. The priority in the development of the ideal belongs to the Soviet philosophical school. There are 4 directions: 1 - Ilyenkova, 2 - Dubrovsky, 3 - Livshitsa, 4 - synthetic. V. Pivovarov's theory of the ideal.

Ilyenkov believes that the ideal is a form of the existence of objective reality. The ideal exists independently of the existence of its bearer. The ideal exists not only in the head, but also in reality, in the world, and he builds his concept on the philosophy of Plato, the doctrine of ideas, which exists outside matter and determines it. The ideal is a really existing phenomenon, a scheme of a person's real objective activity, consistent with the form outside the head, outside the brain, a scheme of activity, and not the activity itself, in its flesh and blood ..

Ilyenkov believes that the ideal arises on the basis of the socially transforming human activity. And activity is nothing more than a set of practical actions and labor operations for the emergence and creation of any thing; in an ideal concept, we are given not an image, but a diagram of a person's production activity, which for a person has the significance of a law of being, an algorithm. Bridgman wrote about this, who argued: "All historical human activity is reflected and preserved in his language and exists in the form of cultural objects with a universal aesthetic course." The ideal exists in the form of: 1 - a universal law that determines the production activity of a person, 2 - the norms of social consciousness, 3 - an aesthetic ideal, 4 - Coded cultural monuments .. The ideal is the law of human existence. Dubrovsky sharply opposes his concept to Ilyenkov. The ideal is a purely personal phenomenon, realized by a cerebral neurodynamic process of a certain type. He approaches the concept of the ideal from the standpoint of natural science. The ideal is the form of existence of our psyche. Our psyche constantly absorbs information and therefore, in principle, cannot lose it. A person has a short-term memory or a system of relevant information, this is a set of necessary information, which can eliminate the fundamental needs that have arisen. This information exists in the form of an archype. Man is a living being, and therefore needs constantly arise. And since our needs are the needs of the body and spirit, the process is influenced by the peculiarity of our body and state of mind.

Returning to the discussion between Ilyenkov and Dubrovsky, we can draw the following conclusion: the opposition of their concepts reflects the different nature of the ideal and the spiritual. The ideal is a reflection at the level of objective reality and it is characteristic not only of a person, but also of a machine and of nature as a whole, thus representing the highest systemic property of complexly organized functional systems. The spiritual is peculiar only to man and exists in man. From this position, the following distinctions between the ideal and the spiritual can be deduced.

Everything spiritual in the way of its being and manifestation is ideal, but not everything that is ideal has a spiritual content. Indeed, we have such a phenomenon as artificial intelligence inherent in a machine, in addition, according to Ilyenkov, the ideal is associated mainly with objectified results of activity: a form of value, an icon, forms of state-political organization of life, which, in his opinion, are subjective in society in relation to nature, but not to man. The ideal is a bridge, it is a communication channel through which the spiritual enters the sphere of consciousness and through it into society.

The ideal is available for almost endless replication, the spiritual is always individual and unique. Their difference is the same as the difference between the master's painting (IE Repin "Barge Haulers on the Volga") from the corresponding reproduction, replicated in millions of copies.

The ideal, both in form and in content, is accessible to a machine and can exist outside and without a person. The spiritual lives only in a person, for a person and is accessible only to him. It arises through experience, which is the most adequate way of realizing a value relationship. It is always associated with an ideal, with a certain way of realizing it.

The spiritual appears where the possibilities of the ideal are exhausted and it stops in powerlessness to solve the task before it. These are the questions that I. Kant posed before himself: is there a God or not, the soul is immortal or mortal, these are the problems of free will and the integrity of the world, expressed in its antinomies. These problems go beyond the limits of reason, these are supra-world problems, for the world for Kant is an idea, "only the creation of reason." Reason, and for us it is ideal, is not able to solve these problems, leaving their solution to the faith, the spiritual, therefore, as Kant declared, "he had to limit knowledge in order to make room for faith."

The ideal is an integral part of natural existence. Spiritual is not an integral part of nature, but its highest quality value inherent in man, as another new form of being. The spiritual is not subject to quantitative factors and is not divided into parts.

Spiritual, the highest spiritual values can be acquired only by one's own life experience, spiritual labor to master them. Whereas the ideal is imposed on a person, acquired, appropriated by him, without affecting the deep foundations of the inner world of a person.

By separating the ideal and the spiritual, we thereby separate the concepts of "consciousness" and "soul". Two thousand years ago, the term "consciousness" (psyche) was quite appropriate in philosophy, although already Plotinus distinguishes between consciousness and soul, indicating that consciousness is a memory. This is not reality, but a reflection of what happened to the person at the highest level, the level of "rest in divinity." It is not only a memory, but also the ability to fix the highest level content in the language. In addition, consciousness is obliged to remind a person of his sinfulness, therefore, consciousness, according to Plotinus, is secondary in relation to the soul. The soul is substantial, consciousness is functional. ON. Berdyaev also believed that consciousness was given to man in order for him to experience the torment of a soul that has lost contact with God.

The spiritual is the basis of any culture and culture is accepted as a system of human values, the ideal is the law, the technology of production and labor activity, which creates objects and phenomena.

the entire material world as a whole, in all its forms and manifestations. In terms of DOS. questions of philosophy under O. p. everything that exists is understood independently of human consciousness and is primary in relation to it. The concept of “O. R." relatively. In relation to an individual, this is everything that exists outside of his consciousness and is reflected by him. But he himself, with his own consciousness, will be O. r. in relation to other people, etc. Abstracting from the individual view of the world, we can say that O. p. coincides with all material reality. The latter, however, includes various material objects, their properties, space, time, movement, laws, various social phenomena - relations of production, state, culture, etc. However, it cannot be concluded from this that the concept of “O. R." opposes the concept of matter. Such an idea can arise if matter is torn away from its diverse properties and forms of manifestation, without which it does not exist. Movement, space, time, life, etc. are all properties or manifestations of properties and interactions of different types of matter in terms of the degree of complexity, which together form the world as a whole or the entire O. r. (Being).