The term philosophy of history was introduced by whom. History of philosophy briefly

PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY

PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY - a concept as part of philosophical knowledge, aimed at comprehending the historical process as a whole and analyzing the methodological problems of historical knowledge. Building a model of the historical process, F.I. develops a certain interpretation of the specifics of historical reality, the meaning and purpose of history, the main driving forces of history and the mechanisms of their action, the relationship between historical necessity and human freedom, the unity and diversity of history, etc. The historical process of the development of society has always been the subject of reflection of philosophers; vivid examples of philosophical and historical thought are presented in ancient (Polybius), ancient Chinese (Sima Qian), medieval (Augustine) cultures, however, the classical forms of F.I. were created in European philosophy of the 18th - first half of the 19th centuries. The very term "F.I." was introduced by Voltaire to denote a summatively generalized idea of ​​history. The figures of the late Enlightenment, Turgot and Condorcet, created the concept of progress as the meaning of history. Herder, asserting the unity of the principles of the historical development of all mankind, developed an interpretation of world history as a single process. Hegel's concept is the highest achievement of classical F.I. - represents the historical process as possessing providential rationality. History, which unfolds exclusively in the spiritual sphere, takes place as a necessary movement behind the backs of individuals: the energy of conflicting private interests is used by history to achieve its own higher goals; the reason of history, hidden behind external chaos and irrationality, is revealed only to the philosophical gaze. The speculative nature of the Hegelian conception of history, its isolation from concrete historical material and the real practice of historical knowledge, was emphasized already in the middle of the 19th century. became the subject of criticism. The alternative extreme is Marxism, which attempted a radical "grounding" of history: according to the social concept of Marxism, history is formed by the practical activity of a person who satisfies his material needs; history is based on the empirically observed development of social productive forces. The rapid growth of historical knowledge in the 19th century. largely devalued the philosophical and speculative approach to understanding history, F.I. increasingly appears as a philosophy of historical science. In particular, in the late 19th - early 20th centuries. neo-Kantian F.I. (Windelband, Rickert), who analyzes the methodological originality of historical knowledge and sees it in individualizations - as opposed to the generalizing orientation of the sciences of nature. The problems of the logical organization of historical knowledge came to the fore in the analytical F.I. (Popper, K. Hempel). The need to clarify the meaning of history in the face of large-scale historical catastrophes reactivated in the first half of the 20th century. ontological component of F.I. - appeared the "morphology of culture" by Spengler, the concept of "axial time" by Jaspers, the grandiose historical synthesis of Toynbee. However, from the classical F.I. these concepts are distinguished by a sense of insecurity and the possible irrationality of history. For the second half of the 20th century the displacement of history from historical consciousness is characteristic: firstly, the concrete material accumulated by modern historical science has become so vast and heterogeneous that it is no longer possible to fit it into a single model of the historical process; secondly, modern historical science very effectively carries out the analysis of methodological problems on its own - without resorting to philosophy; thirdly, intensively developing futurology comes to the fore in determining the leading trends in historical development. (see also: HISTORY, HISTORICISM, SOCIAL REALISM, SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY).

The latest philosophical dictionary. - Minsk: Book House. A. A. Gritsanov. 1999

See what "PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY" is in other dictionaries:

Branch of philosophy that gives philosophy. interpretation of the historical process. Philosophical elements. comprehension of history was contained in antich. philosophy and historiographic works. In the Middle Ages, philosophy the study of history was not separated in any clear way from ... Philosophical Encyclopedia

philosophy of history- PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY philosophical study of the origins, essence, procedural form of history and the meaning of historical existence; methodology of knowledge of history. In the first case, the past itself is subject to consideration, in the second ... ... Encyclopedia of Epistemology and Philosophy of Science

A branch of philosophy that deals with the problems of the meaning of history, its laws, the main direction of human development and historical knowledge. Representatives of the philosophy of history (the term was introduced by Voltaire) declared the driving force of history ... ... Big Encyclopedic Dictionary

- 'PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY' by Rickert (1904). According to Rickert, the student of history must take into account the peculiarity of conceptual structures, according to which any concept necessarily reflects a specific teleology. Yes, formal... History of Philosophy: Encyclopedia

English philosophy of history; German Geschich tsphilosophie. The area of ​​philosophical knowledge, covering the ontological issues of history. process, such as the meaning and direction of the story, the division and sequence of the main stories. eras, specifics ... Encyclopedia of Sociology

The doctrine that determines the understanding of history as a science of the development of societies. forms and the laws of human progress. Dictionary of foreign words included in the Russian language. Pavlenkov F., 1907 ... Dictionary of foreign words of the Russian language

A branch of philosophy designed to answer questions about the objective laws and spiritual and moral meaning of the historical process, about the ways of realizing human essential forces in history, about the possibilities of gaining universal human unity ... Wikipedia

Philosophy of history- 1) a branch of philosophy that explores the ultimate foundations and meaning of human history. The term F. and. introduced by Voltaire. For Russian thinkers are characterized by an increased interest in the philosophical and historical problems of Russia, the desire ... ... Russian Philosophy. Encyclopedia

PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY- The subject of this area of ​​philosophy is the historical dimension of human existence and the possibility of its awareness and knowledge. The term was introduced into philosophy by Voltaire (as one of his works was called). In F.i. a certain aspect is subjected to comprehension ... ... Modern Western Philosophy. encyclopedic Dictionary

Philosophical discipline, the subject of which is the interpretation of the meaning of history, the study of its patterns and structures, as well as the possibilities and boundaries of historical knowledge. It arose in modern times (the term was introduced by Voltaire as a special ... ... encyclopedic Dictionary

The philosophy of history (the term was introduced by Voltaire) is a field of philosophical knowledge that covers ontological issues of the historical process, such as the meaning and direction of history, the division and sequence of the main historical eras, the specifics of the historical process, the relationship between history and nature, freedom and the need for historical creativity, as well as epistemological and logical-methodological problems of historical science.

The formation of the philosophy of history as an independent philosophical discipline is historically associated with the names of Voltaire, J. Vico, I. Herder, and especially G. Hegel. Hegel's construction has not become obsolete to this day, confirming a completely fair generalization regarding "progress in the consciousness of freedom." If we consider G. Hegel's conclusions outside the teleological context as an empirical generalization of historical facts, then it becomes possible to replace the teleological scheme of the philosophy of history with social evolutionism, acting on behalf of sociology. This turning point in the philosophy of history occurred in the middle of the 19th century. At the same time, one direction set the goal of clarifying the philosophical and methodological foundations of historical knowledge in comparison with natural science, while the other pursued a different goal - to penetrate into the depths of cultural and historical types of organization of social life that are inaccessible to conceptual thinking.

Wilhelm Dilthey (1833-1911) was a German cultural historian and social philosopher. Representative " philosophy of life", the founder of the so-called understanding psychology, which served as an impetus for the creation of understanding sociology. Spengler Oswald (1880-1936) - German philosopher, representative of the "philosophy of life." Fame came to him after the sensational success of the book "The Decline of Europe" (1918-1922), where he considered culture as a kind of organism with internal unity, isolated from other similar organisms and passing through a certain "life cycle" in its development.

Varieties of philosophy of history. The popularization of the problems of historical knowledge is associated with the names of the German philosophers W. Dilthey and O. Spengler. Philosophical irrationalism opposed the concept of the unity of world history, based on Christian providentialism, with the biological model of the historical process, according to which the unity of mankind is a fiction, but in fact there is a variety of specific types of culture, reminiscent of the richness of the forms of the organic world.

The main conclusions of the traditional philosophy of history of the Hegelian type, which saw the meaning of history in the gradual ascent to freedom, were challenged by J. Gobineau2 in his essay with the characteristic title "On the Inequality of the Human Races". According to J. Gobineau, the factor of civilization is " race purity", which, however, cannot be preserved for a long time. This explains the fragility of the heyday of the centers of civilization: " ethnic mixes"destroy the unity of lifestyle and ultimately lead to" degeneration of man", and consequently, to the decline of the entire social structure. J. Gobineau has 10 civilizations in the history of mankind, in the birth of each of which he assigns a creative role to the white race as fundamentally different from the black and yellow races.

Although the frank biologism of the concept of J. Gobineau did not receive support in the 20th century, the very idea of ​​a pluralistic model of historical development attracted more and more attention. The most consistent idea of ​​the self-sufficient isolation of discrete3 cultural organisms, fatalistically subject to the biological necessity of birth, flourishing, aging and dying, was defended by O. Spengler, whose theoretical constructions were largely anticipated by the concept of cultural-historical types of N. Danilevsky.

The collapse of Eurocentrism, which was vividly reflected in the work of O. Spengler "The Decline of Europe", exacerbated the problem of creating a theoretical model of the historical process, in which the diversity of individual forms and the richness of local specifics do not exclude the presence of objective connections of the historical existence of mankind. The fundamental one-sidedness of Spengler's "morphology of culture" was attempted by the English historian and sociologist A. Toynbee, who brought to the fore the integrating function of the great world religions, in which he saw the only support for the rapprochement of peoples. Thus, the Christian providentialism of the classical philosophy of history is replaced by the idea of ​​ecumenical religion, and the philosophy of history returns to its origins, enriched by the consciousness of the fundamental unacceptability of monopoly claims to the truth of any one creed.

The second variety of modern philosophy of history has grown out of the internal processes of the development of historical science, and above all from an attempt to realize the epistemological nature and the logical and methodological specifics of the very procedure of historical research. Raising the question of the logical-epistemological specificity of historiography became possible only in the philosophical atmosphere created by the "critical philosophy" of I. Kant.

Following the example of three " Kantian critics", V. Dilthey put forward a project to create a "Critique of Historical Reason", which assumes as the main content the answer to the question of how historical knowledge can take place. When solving this issue, three main directions were identified: hermeneutic intuitionism "(philosophy of life" and existentialism ( W. Dilthey, X. Ortega y Gasset, O. Spengler, M. Heidegger3), the neo-Hegelian philosophy of the identity of historical being and thinking (B. Croce, J. Gentile, R. Collingwood), the axiological methodology of neo-Kantianism, which solution of the epistemological question of the relationship between historical knowledge and historical reality, limiting itself to consideration of the structure of historical knowledge.

THE CONCEPT OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY.
PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY A. TOYNBEE AND K. JASPERS

The philosophy of history is an independent area of ​​philosophical knowledge, the purpose of which is to study the qualitative originality of social society, the features of its development and prospects.

One of the first representatives of the philosophy of history is Augustine Aurelius (4th century AD). He considers the history of mankind from a religious, Christian point of view as a process of salvation, the acquisition by mankind of the lost unity with God. Only in the XVIII century. the philosophy of history begins to take shape as a secular science.

A huge contribution to the development of the philosophy of history was made by the German philosopher G.W.F. Hegel. From his point of view, history is a process of progressive development, "the unfolding of the World Spirit."

K. Marx and F. Engels adhered to a materialistic understanding of history. They attached decisive importance to the development of the economy and industrial relations. Politics, religion, culture are considered in Marxism as a "superstructure" over the economic "basis" of society.

Widespread in the late XIX - early XX centuries. received a civilizational approach in the philosophy of history. Its largest representatives N. Danilevsky, O. Spengler, A. Toynbee argued that every culture, every civilization goes through its own unique path of historical development from inception through prosperity to decline.

Arnold Joseph Toynbee (1889-1975) believed that history has a universal content. It is always realized through the personality and fate of each individual person, has a human face. Toynbee defines history as the relationship between the historical (temporal) and the supra-historical (eternal).

The object of study of the philosophy of history cannot be either humanity as a whole, or any individual nation or state. The object of the philosophy of history are cultural-historical types, which Toynbee calls societies or civilizations. They are units of history that can be compared or studied. Each of these civilizations emerges as a result of a socio-cultural challenge. Challenges can be varied: climatic conditions, relations with other peoples, religious ideas.

Karl Jaspers (1883-1969) believed that humanity has a single origin and a single path of development. History, according to Jaspers, has its beginning and its end. Its movement is determined by the power of providence.

Faith is the basis and meaning of history. Only philosophical faith can become a single faith for all mankind. It is an act of will, but faith should not be opposed to knowledge. Any knowledge is based on faith. Philosophical faith is the awareness of being, its origins through an appeal to the historical situation.

The concept of "historical situation" is a key one in the philosophy of K. Jaspers. Each society develops its own historical situations, but sometimes the historical situations in different societies turn out to be close in spirit. This is the time for the emergence of philosophical faith.

......................................................

Material from ENE

Philosophy of history

Definition of philosophy of history.

This name means:

1. philosophical review of the past destinies of all mankind, as well as the history of a people (F. the history of France), any era (F. the history of the French Revolution), etc.;
2. philosophical study of the general laws of the historical process, abstractly taken,
3. philosophical theory of historical knowledge, and sometimes
4. practical lessons of a moral or political nature that can be learned from history.

This vagueness of the term makes it possible to subsume under the general heading of the philosophy of history very dissimilar tasks arising from the contact of two independent areas of knowledge - history and philosophy. based on historical facts. Little deserve this name and such disciplines as the historian (see), historical methodology (see), etc., which set as their task the establishment of the principles of historical knowledge. Most often, the term is understood either exclusively in one of the first two meanings, or in both together; in the latter case, they usually do not distinguish between the tasks of a philosophical understanding of the past, as it really was, and an understanding of how it happens in general, by what forces the historical process is created and according to what laws, regardless of any given times and places. Since the emergence of sociology (see), the study of the laws governing social phenomena, and consequently, the development of society or the historical process taking place in it, has been taken over by this science, and the significance of the brought to well-known abstractness of the image of the actual course of history. There is another term historiosophy, equivalent to the term F. history; it is found in many literatures, but has not taken root on Russian soil. We got a bigger move historiology, but already in a more definite sense of the theory of the historical process, taken abstractly; it would be most convenient to use it instead of the term F. of history, leaving behind the latter only the first of the above meanings. The first to use the term F. history was Voltaire, who thus called his "Essai sur les moeurs et l'esprit des nations". In general, this name can be understood as all attempts to depict the past or understand the essence of the historical process from the point of view of a certain philosophical worldview. The philosophy of history can, therefore, reflect the most varied systems and doctrines; it can be religious, metaphysical, and scientific; religious can be pantheistic and deistic (providentialistic; see), metaphysical - have a more mystical or more rationalistic character, scientific - reflect the ideas of one or another sociological school. On the other hand, the philosophy of history also includes certain subjective elements (see Subektivism), as a result of which, for example, the philosophy of the history of individual political parties must have a different character.

Historical sketch of the philosophy of history

General historical and philosophical constructions began to emerge in very ancient times. The teaching of the ancients about the four ages (gold, silver, copper, iron) already contains the well-known F. of history, as well as the well-known picture of the change of four monarchies, which became a brief F. of history for all the Middle Ages. The first, of course, extremely imperfect history of mankind (“Adversus paganos historiarum libri septem”) was written at the beginning of the 5th century. AD by the Spanish priest Orosius, who set as his goal to prove that the introduction of Christianity did not in the least worsen the life of peoples. The historical-philosophical nature of the "De civitate Dei" Bliss. Augustine, where the whole history of mankind is seen as a struggle between two kingdoms - divine and diabolical. These writings set the tone for all subsequent providentialist F. history. In its development, a particularly prominent place belongs to Bossuet's Discourse on World History, which, in the author's opinion, should have been for the history of individual countries and peoples what a general geographical map is in relation to private ones. The real F. of history began only in the 18th century. The Neapolitan thinker Vico in his "New Science" developed the theory that glorified him, according to which all peoples in their historical life follow the same path and universal history is an eternal cycle of the return of the same phenomena. The essay on Roman history and Montesquieu's The Spirit of the Laws are also important in the birth of historiology and sociology; they introduced into science the concepts of the laws of social phenomena and the "main current (allure principale) of historical life", in particular, they found out the influence of climate on historical life. Voltaire also introduced the philosophical spirit into historiography. Of particular importance for the entire further development of F. history was a new point of view of progress (see), from which in the second half of the 18th century. began to consider the history of mankind. Turgot was the first to formulate it, followed by a number of other writers who stood on the point of view that the history of mankind is the history of its gradual improvement and that the main role in this improvement is played by the success of the human mind. This idea was especially brilliantly developed at the very end of the 18th century. Condorcet in his famous Outline of a Historical Picture of the Progress of the Human Mind. In Germany in the second half of the XVIII century. major works on F. history were written by Iselin, the author of “Philosoph. Muthmassungen aber die Geschichte der Menschheit", Herder, whose work "Ideas about F. humanity” is one of the main works of the era, and remained little known, but deserves great attention Pelitz (see), the author of “Grundlinien zur pragmatischen Weltgeschichte”. Herder, by the way, deserves the credit for trying to base history on natural science. Pelitz wrote his book, which he himself characterized as an attempt to "reduce world history to one principle," under the influence of one thought of Kant. Among the small articles of the famous philosopher there is one (“Idee zu einer allgemeinen Geschichte in weltb ü rgerlicher Absicht”), where he proves the need for a philosophical processing of world history according to the plan of nature, with the goal of creating a perfect society. “It may seem strange,” says Kant, “to consider the history of mankind as if it had actually been accomplished for reasonable purposes; but this point of view can still be recommended as a guiding idea, and if the course of history is determined in such a way as a priori, this does not mean that a philosopher can neglect the study of empirical history. With this remark, Kant, as it were, warned against the abuse of philosophy that was in use in German idealism in the first half of the 19th century. A writer of the 18th century occupies a special place in German historical literature. Jacques Wegelin, who in the seventies of the 18th century published a number of articles (in French) “On F. History” in the Notes of the Berlin Academy, according to his definition, the basis of history should be a simple and methodical story, F. should to guide it, “as if hiding behind a curtain.” The general character of the philosophy of eighteenth-century history lies in its progressively philanthropic and humanitarian-idealistic tone, in its optimism and preaching of active participation in life. In the first half of the XIX century. philosophy reached a special development in Germany, where, however, it received an extremely unscientific direction in the philosophical schools of Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel. The first of them, in his Grundz uuml;ge des gegenwärtigen Zeitalters, proclaimed the following principle: “The philosopher who studies history follows it along the a priori running thread of the world plan, which is clear to him without any history; the philosopher's appeal to history does not at all aim at proving anything, since his propositions have been proven earlier and independently of any history. The philosopher uses history only to the extent that it serves his purpose - and ignores everything else that does not serve this purpose. This method would be completely inadequate for a simple empirical study of history, but it is quite permissible for a philosopher. Fichte even directly stated that the philosopher's task is to deduce from his basic concept the entire content of experience and that in fact he can "a priori describe all time and all its possible epochs." Schelling, who often contrasted the historical with the philosophical, as empirical with the a priori, and at one time even spoke of the complete impossibility of their combination in F. history, hesitated for a long time between rather dissimilar solutions to the problem, until in the end he left empirical history completely aside in order to understand history. in the transcendental sense of "an epic created in the Spirit of God" or "a progressively developing revelation of God". In this understanding, empirical history had to submit to an a priori scheme. From Schelling's school came a whole galaxy of writers who viewed history from this mystical-metaphysical point of view. The philosophical construction of history according to an a priori logical plan reached a particular prevalence in the era of the dominance of the Hegelian system. Among the main works of this thinker, a very prominent place belongs to his F. history (see), in which the history of mankind is considered as a process of self-consciousness of the world spirit, taking place according to a well-known logical plan, and the actual course of history is adjusted to an a priori scheme. The construction of history was, obviously, a direct violation of the most elementary requirements of historical science, and in the end the philosophy of history in the spirit of German idealism greatly discredited the very idea of ​​history history. Simultaneously with the development in Germany of the metaphysical theory of history, in Germany, and especially in France, there was not only a political but also a cultural struggle between reaction and liberalism, which introduced a certain ideological (and sometimes outright tendentiousness) into the study of history. In France, moreover, a utopian socialism arose, which also had its own special views on history. In the spirit of cultural reaction, Friedrich Schlegel was engaged in the philosophy of history and wrote a book under this title (1828), which saw the goal of the philosophy of history in the “historical depiction of the course of restoration in various world periods of the lost divine prototype of man.” For Fr. Schlegel, however, the whole new history, starting with humanism and the Reformation, was something like one big mistake. It must be added to Schlegel's credit that he was opposed to the construction of history according to a logical plan. In the spirit of clerical reaction, Gorres also considered the past of mankind in his essay “On the basis, division and sequence of world history”. Of the liberal historians of the era, Guizot deserves to be noted, who, although he did not specifically deal with F. history, had a great influence on understanding the essence of the historical process. In addition, Cousin, Jouffroy, Quinet and Michelet dealt with historical questions in France (the last two introduced the French to the ideas of Herder and Vico). Of the utopian socialists of this era, both Saint-Simon and Fourier had their own F. stories - the latter, however, is purely fantastic, merging with his bizarre cosmogony. Their common feature is the representation of the world-historical process as gradually realizing the future harmonious state of mankind. In this respect, Saint-Simonism and Fourierism merely continued the progressive tradition of eighteenth-century philosophy of history. In particular, Saint-Simon created a whole historical and philosophical formula for the gradual transformation of a military society into an industrial one and a sequence of states of slavery, serfdom and wage labor, which should be followed by a stage of social labor (see), Saint-Simon also owned the first idea of ​​​​sociology (there same). In the era of the Restoration, the struggle between the reactionary aristocracy and the liberal bourgeoisie put forward in French historiography the idea of ​​a class struggle, which was used in the next period (after 1830) and to illuminate the history of mutual relations between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat (Louis Blanc). Finally, two more writers adjoin utopian socialism in France, who directly set themselves historical and philosophical tasks. In 1833, Busche, who combined in his worldview devotion to Catholicism and passion for Jacobinism (see French Revolution), published "Introduction to the science of history, or the science of the development of mankind"; Leroux, akin to him in spirit, wrote the historical and philosophical work On Humanity (1840). In both of these writings, historical and philosophical thought is immersed in the deepest mysticism. If we take into account that in the first half of the XIX century. in the two main countries where the philosophy of history developed, metaphysics and utopianism dominated in this area, it can be said that, with a few exceptions, the philosophy of history at that time was on the wrong track. That is why real historians expressed more and more distrust and even contempt towards F. history. Philosophy of history was led onto new paths only in the middle of the 19th century. thanks to a number of writers who set themselves the task of freeing history from theological and metaphysical influences and creating a positive science of society. At the head of this movement was Auguste Comte, the founder of sociology and the author of one of the most remarkable attempts at F. history. His social dynamics is not a general theory of social evolution, as he himself intended, but a philosophical overview of human history. The main drawback of this review is that it, like the F. history of Hegel, is adjusted to an a priori (in relation to the actual course of history) formula; nevertheless, Comte's merit is the formulation of the problem of the scientific construction of F. history. Buckle also acted in the same direction, who also formulated the need to raise history to the level of science. In general, in the second half of the XIX century. the philosophy of history is already developing under the strong influence of positivism, understanding this word in the broad sense of F., fundamentally refusing metaphysics and striving to rely on the data and methods of positive science. Buckle paved the way for naturalism in F. history, bringing to the fore the influence exerted by nature. At one time (in the 60s and 70s of the 19th century), sociological Darwinism, which tried to explain history by factors of biological evolution, had a strong influence on history. Despite, however, the fascination with the results and methods of natural science, the general character of the positivist philosophy of history is determined by its main thesis about the leading role of mental development in historical evolution. This is the point of view of F. history of the XVIII century, revived with particular force in the era of the new emancipation of the mind from mysticism and metaphysics. Comte considers the law of three phases of the worldview to be the basic law of historical evolution; according to Bockl, progress depends on the development of positive knowledge and its dissemination in society. The philosophy of history in the Hegelian school has the same essentially intellectualistic character. In the middle of the XIX century. Marx and Engels formulated a different view of history, the essence of which can be briefly expressed in the following words: “explanations of an epoch must be sought not in its economics (or not in the minds of people), but in its economy (or in the state of the productive forces of society).” This is so called. economic materialism (see), which gained many followers and influenced F. history only at the very end of the 19th century. This direction arose from a combination of Hegelianism with the teachings of French historians about the class struggle. Positivism, naturalism, economic materialism left a mark on the entire historical and philosophical literature of the second half of the 19th century; but even in this era, many works on F. history appeared, in which we are dealing, in essence, with the remnants of previous points of view. The most prominent representative of historical and philosophical providentialism was Fr. Laurent, author of "Etudes sur l'histoire de l'humanité", the last volume of which is devoted to F. history: on the one hand, this is a summing up of the entire work, on the other, a criticism of various historical and philosophical theories. Other writings continue the tradition of metaphysical systems; the most significant of these are listed below in the general bibliography. With a wide variety of philosophical trends, from the point of view of which writings on philosophical history were written, and with the extreme heterogeneity of their content, any exact classification of them is extremely difficult. A significant number of them are purely religious and even directly religious in nature. For example, the writings of Fortman, Guiraud, Rougemont, Sarkus differ in a sharply Catholic direction; others can be called purely Protestant (for example, Eit), deistic (Bunsen, Laurent, etc.), mystical (Molitor, as well as Buchet and Leroux - in the spirit of humanitarian socialism, Vronsky - in the spirit of Polish messianism): other undoubtedly religious writers in this area is difficult to classify to any particular direction. A much larger number of works on F. history are written from a metaphysical point of view, often in the spirit of one school or another. Under the influence of Hegel were Biederman, Tseshkovsky, Rosenkranz, Shtutuman, Vera and many others, among which economic materialists should be included, who, having mastered Hegel's method, rejected, however, his idealistic point of view. Among the prominent followers of the Krause school are Altmeier; under the influence of Fichte wrote, among other things, Pestalozzi, under the influence of Schopenhauer - Banzen. The writings of Ehrenfeichter, Ferrari, Funk, Görres, Kirchner, Lotze, Mehring, Renouvier, Roholle, Schildener, and others are more or less metaphysical in nature, which do not reflect well-known philosophical schools in any sharp way and, in particular, stand closer or to religious-idealistic, or scientific-realistic understanding. In addition, many historians worked in the field of philosophical history—Bockle, Guizot, Michelet, Quinet, and others. Surveying the entire literature on philosophical history, we find in it comparatively few works in the scientific spirit in the past; only in recent decades has there been an increase in the number of historiological works and philosophical surveys of world history, conceived or even executed in the spirit of positive sociology. In addition to Comte and Buckle, here we should mention Barthes, Bourdot, Lacombe, Lorenz, L. Mechnikov, Simmel, Ward, etc., and also to mention once again the main representatives of economic materialism. On the other hand, very often the scientific intentions of the authors do not at all correspond either to the posing of historical questions, or the methods for solving them, or, finally, the conclusions obtained; the most characteristic examples of this are the works of Banleu, Dergens, and Hermann.

Russian historical and philosophical literature is relatively poor. It originated in the well-known dispute between Westerners and Slavophiles (see); Slavophilism developed a peculiar philosophy of history, in which the main works are the works of Khomyakov, Kireevsky, N. Ya. Danilevsky, Bestuzhev-Ryumin, and Strakhov. They are dominated by a religious and nationalist point of view. It was originally shared by Vl. Solovyov, who freed himself from it in his last works, but remained faithful to the religious-metaphysical view of the historical process. Hegelianism found a prominent representative in Russia in the person of B. N. Chicherin, many of whose writings are related to philosophical history. Especially fortunate in Russian literature over the past decades is the sociological point of view, which is the basis of a number of historiological works listed elsewhere (see the corresponding article). On the influence of historical and philosophical theories on the development of Russian history, see also acc. Art.

Major historical questions

At the present time no one will defend the philosophical construction of history a priori. The idea entered the general consciousness that F. history can only be a generalization of the positive data of historical science, eliminating from this area the idea of ​​a plan destined for world history. The latest view asserts that historical movement is conditioned by a mass of different physical, cultural and social conditions, the movement of which is subject to a certain regularity. Much progress has now been made in the application of this idea. Even Comte considered it possible to consider world history as internally unified process controlled by one basic law, which was a kind of echo of the former thought about some reasonable regularity of world history (Hegel). Separate peoples are not parts of some higher whole, which is only gradually being formed, but independent wholes; in the life of each of them individually, the same laws of cultural and social development operate. However, even here one should not understand the regularity in the spirit of Vico's theory about the existence of some general plan, carried out one by one by all historical peoples. The conditions of the geographical environment, the physical and mental properties of the tribe, the external destinies of the people, foreign influences, unequal internal relations, the various moments in the appearance of peoples on the stage of world history - all this leads to the fact that the history of one people cannot resemble the history of others. Therefore, in the modern understanding, historical regularity is reduced either to the existence of unchanging causal relationships (similar causes give rise to similar consequences), or to the existence of general trends in the development of certain aspects of life (the same cultural and social forms develop in approximately the same way). All this requires a constant decomposition of historical facts into their simplest elements, in the mutual relations of which only a certain regularity can be traced, which cannot be formulated when we are dealing with their extremely complex and surprisingly diverse combinations in actual historical life. The old philosophy of history operated on such complex phenomena as China, India, the classical world, Christianity, and so on, taking them as elements combined in one integral image of the course of world history; modern philosophy of history, without completely abandoning the idea of ​​such a synthesis, not only presupposes it, but also brings to the fore analysis, which it tries to bring to the decomposition of even individual particular facts into their simplest elements. The opposition between the former F. of history, with its metaphysical premises and purely constructive tasks, and the modern F. of history, with its fidelity to the scientific soil and the analyzing method, is so great that some scholars now deny the right of the F. of history to exist, separate from history or from sociology. (P. N. Milyukov). In any case, no one now denies the possibility of a theoretical relationship to history, which Schelling and Schopenhauer did not recognize; the whole question is only where to look for a realistic explanation of history. Previously, historiological realism was understood in the sense of the need for a naturalistic understanding of history, its explanation from natural data. In the footsteps of Montesquieu and Herder, for the first time in the XVIII century. put forward the influence of natural conditions on history, went in the XIX century. many writers, of whom the most prominent place belongs to Buckle. This is still not completely exhausted topic for historiological considerations; more and more new prospects are opening up in this area. Let us note, for example, L. Mechnikov's recent work Civilization and the Great Historical Rivers, in which the question of the influence of large rivers, seas and oceans on history is examined. The one-sided passion for the "theory of climate", as the explanation of history from natural conditions was often called, gave rise to the opposite "theory of race", according to which all the makings of the future history of each people are entirely contained in its tribal (physical and mental) characteristics. However, at present, anthropological, ethnographic, linguistic and historical studies reveal that the very concept of race suffers from uncertainty, that peoples of a pure race, not mixed with others, do not exist, that language cannot testify to the origin of a people, that the same mental characteristics individual individuals are found among the most dissimilar peoples - and vice versa, in the same people there is a wide variety of mental types and characters, and that, finally, much that is taken as innate to a person turns out to be grafted onto him by the cultural environment surrounding him (the most sharp examples of the application of the theory of race are the comparative characteristics of the Aryans and Semites made by Renan, Khvolson, and others). Without denying the importance of the geographical and anthropological conditions of historical development, supplementing some explanations with others, demanding precise analysis and factual validity here, modern historiology pays its main attention not to the conditions in which historical development takes place, but to the forces that move it. The earlier view, according to which these forces lie in ideas, cannot be considered abandoned at the present time; only the notion of some ideas that are outside of human consciousness and nevertheless move history forward, or of ideas that were originally invested in the “folk spirit” and from it draw their developing content, has been eliminated. The newest understanding of ideas as driving forces is alien to any metaphysical and mystical premises, and therefore does not contain anything unscientific. However, it cannot be denied that it is far from being a complete explanation of history. Firstly, this is a too one-sided intellectualistic explanation of history, taking little account of other spheres of mental life; historical ideolologism necessarily requires supplementation in other manifestations of the human psyche. Secondly, the psyche alone, no matter how fully and broadly we understand it, is not able to explain history when the conditions of the external environment are removed from the scientific horizon, in which the life of individuals who form society is placed. This environment is not only the surrounding nature (and, moreover, nature greatly modified by human activity), but also the entire cultural and social environment that forms the mental personality of a person, gives its activity certain forms, sets certain conditions and boundaries for it. The concept of the environment (see) is one of the most important acquisitions of the latest historiology; but it also receives far from the same interpretation by writers of different directions. First, there are different shades in understanding what constitutes the very content and the main essence of the environment. For some, this is primarily a spiritual culture, which is the result of a purely mental interaction of individuals, supported by imitation, upbringing, tradition, while for others - specifically for representatives of economic materialism - the social environment is primarily a set of real relations determined by the material needs of people. A broader understanding of the environment lies in the synthesis of both views, which takes into account the inseparable existence in the individual of bodily needs and mental, moral, aesthetic, generally spiritual needs. Secondly, the relationship that exists between the environment and the individual is also understood in a different way. Many are ready to see in the individual only a passive product of the environment, wholly explained by its influences. This idea is based on the doctrine of the great power that imitation has in life (the theories of N.K. Mikhailovsky, Tarde, etc.), but in itself it does not necessarily lead to the recognition of the unlimited power of the environment over the personality, since biologically, then There are physical and mental properties, individual individuals differ in different degrees of susceptibility to external influences and susceptibility to environmental influences, and many, moreover, show special originality and independence. Culture not only levels the individual, but also contributes to the development of their inherent features. A person adapts to the environment, but he also tries to adapt it to himself. Thirdly, in connection with this, there is also a dispute about how changes are made in the cultural and social forms that form the environment. In the XVIII century. the belief prevailed that language, religion, laws, the state, etc., were artificial products of the conscious creativity of people, and the changes themselves in all these manifestations of social life were understood as a deliberate reformation of these relations according to ideal ideas. Such a view was subsequently called mechanical, in contrast to the organic, which replaced it at the beginning of the 19th century. In this latter understanding, language, law, the state, etc., are products of the natural development of society, in which there is nothing far-fetched and preconceived (see Historical School of Law). This idea was later generalized, and a whole doctrine was obtained about the self-development of cultural and social forms, or about the so-called spontaneous evolution (see), the name of which we already find in Comte, but whose main defender is Spencer. Recently, the same idea of ​​a purely spontaneous course of history has been especially eagerly developed by representatives of economic materialism. Meanwhile, all cultural and social forms exist only in human activities, as the methods and techniques of the latter, usual in a given society, or through human activities, as their products and results - and since nothing in social life is carried out without the activity of individuals, then the development of cultural and social forms is accomplished not by itself, but by influencing them on the part of members of society. Of course, human activity can have different degrees of intentionality, consciousness, expediency, perseverance, skill and success; but from the fact that people very often show complete passivity and unconsciously go with the flow, it does not at all follow that this is the whole basis of the historical process. One of the first to clarify the question of the activity of individuals in the historical process was P. L. Lavrov (see N. Kareev, Lavrov’s Theory of Personality, in the 12th volume of Historical Reviews); later this point of view, eliminating the idea of ​​spontaneous evolution, was developed by other writers, for example. Lester Ward, who was a special critic. Spencer. In connection with this is the question of the role of great people in history and of the action of the masses of the people in them. In the earliest times, historiography imagined history as a succession of events, the main actors of which are individuals, the so-called. "heroes", "great people", etc. And in the special historical and philosophical literature, we often come across the idea of ​​great people as real figures of history and with various mystical and metaphysical interpretations of their role. Nowhere has this view been expressed so sharply and with such exaggeration as in Carlyle's famous Cult of Heroes. Later, historiology went to the other extreme (for example, the historical and philosophical reasoning of L. N. Tolstoy in "War and Peace"): great people are zeros, labels of events, the least involved in them. Both views sin with the artificial opposition of the individual and society as homogeneous quantities, as if, moreover, great people stand completely outside of society, and the latter is not an aggregate of many such individuals as a great man. In the latter analysis, the activities of the masses are also decomposed into the activities of individual personalities, among whom, and not somewhere outside their totality, there are also those figures who are customarily called great people. The essence of the matter lies in the fact that the participation of individuals in the historical process is different both quantitatively and qualitatively, and between great people and the very last of ordinary mortals there is a whole gradation of steps. The question of the role of the individual in history has attracted particular attention in Russian and German literature in recent years. In our country, economic materialists have come forward as deniers of the role of the individual in favor of a purely spontaneous course of history. In Germany, a very sharp controversy was caused by Lamprecht, who proclaimed in his "Alte und neue Richtungen in der Geschichtwissenschaft" (1896) that the old, "individualist" direction of history should be completely replaced by a new, "collectivist" one. Very many historians participated in the controversy caused by this statement (Breisig, Gintze, Meinecke, Pirenne, Rachfall and others; see Malinin's Russian pamphlet). The question of the role of the individual in history receives a different formulation and has a different meaning in the areas of pragmatic (see) and cultural (see) history. The first deals with events that must be linked by causality. On this basis, in relation to the personality, the question is what causes its actions, from which, as elements, events are made up. This is the same problem that in F. gives rise to a dispute about free will (see). Scientific historiology solves it in the sense of the strict conditionality in the past of all individual acts that make up the pragmatic facts of history, although at the same time it is armed against fatalistic (see) conclusions from deterministic premises. In cultural history, the question of the role of the individual is reduced to the question of bringing greater consciousness and skill in achieving goals into the historical process and, in general, of the greater or lesser influence of activity on everyday life. With the undoubted conditionality of the events taking place in society, the life of this society itself, that is, with the dependence of individual human actions on these cultural and social forms, on the one hand, and with the influence that events have on life, that is, with the general dependence of cultural and social forms from individual actions - on the other hand, we must consider the historical process as a single cultural-pragmatic process, the individual moments of which are so diverse in nature that they can be explained both from the “individualistic” and from the “collectivistic” point of view, and according to the principle of causality, and according to the principle of evolution; separate theories only bring to the fore different aspects of the process. The very division of historical facts into pragmatic and cultural (by categories events And life) received a philosophical justification and interpretation only in recent decades. The latest historiology focuses its attention on everyday life, preferably before events. In line with the posing of historiological questions, the need for critical analysis and the philosophical substantiation of the general concepts with which the philosophy of history operates, having inherited them from the time of the domination of metaphysical systems, is more and more felt in modern historical and philosophical literature. This expands the area of ​​the laws of historical knowledge towards the sphere of epistemological and logical problems.

Literature

General reviews of the history of the philosophy of history

More or less general reviews of the history of F. history (or its individual directions) are the following works:

• Flint, The ph. of hist. in Europe” (there is a French translation, 1878);
• Fantana, "La filos. della storia nei pensatori italiani" (1873);
• F. K., "Nasza historozofja" ("Ateneum", 1876);
• Marselli, "Scienza della storia" (1873);
• K. Maur, “Die phil. Geschichtsauffassung der Neuzeit" (1877);
• Rosenkranz, "Das Verdienst der Deutschen um die Ph. d. G." (1835);
• Rapoport, "F. history in its main currents” (1899);
• Benloeu, "Les lois de Phistoire" (1881);
• Bernheim, "Geschichtsforschung und Geschichtphilosophie" (1872);
• Biedermann, "Ph. der Gesch. (1884);
• Bossuet, Discours sur Phist. universelle";
• Buchez, "Introduction à la science de l'histoire ou science des développements de l'humanité" (1833);
• Buckle, "Hist. of civilization in England";
• Bunsen, "Gott in der Geschichte" (1857);
• Cieszkowski, "Prolegomena zur Historiosophie" (1838);
• A. Comte, "Cours de Phil. positive" (vols. V and VI), and his own, "Système de politique positive" (vol. III);
• Condorcet, "Esquisse d'un tableau historique des progrès de l'esprit humain" (1794);
• V. Cousin, De la phil. de l'hist.";
• Doergens, "Ueber das Bewegungsgesetz der Geschichte" (1878);
• Ehrenfeuchter, "Entwickelungsgesch. der Menschheit, besonders in ethischer Beziehung" (1845);
• Eyth, Ueberblick der Gesch. vom Christi. Standpunkt" (1853);
• ferrari, Essai sur le principe et les limites de la phil. de Phist." (1843);
• Fichte, "Grundzüge des gegenwärt. Zeitalters,
• Fontana, "Idea per una fil. della st." (1876);
• Fortmann, Web. das wesen und die Bedeut, der hist. Entwick." (1840);
• th. Funck, "Phil. et lois de Phist." (1859);
• Görres, Ueb. Grundlage, Gliederung und Zeitfolge der Gesch. (1830; 2nd ed., 1880);
• Guirand, "Ph. catholique de l'hist" (1841);
• Gruizot, "Hist. de la civil. in Europe";
• Hegel, Ph. der Gesch.";
• Herder, "Ideen zur Ph. der Gesch. der Menschheit" (1785);
• Hermann, "Prolegomena zur Ph. der Gesch. (1849); his own, “Zw ölf Vorlesungen ü b. Ph. derG." (1850); his own, “Ph. der Gr.";
• Iselin, "Phil. Muthmassungen üb. die G. der Menschheit" (1764, 2nd ed., 1786);
• Kant, “Idee zu einer allgem. Geschichte" (1784);
• Krause, Die reine d. i. allgem. Lehenlehre and Ph. der Gesch. (1843); his own, "Vorles. ub. angewandte Ph. d. Gesch." (1885);
• Lasaulx, "Neuer Versuch einer alten auf die Wahrheit der Thatsachen gegründ.Ph. de G." (1856)
• Laurent, Ph. de l'hist." (1870);
• P. Leroux, "L" humanite, son principe et son avenir";
• Lessing, "Die Erziehung des Menschengeschlechts";
• Lotze, "Mikrokosmos" (1864);
• Mehring, "Die philosophisch-kritisch. Grundsätze der Selbst-Vollendung oder die Geschichts-Phil." (1877);
• Jules Michelet, "Principes de la phil. de. l" histoire ";
• Molitor, "Ph. der Gresch. mit vorzüglicher Rücksicht auf die Kabbalah" (1857);
• Pestalozzi, "Meine N'achforsch. über den Gang der Natur in der Entwickelung des Menschengeschlechts" (1787);
• Pöhtz, "Grundlinien zur pragm. Weltgesch., als ein Versuch sie auf ein Princip zurückzuführen" (1795);
• Quinet, "Introd. a la ph. de l'hist. de l'humanité" (1825);
• Eenouvier, "Introd. à la ph. analytique de l" hist. (1864):
• Rocholl, Ph. derG." (1878); Rottels, Gottes Erziehung des mensch. Gescht. oder auch eine d. G." (1859);
• Sarcus, "Et. sur la Ph. de l" hist. "(1859);
• Schelling, "Ist eine Ph. d. G. möglich";
• Schildener, "Der Process der Weltgesch als Grundlage der Metaphysik" (1854);
• fr. Schlegel, "Ph. d. Gr." (1829);
• Stutzmann, "Ph. d. G. der Menschheit" (1808);
• Turgot, "Sur les progrès successifs de l"é sprit humain"; his own "Plan de deux discours sur l" hist. univ.";
• Vera, Introduction alla fil. della storia" (1869);
• Vico, "Scienza nuova dell" origine delle nazioni" (1726);
• Weguelin, Sur la Ph. de l'hist." ("Νο uv. mem. de l'Acadé mie de Berlin" for 1770-76);
• Wronski, Phil. absolue de l'hist." (1852).

Russian Op. historical philosopher. contents are specified in acc. Art. The latest (after 1880) historiological works:

• Barth, Dje Ph. der Gesch., als Sociologie" (1897; available in Russian translation);
• L. Bourdeau, "L" histoire et les historiens. Essai critique sur l"histoire considérée comme science positive" (1888);
• K. Breysig, "Aufgabe und Masstä he einer allgem. Geschichtsschreibung" (1900);
• H. Kareev, "The main questions of the philosophy of history" (1883); his own, 1) "Theoretical questions of historical science", 2) "Problems of sociology and the theory of history", 3) "Philosophy, history and theory of progress" (in "Historical-philosophical and sociological studies");
• lacombe, "De l" histoire consid éré e comme science"(1894; Russian translation - "The Sociological Foundations of History", 1895);
• O. Lorenz, "Die Geschichtswissenschaft in Hauptrichtungen und Aufgaben" (1886); his own, "Die material. Geschichtsauffassung" (1897);
• Milyukov, Essays on the History of Russian Culture (vol. 1, introduction);
• P. Lavrov (under the pseudonym Arnoldi), "Problems of Understanding History";
• Ratzenhofer, "Die sociologische Erkenntniss";
• Simmel, Die Probleme der Geschichtsphilosophie; eine Erkenntnisstheoretische Studie" (1892);
• R. Whipper, “A Few Remarks on the Theory of Historical Knowledge” (“Problems of Philosophy and Psychology”, 1900);
• Xenopol, "Les principes fondamentaux de l'histoire" (1899)

etc. Essays in the spirit of economy. mater. and critical works about him will be indicated in the article on Economic. mat.

ABOUT natural-historical conditions of history cm.

• Du-Bois-Reymond, "Culturgeschichte und Nat urwissenschaft"; Rickert, "Culturwiss. and Naturwiss.";
• Bertillon, "De l'influence du milieu";
• Durand, "De l'influence des milieux sur les caractères des races de l'homme";
• Ber, "On the influence of external nature on the social relations of individual peoples and on the history of mankind";
• Peschel, "Einfluss der Landergestaltung auf die menschliche Gesittung";
• L. Metchnikoff, "La civilization et les grands fleuves historiques" (1889).

On the question of the role of the individual in ucmopuu:

• H. Barr, Essais sur la science histoire. La meth. statistique et la question des grands hommes" "Νοuv. R.", 1890); Bourdeau(name above);
• bombard, "La marche de l" humanité et les grands hommes d "après la doctrine positive" (1900);
• Carlyle, "On heroes, hero-worship and the heroic in history" (available in Russian translation);
• Joly, "La psychologie des grands hommes";
• H. Kareev, “The essence of history. process and the role of personality in history” (1890); his own, "Historical Philosophy in War and peace from the point of view of the development of culture" (1902);
• L. Ward, "Dynamic Sociology" (1883).

The latest dispute about the old and new directions in ucmopuu:

• K. Lamprecht, "Alte und neue Richtungen der Geschichtswissenschaft" (1896)
• and a number of articles in Zukunft for 1896-97, Hist. Zeitschr., Deutsch. Zeitsbr. f. Geschichtswiss. and "Jahr buch für Nationaloek.";
• O. Hintze, “Ueber individual. und collekt. Geschichtsauffassung" ("Hist. Zeitsch.", 1896; ibid. article by Meinecke);
• F. Rachfall, "Ueber die Theorie einer kollektivistischen Geschichtswiss." ("Jahrbuch f. Nationaloek.", 1897);
• Breisig, "Ueber Entwickelungsgeschichte" ("Deutsch. Zeitschr. f. Geschichtswiss.", 1896);
• H. Pirenne, Une polé mique histor. en Allemagne" ("Rev. hist.", 1897);
• A. Malinin, “Old and new direction in history. science" (1900).

N. Kareev.

The history of philosophy as a science arose simultaneously with the formation of human civilization. Questions of the origin of the surrounding world, life and man have a long prehistory and date back to the period of the primitive communal system. Already at that time, a person was asking himself questions about the structure of the world around him, about the meaning of life on Earth. And this interest prompted him to study his surroundings. This is how philosophy was born. Thus science emerged from philosophy. Thus, primitive attempts to reveal the secret of existence put man on the path of civilization.

The emergence of philosophy

Primitive man had a very limited stock of knowledge and skills, but an endless opportunity to observe the world around him. Everything that happened around him was beyond explanation and control. Therefore, the isolation of man was accompanied by magical rites, nature and heaven were animated, and natural processes began to be explained by divine intervention. The complex construction of the device of the surrounding world was helped to build with the help of the development of the language - it was the words denoting abstract concepts that laid the foundation for the primitive knowledge of the world.

Already in historical times, chaotic meanings about nature have undergone changes. The first coherent theories of the universe have been known since the time of the first world civilizations. Separate regions of the world formed their ideas about the world around them depending on the conditions of progress, the development of applied skills and the formation of theoretical science. Periods in the history of philosophy are inextricably linked with socio-economic changes that have affected all peoples and states on the way to modern civilization.

Philosophy of India

The history and philosophy of science could rightly call the Ancient East the place of their birth. In these territories, the agricultural way of life prevailed, new principles of building society developed more actively, there were various social classes, cities and civilizations arose. The sum of knowledge and experience contributed to the emergence and development of various disciplines, including philosophy.

The first mentions of the life of the most ancient civilizations were found in the written monuments of Ancient India. The found texts have not yet been fully deciphered, but they already give an idea of ​​the life and customs of those times. Ancient Indian (Vedic) literature includes an extensive set of texts, the oldest of which dates back to 1500 BC. e. The found set of texts was compiled and edited for nine centuries and is teachings and information of a predominantly cult and religious nature.

The religion of the Vedas is a complex set of mythological representations, rituals, and ceremonies. In them, one can trace the traces of the myths of the Indo-European Aryans, who previously lived on the territory of modern Europe, the legacy of Indo-Iranian views and a powerful layer of views of non-Indian cultures. Different peoples brought their myths and traditions, as well as information about their gods, to the Vedas. This is how Vedic polytheism arose, in which the gods are like people. The earliest and most famous gods: Indra - the god of war and thunderstorms, Ushas - the goddess of dawn, Vayu - the god of the wind and many others. Later, the gods Vishnu, Brahma and Shiva make their way into the pantheon.

The history of the development of philosophy often returns to the ancient Indian teachings. Despite the archaic views, the teachings of prana and karma are still famous; the principles of these Vedas form the foundation of new religions and methods of studying the world.

Buddhism

The first millennium brought many changes to the Old Indian society. The development of crafts, the improvement of agriculture and the emerging power of monarchies brought changes to the worldview. The old philosophy no longer met the requirements of the time, new schools arose that gathered their students and explained the world from their point of view. One of these schools was Buddhism. The founder of this doctrine was Siddhartha Gautama, the son of an aristocrat and ruler from the Shakya clan. In the prime of his life, he left home and, after many years of wandering, comprehended the right life and formulated the rules leading to enlightenment. He was called the Buddha (awakened, enlightened), and the faith he professed was Buddhism.

At the heart of Buddhism lies the doctrine of the four noble truths. According to them, the whole life of a person is suffering through which one must go. The path to the elimination of suffering leads through right judgment, right action, right decision, right speech, right life, right attention and concentration. Extremes such as asceticism and sensual pleasures are rejected by Buddhism. The cycle of life is also accepted by Buddhism, but at the end of the path of the righteous, nirvana awaits - liberation - and complete dissolution in the deity.

For a long time, Buddhist principles existed only orally. Canonical Buddhism was formed after many years of oral tradition, surrounding its teacher with many legends and miracles. Basic concepts were written down and rethought, and many of the Buddha's laws are still alive today.

Philosophers of ancient Greece

The history of Western philosophy originates in Ancient Greece. It was this country that became the founder of philosophical thought on the European continent. The history and philosophy of science among the Greek thinkers acquired almost modern forms. The method of philosophizing developed by the Greeks is the first attempt at a methodological comprehension of being.

The history of the philosophy of ancient Greece has four stages of development. The first period was called pre-Socratic. It dates from the 5th-4th century BC. e. The need for new knowledge came along with a significant transformation of social relations. In Athens, thinkers of a new type appear - the sophists, who concentrate their attention on the problems of the Greek city-states. At this time, the teaching of Pythagoras was developing about the number as the basis of all being, about the order and chaos of Heraclitus, about the smallest particles of matter - the atoms of Democritus.

The second period dates back to the second half of the 5th century, it was called the classical one. The main thinkers of this time are Plato, Aristotle and Socrates. Modern concepts of the philosophy of history were developed on the basis of the works. Such attention to the thinkers of Athens continued for hundreds of years, until the defeat of Athens in the Peloponnesian War. After this event, Athens loses its socio-political significance, but still remains the center of the political and cultural life of Ancient Greece. It was then that the first integral picture of the world appeared, which was called Aristotelian: the Earth is called the center of the Universe, the basis of all sciences is natural philosophy. The classical Greek school laid the foundation for logic.

The third stage begins at the end of the 4th century BC. e. The history of philosophy calls it Hellenistic. Unlike the previous stage, which was dominated by various philosophical teachings, the Hellenists paid less attention to the knowledge of the laws of the universe. Basically, they specialized in opening schools in which the philosophy of history was studied. Briefly, this period can be called not scientific, but administrative - more attention was paid to the dissemination of scientific discoveries and philosophical views, and not to knowledge of the laws of the world.

The fourth period is closely associated with Rome as a decisive force in the ancient world. The history of the development of philosophy calls this period Roman. Roman philosophy of the fourth stage is formed under the significant influence of Greek teachings. A certain impetus to the development of philosophical ideas was given by the arrival of the Athenian sages in Rome. Since that time, three philosophical trends originate in Rome - skepticism, stoicism and epicureanism. Also during this period, a completely new trend originates, which had a decisive influence on the course of European history as a whole.

Christianity

The development of Christianity falls on the 1st-2nd century AD. The subject of the history of philosophy reveals this phenomenon both from a religious and a philosophical point of view. Only those philosophers who managed to combine these two lines of development could count on recognition and a comfortable life. Numerous mob riots and slave uprisings were brutally suppressed, so the idea of ​​​​redemption, the messiah and the hope of a divine miracle found many, many admirers. Faith in deliverance brought a new religion - Christianity. The main difference from previous teachings was that the new religion did not distinguish between the rich and the poor, did not distinguish them by nationality and origin. All people were equal before God, all had the hope of gaining eternal life - this is what the new philosophy of history taught people. Briefly, one can also say about the essence of the new teaching - the most important concepts, such as sacrifice, were also rethought. The atonement of the sins of mankind by Jesus Christ made sacrifices unnecessary, and everyone could turn to God with the help of prayer without resorting to the mediation of priests and clergymen.

Jewish traditions were taken as the basis of Christianity, which formed the basic principles of the philosophy of history. Briefly, the wording of Christianity sounded like "the atonement of the son of God for the sins of all peoples." Gradually, the structure of the Christian community changes, and the poor and oppressed are replaced by rich and powerful people. There is a church hierarchy. The reign of Constantine the Great establishes Christianity as the main religion of the state.

Views about what being is in the history of the philosophy of Christianity are based on the teachings of Aristotle. The picture of the world presented by him fit perfectly into the Christian canons and was not subject to discussion for almost one and a half thousand years. Scholasticism arises as an attempt to prove the existence of God on the basis of inferences. Science practically ceased to develop, and progress in scientific knowledge did not exist as a concept. Until now, the history of philosophy has not had such a detrimental effect on technological progress. Despite some inventions, people continued to live, as in ancient times, because it was such a life that was pleasing to God.

Middle Ages

The problems of the philosophy of history in the Middle Ages were built almost entirely on the principles of scholasticism. John Chrysostom and Thomas Aquinas became the largest theologians and philosophers in the field of scholasticism, their works are recognized by both the Western and Eastern branches of Christianity. They provide numerous proofs of the existence of God and man - as a divine creation. Theologians' teachings are usually based on Scripture and on the laws of logic - for example, the theory of dual truth distinguishes between philosophy and theology. Gnosticism and Manichaeism, which arose at that time, should be considered alternative currents of philosophical doctrine. Gradually, the main philosophical doctrine complements and explains Christian theology, while other currents were recognized as heresy and brutally eradicated.

rebirth

The revival, or Renaissance, was caused by the ideological and cultural development of European states. Crafts and trade actively developed, a new class of townspeople was formed who made fortunes in manufactories and trade. The Christian religion is no longer able to explain all the changes, and ancient humanistic teachings come to the fore. Ignoring earthly life for the sake of heaven is no longer relevant, society began to strive for earthly values.

The Renaissance arouses interest in the ancient philosophical heritage, the works of Plato and Aristotle are perceived differently - the ancient philosophers are positioned as advisers, not teachers. This is how new philosophical currents arise, the most significant of which are humanism and Platonism.

Humanism - a trend that arose in medieval Italy, puts an equal sign between the divine and the human, without rejecting either one or the other. The principles of humanism are expressed in the works of Dante, Petrarch, philologist Lorenzo Valla.

Platonism considered the only true knowledge of the world through philosophy as the only reliable system of knowledge about man and the world. The Platonists regarded religion as merely a conventional doctrine acceptable to the majority. The followers of the Platonic teachings founded schools to develop and disseminate their understanding of what man meant in the history of philosophy. It was the Platonic school that made it possible to discover the talents of Galileo, da Vinci and other scientists of that time.

Philosophy of the New Age

Over time, new forms of economic relations arise, which became the beginning of the capitalist economic system. New relationships in society and new views gave rise to new philosophical schools and new directions of philosophical thought. The founder of the new direction was Francis Bacon. He severely criticized the principles of scholasticism and put experience at the head of all systems of studying the world.

Rene Descartes and David Hume, on the basis of philosophical knowledge, form a new science, reflecting on the influence of sensations on the perception of the world, the works of Locke and Kant laid the foundation for the materialistic perception of the world.

Man and the world. Theories of mind

The development of the classical philosophy of modern times reaches its peak in the works of Georg Hegel. His worldview was strongly influenced by the teachings of Plato, Rousseau, Montesquieu. Hegel's philosophy of history for the first time forms the concept of dialectics - the original unity of life, which turns into its opposite. Overcoming bifurcation, the world returns to unity, but becomes richer and more saturated.

In his treatises, the scientist develops a theory according to which the beginning of things can be understood from two points of view. Hegel's philosophy of history calls them transcendental philosophy, the subject of which is the individual, and natural philosophy, which deals with the surrounding world. None of these currents is exhaustive, but together they are able to build a transparent and understandable picture of the universe.

Hegel's works brought to philosophy a clear designation of the foundations of reality as a kind of concept. The history of philosophy interprets this term not as a form of human thinking, but as the truest basis for all being. For Hegel, the concept is the "essence of things", its embryonic state, which is transformed and realized over time.

The history of Russian philosophy has much in common with the teachings of Hegel. Russian philosophers have made attempts to build a new concept of perception of the world. Basically, the foundation for this is the Orthodox tradition of honoring God and the king and the theses of non-resistance to power. The key works of Russian philosophy are written by Chaadaev, Herzen, Vs. Solovyov, L. Tolstoy.

Philosophy in the works of K. Marx

Interest in the works of Karl Marx has not waned for about 200 years. His understanding of the world broke out of the framework of standard philosophy and formed an ideology - a phenomenon that set the tone for the socio-economic development of society in the 19th and 20th centuries. In the field of philosophy, Marx calls himself a student of Hegel and claims in his works only relative independence.

Marx considered labor to be the basis for the development of all social and economic relations, thus removing the question of the meaning of the existence of gods and nature. Man in the works of Marx is only a kind of quintessence of social life, capable of work. Thus, the importance of the individual, family and state is leveled, society and the stage of its economic development become fundamental. It is not surprising that Marxism has become a philosophical banner, under the banner of which various radical parties and social movements have arisen to this day.

Conclusion

A huge foundation of knowledge of the past underlies modern philosophical science. The history of philosophy continues its development and enriches the next generations with knowledge about the structure of the universe and about the place of man in the world around him.