What is the essence of the philosophical teachings of ancient skeptics. Pyrrho - founder of skepticism

Ticket 1. Philosophy, its subject, functions and structure.

Subject philosophy is a set of questions a person has about the world around him, the answers to which give a person the opportunity to optimize the realization of his needs.

Functions philosophy:

Worldview (helps to form a worldview and acts as its theoretical basis)

Theoretical-cognitive (philosophy understands the world, develops new knowledge)

Critical (analysis of the world: within the framework of philosophy, an assessment of what is happening in the world is carried out on the basis of the general ideas contained in philosophy about the norm and pathology of the phenomena and processes of reality surrounding a person.)

Methodological (helps to integrate knowledge into one whole, acts as a methodology, i.e. as a doctrine of methods of cognition and transformation of reality.)

Prognostic (engaged in forecasting: many philosophers of the past acted as prophets, predicting the future.)

Structure philosophy:

historical philosophical knowledge(means process development of philosophy, analysis of this process as a whole and its individual stages)

theoretical philosophy consisting of:

ontology (the study of being)

epistemology (about knowledge)

axiology (about values)

ethics (about morality)

aesthetics (about beauty)

anthropology (about man)

social philosophy (about society)

metaphysics (about the origins of the world)

Ticket 2. Philosophy and worldview.

The term “philosophy” arose from the combination of two Greek words “phileo” - love and “sophia” - wisdom and means love of wisdom.

One of the functions of philosophy is worldview, which means that philosophy helps to form a worldview (a set of sensations, points of view that fit a person into this world, in other words, a person’s attitude to the world around him).

Philosophy is the theoretical basis of a worldview.

Worldview can be:

– idealistic;

– materialistic.

Materialism is a philosophical view that recognizes matter as the basis of existence. According to materialism, the world is moving matter, and the spiritual principle is a property of the brain (highly organized matter).

Idealism is a philosophical view that believes that true existence belongs to the spiritual principle (mind, will), and not matter.

A worldview exists in the form of a system of value orientations (spiritual and material goods that society recognizes as the dominant force over itself, determining the actions, thoughts and relationships of people), beliefs and convictions, ideals, as well as the way of life of a person and society. Types of worldview can be distinguished by various reasons.

The relationship between the concepts of philosophy and worldview can be characterized as follows: every philosophy is a worldview, although a worldview is not necessarily philosophy. Worldview is not just knowledge about the world and man, but also an assessment, a person’s attitude towards the world.

Ticket 3. Philosophy of Ancient India and Ancient China (Confucianism and Taoism).

Ancient Indian philosophy.

Ancient Indian philosophy is conventionally divided into four periods:

Vedic

classical

post-classical

new philosophy

The main features of the philosophy of Ancient India are religiosity, morality and mysticism. Philosophy considered such problems as development of the individual and the universe, liberation of man from passions and material existence.

The thinkers of ancient India regarded truth as multifaceted knowledge, which cannot be expressed in full by focusing only on individual aspects. That is why they believed that there are many ways of improvement, by choosing one of which you can develop your personality and grow spiritually.

Indian philosophy recognized the ultimate goal man, his development and self-improvement. It is through one’s own self-development that one could improve the world itself.

The main goal was achievement of truth, knowledge of the soul and essence of man and touched upon such sections of philosophical knowledge as ontology, epistemology, metaphysics, anthropology and ethics.

Ancient Chinese philosophy.

Ancient Chinese philosophers before the first millennium BC believed that everything that exists and happens in the world depends on the predestination of heaven. Therefore, it was believed that the head of state was the “son of heaven.” The people of China believed that their lives depended on the influence of certain spirits, so sacrifices to these spirits took place.

According to ancient Chinese philosophers, the world arose from chaos. It was argued that two spirits: yin (feminine) and yang (masculine) brought order to the formless chaos, giving birth to the world.

At the beginning of the 1st millennium BC, the natural philosophical concept was formed. The same spirits that influence people's lives are represented as some material forces (water, fire, wood, metal, earth).

Confucianism

The founder of Confucianism is Kong Tzu (Confucius). He taught that heaven is a higher power, a formidable ruler, fate, fate, which is dissatisfied with the existing state of affairs. His ideals are not in the future, but in the past. Kong Tzu founded the idea of "rectification of names." This idea was to try to bring phenomena back to their former meanings. With all deviations from the norm, Confucius believed, one should definitely return to it.

The basis of order in a country according to Confucius is li (ceremonial, ritual, respect, decency, and so on...)

Confucian ethics is based on the concepts of "reciprocity", "golden mean" and "philanthropy", which constitute the "right path". Every person who wants to live a happy life must follow the right path. Confucius believed that the key to governing a people lay in the power of the moral example of superior citizens to inferior ones.

Kun Tzu strives to eliminate cruelty, rudeness, robbery and greed.

Confucian philosophy emphasizes the idea of zhong ("devotion") - the idea of submission. The need to honor the ruler, parents and older brothers as younger ones was also emphasized. Confucius put forward the idea that people are by nature close to each other, that people have innate knowledge, which he considered “supreme knowledge.” People also have other types of knowledge gained through training and direct experience.

The founder of Taoism is Lao Tzu. The central concept of the teachings of Taoism is Tao - the universal pattern of the world, the fundamental principle and completion of everything that exists. Tao is eternal, nameless, incorporeal and formless, inexhaustible and endless in its movement. Tao is present in all material things and causes changes in these things, turning things into their opposites.

Taoism recognizes the independence of human actions. The cause of all adversity, followers of Taoism believe, is a violation of the operation of the Tao. Therefore, in order to get rid of adversity, you need to give up everything you have achieved.

Reasonable behavior, according to Taoism, is the desire for calm, for moderation. Taoism bases its concept of management on the concept of non-action.

Knowledge for followers of the teachings of Tao does not matter, since they believe that the more a person knows, the further he moves away from the true Tao.

Ticket 4. Main schools of pre-Socratic ancient philosophy.

Milesian school- known as the first philosophical school. In it, for the first time, the question of the fundamental principles of all things was consciously raised. In the first place was the question of the essence of the world, and most representatives adhered to a materialistic point of view. Thales considered water to be the first principle, his student Anaximander - apeiron (a certain hypothetical natural material), and Anaximander's student, Anaximenes - air; his student Anaxagoras considered the first principle to be an infinite number of small material particles, qualitatively different from each other, which he calls the seeds of things. Adherent Milesian school, Heraclitus called fire the first principle, since not only ordinary material bodies, but also souls come from fire. The soul is material, it is the least wet, dry fire. All things arise from fire through successive transformations.

School of Pythagoras- the basis of the world is Number. Things are changeable, but numbers are universal and regular. The achievement of the Pythagoreans was the explanation of the properties of an object through its organization and orderliness. A student of Pythagoras, Empedocles considered the four elements to be the beginning of all things: fire, earth, water and air. Basic elements and forces can neither arise nor be destroyed. Only combinations of elements arise, or rather are united and separated.

Eleatic school- its founder, Parmenides believed that being is pure positivity, and non-existence is negativity. Being is one, timeless, eternal, indivisible, unchangeable and exists only in the present, only it is truly existing, and multiplicity, variability, discontinuity, fluidity are all the lot of the imaginary. (In other words, being is one and change is illusory). Ticket 5 Philosophy of Socrates and Plato

Socrates (about 470-399 BC), ancient Greek philosopher, one of the founders of dialectics as a method of finding truth by asking leading questions - the so-called. Socratic method (MAIEUTICS (Greek maieutike, letters - midwifery art), Socrates' method of extracting knowledge hidden in a person with the help of skillful leading questions.). He was accused of “worshipping new deities” and “corrupting youth” and sentenced to death (he took hemlock poison).

He presented his teachings orally; the main source is the writings of his students Xenophon and Plato. The goal of philosophy is self-knowledge as the path to comprehension of true good; virtue is knowledge or wisdom. For subsequent eras, Socrates became the embodiment of the ideal of the sage.

Key ideas: Maieutics and irony

The Socratic dialogues were a search for true knowledge, and an important step on this path was the awareness of its absence, the understanding of one’s own ignorance. According to legend, Socrates was called “the wisest of all wise” by the Delphic Pythia. Apparently, this is connected with his statement about the limitations of human knowledge: “I know that I know nothing.” Using the method of irony, Socrates puts on the mask of a simpleton and asks to teach something or give advice. There is always a serious goal behind this game - to force the interlocutor to reveal himself, his ignorance, to achieve the effect of a beneficial shock to the listener.

About a person. Repeating after the Delphic Oracle “Know thyself,” Socrates addresses the problem of man, the solution to the question of the essence of man, his nature. You can study the laws of nature, the movement of the stars, but why go so far, as Socrates seems to say - know yourself, go deeper into what is close, and then, through knowledge of accessible things, you can come to the same deep truths. For Socrates, a person is, first of all, his soul. And by “soul” Socrates understands our mind, the ability to think, and conscience, the moral principle. If the essence of a person is his soul, then it is not so much his body that needs special care, but his soul, and the highest task of the educator is to teach people how to cultivate the soul. Virtue makes the soul good and perfect.

Socrates reveals the concept of happiness and the possibilities of achieving it. The source of happiness is not in the body or in anything external, but in the soul, not in enjoying the things of the external material world, but in a feeling of inner fulfillment. A person is happy when his soul is orderly and virtuous.

The soul, according to Socrates, is the mistress of the body, as well as the instincts associated with the body.

Plato (428 or 427 BC - 348 or 347), ancient Greek philosopher. Disciple of Socrates, ca. 387 founded a school in Athens. The main part of Plato's philosophy, which gave the name to the whole direction of philosophy, is the doctrine of ideas (eidos), the existence of two worlds: the world of ideas (eidos) and the world of things, or forms. Ideas (eidos) are prototypes of things, their sources. Ideas (eidos) underlie the entire set of things formed from formless matter. Ideas are the source of everything, but matter itself cannot give rise to anything. The human soul is represented by Plato in the form of a chariot with a rider and two horses, white and black. The driver symbolizes the rational principle in a person, and the horses: white - the noble, highest qualities of the soul, black - passions, desires and the instinctive principle. The second force, no less transformative of a person and capable of raising him to the world of the gods, is Love. In general, the philosopher himself resembles Eros: he also strives to achieve good, he is neither wise nor ignorant, but is an intermediary between one and the other, he does not possess beauty and good and that is why he strives for them. Ideas (the highest among them is the idea of good) are eternal and unchanging intelligible prototypes of things, of all transitory and changeable existence; things are likeness and reflection of ideas. Knowledge is anamnesis - the soul's recollection of the ideas that it contemplated before its union with the body. Love for an idea (Eros) is the motivating reason for spiritual ascent. The ideal state is a hierarchy of three classes: rulers-sages, warriors and officials, peasants and artisans. Plato intensively developed dialectics and outlined the scheme of the main stages of existence developed by Neoplatonism. In the history of philosophy, the perception of Plato has changed: “divine teacher” (antiquity); forerunner of the Christian worldview (Middle Ages); philosopher of ideal love and political utopian (Renaissance).

Plato's works are highly artistic dialogues; the most important of them: “Apology of Socrates”, “Phaedo”, “Symposium”, “Phaedrus” (the doctrine of ideas), “State”, “Theaetetus” (theory of knowledge), “Parmenides” and “Sophist” (dialectics of categories), "Timaeus" (natural philosophy). Ticket 6. Aristotle's philosophy Aristotle. If things really exist, then the ideas of things necessarily exist; so that without an idea a thing does not exist or the thing itself remains unknowable. There is no fundamental separation of the idea of a thing from the thing itself. The idea of a thing is inside the thing itself. The idea of a thing, being something singular, just as the thing itself is singular, is at the same time a generalization of all parts of the thing, is a kind of community.

The generality of a thing necessarily exists in each individual thing, and exists differently each time; but this means that the community of a thing embraces all its separate parts and therefore is the integrity of the thing. The integrity of a thing, when with the removal of one part of the thing the whole thing perishes, is the organism of the thing, in contrast to the mechanism of the thing, when the thing remains integral, despite any removal of its individual parts and their replacement with other parts. An organism is such an integrity of a thing when there are one or several such parts in which the integrity is present substantially. The four-principled structure of every thing as an organism: 1. The eidos (idea) of a thing is its essence, which is located in it itself, and without which it is generally impossible to understand what a given thing is. 2. The matter of a thing is only the very possibility of its formation, and this possibility is infinitely varied. The eidos of a thing is not its matter, and the matter of a thing is not its eidos. Matter is only the possibility of realizing eidos. 3. If things move, and for movement there must be some specific cause of movement, then this means that it is necessary to recognize some kind of self-motion, some reason that is a cause for itself. In being there is a self-propelled cause, and this self-propulsion is one way or another reflected in the real dependence of the movement of one thing on the movement of another thing.

Basic philosophical views. But in addition to theoretical mastery of the material, Aristotle was characterized by their comprehension, addition, and processing. Thinking about the existence of the world in all its manifestations, he names 4 reasons for the existence of any thing or object. In his philosophy, Aristotle briefly and succinctly describes these factors: matter, form, cause and purpose. God, according to his teaching, is immaterial, being himself the prime mover. The goals for each subject of existence are different, the highest goal of the universe is the achievement of the Good - the highest value described by Plato. The purpose of every thing, including a person, is to fulfill its purpose as fully as possible.

If we talk about Aristotle’s philosophy briefly, then its main features can be called the scientist’s attention to the realized, existing world. From this position, he is often compared with Plato, who saw the purpose of man’s earthly stay in the pursuit of the Divine, which he designated by the category “One”. It is believed that with Aristotle and his teacher, two paths of development of European culture took shape: Western - Aristotelianism - with its desire to know God in this world and Eastern - Platonism, characterized by a craving for the sublime, unearthly. Ticket 7 Philosophy of Neoplotonism and Stoicism The founder of Stoicism in philosophy is Zeno from Kitium in Cyprus (c. 333 - 262 BC)..

According to the Stoics, the world is one whole. This integrity is based on universal consistency and necessarily conditioned interconnection. The world, according to Chrysippus, is spherical and located in an endless void, which is incorporeal.

The Stoics believed that everything in nature is in motion. Moreover, in their opinion, there are 3 types of movement: change, spatial movement and tension. Tension is considered as a state of pneuma. Depending on the state of pneuma in bodies, four kingdoms of nature are distinguished: inorganic, flora, fauna and the human world. Pneuma is understood not only as a physical, but also as a spiritual principle. The highest tension of pneuma as a spiritual principle is characteristic of sages. But pneuma is something divine among the Stoics; for them it acts as reason, the logos of the cosmos. The mind of God, in their opinion, is pure fire. For the Stoics, God is the highest rational power that controls everything and gives expediency to everything. The world, according to the Stoics, is dominated by strict necessity. Its manifestation is subject to the will of God.

At the center of the ethical reasoning of the Stoics is not the concept of happiness, but the concept of duty. The Stoics, developing their original ethics, saw duty in the pursuit of moral perfection, which is achieved when a person lives in accordance with nature and submits to fate. Man, the Stoics believed, cannot make this world perfect, but he can create a perfect world within himself, acquire proud dignity, and follow the high demands of morality. The desire for perfection lies in the ways of understanding the world and practicing virtuous behavior. Inner freedom is achieved by recognizing the need to follow the demands of indisputable duty.

The Stoics believed that the path to bliss was equanimity. They paid close attention to the analysis of passions, demanding their subordination to reason. Passions were divided into four types: sadness, fear, lust and pleasure.

Sadness, according to the Stoics, comes in many forms. It can be caused by compassion, envy, jealousy, ill will, anxiety, grief, etc. The Stoics considered fear as a premonition of evil. They understood lust as an unreasonable desire of the soul. Pleasure was perceived by the Stoics as the unreasonable use of desires. The Stoics eschewed pleasure. For them, the ideal was a dispassionate person, an ascetic.

Passions, according to the Stoics, are the source of evil, which can appear in the form of unreason, cowardice, immoderation and injustice.

The Stoic strives to rise above passions. This is achieved by understanding the essence of good and evil, between which, as they believed, lies a vast field of moral indifference.

The Stoics taught moderation, patience, and courageous enduring of the blows of fate. They proclaimed: be a man in both poverty and wealth, maintain your dignity and honor, no matter what it costs you, if fate has destined you for poverty, ill health, homelessness, endure them without groaning, if you are rich, handsome, smart, be moderate in the use of these benefits, remember that tomorrow you may find yourself poor, sick, persecuted.

The largest representatives of middle Stoicism are Panetius (about 185 - 110/109 BC) and Posidonius (135 - 51 BC). They softened the rigorism of the original Stoicism.

NEOPLATONISM is the last stage in the development of ancient Platonism, the fundamental novelty of which in comparison with average Platonism should be considered the recognition of the super-existential nature of the origin and the identity of mind-being as its first manifestation, which was first clearly presented in the philosophy of Plotinus (3rd century). Neoplatonism closes middle Platonism, absorbs neo-Pythagoreanism and, starting with Plotinus’s student Porphyry, uses Aristotelianism as an introduction - ch.o. logical - in the teachings of Plato. Ancient Neoplatonism gravitated towards a school organization and existed primarily in the form of a number of schools, focused primarily on the interpretation of Plato’s dialogues and the systematization of his teachings. True, Plotinus’s school in Rome was a circle of listeners that disbanded during the teacher’s lifetime. Nevertheless, it was Plotinus and his students Amelius and Porphyry who developed the basic concepts of the system of Neoplatonism: at the head of the hierarchy of being is the super-existent single good, understandable only in super-mental ecstasy and expressible only by means of negative (apophatic) theology; further, in the order of revelation of the one and as its main manifestations (hypostases) in the sphere of being (cf. Emanation), there follows being-mind (nus) with ideas in it, soul (psyche), turned to the mind and to the sensory cosmos, eternal in its temporary existence (third hypostasis). However, Plotinus's school still lacked clear foundations for the interpretation of Plato's dialogues. Amelius, for example, carried out a triple division of the mind and taught about three minds and three demiurges, believing that these were the “three kings” of Plato’s 2nd “Letter”, while Plotinus understood the “three kings” as one, mind and soul . Porfiry, unlike Plotinus and Amelius, believed that Plato’s demiurge can be understood not as the mind, but as the soul.

Ticket.8Philosophy of Epicureanism A widely known destination in philosophy The Hellenistic era was Epicureanism. Its ancestor Epicurus (c. 342/341 - 270/271 BC) was born on the island of Samos. The thinker's works have reached us incompletely in the form of several letters and a significant number of fragments from his works.

Epicurus understood philosophy as an activity that gives people, through reflection, a happy life devoid of suffering. The goal of his philosophy is not to change the world, but to adapt to it.

The philosophy of Epicurus is divided into three parts The main one is ethics, which teaches how to achieve happiness. The second part of philosophy is physics. It gives insight into the natural world, frees us from fear of it, and serves as a basis for ethics. Both of these parts are based on the canon, a kind of theory of knowledge and methodology of science, which acts as the third part. According to Epicurus, knowledge is possible on the basis of sensations. Repeated sensations, sinking deeply into human consciousness, form concepts. Epicurus considered feelings as infallible, and deduced errors from incorrect judgments.

In physics, Epicurus proceeded from the recognition of the eternity and uncreateability of the world. He, following Democritus, adhered to the idea of the atomic structure of matter. Pointing to knowledge as a means of subordinating necessity to reason acting person, Epicurus thereby pointed out the real way to rise above necessity, to subordinate it to one’s interests. This circumstance allowed the philosopher to consider a person in the world not as a puppet, but as a free creator of his actions, his destiny. In other words, in the knowledge of phenomena that occur due to necessity and chance, Epicurus sees the path to freedom.

Prudence as a human ability is formed during education. It frees a person from boundless absurd passions and fear, which is an indispensable and first condition for acquiring the ability to think happily and avoid unhappiness. Epicurus believed that the achievement of happiness should involve freeing a person from the bonds of social activity, meaning participation in political activity.

Elaborating on Ethical Issues, which occupies a dominant place in Epicurus’s system of philosophizing, and comparing the state of ataraxia and serenity with happiness, Serenity (ataraxia) for him is only a condition for one of the types of pleasures, which he divided into active and passive or the pleasures of peace. The latter are, according to Epicurus, the result of serenity. Achieving happiness involves the realization of numerous desires. The philosopher believed that an error-free combination of desires when choosing a line of behavior largely depends on the individual himself. According to Epicurus, the organization happy life requires not the free manifestation of knowledge, but its clear implementation within predetermined limits. In other words, one must observe moderation in realizing desires and receiving pleasures. The latter can be obtained only if measures are taken in needs that are realized in desires. The problem of pleasure occupies a special place in the ethics of Epicurus. In it, the thinker recognized that pleasure is the highest for a person. This point of view is characteristic of hedonistic ethics. In this case, pleasure is recognized as the beginning and end of a happy life. Epicurus associated pleasure with the absence of pain. Epicurus understood pleasure as the line beyond which suffering begins. Moderation in everything, including pleasures, is considered by the thinker as an independent and significant good. According to the philosopher, one who is accustomed to moderation will not suffer when there is not much and one has to be content with little. Epicurus included among the most important conditions for a happy life, first of all, such seemingly elementary, but extremely important needs for maintaining life, as the need for food and warmth. In his opinion, the satisfaction of these needs gives rise to the most pleasant pleasures.

Question 9. Philosophy of ancient skepticism

Skepticism arises as a trend in philosophy, obviously due to the collapse of some educated people's hopes for the previous claims of philosophy. At the core of skepticism is a position based on doubt about the existence of any reliable criterion of truth.

By focusing on the relativity of human knowledge, skepticism played a positive role in the fight against various forms of dogmatism. Within the framework of skepticism, a number of problems of the dialectics of knowledge were posed. However, skepticism also had other consequences, since unbridled doubt about the possibilities of knowing the world led to pluralism in the understanding of social norms, to unprincipled opportunism, servility, on the one hand, and disregard for human institutions, on the other.

Skepticism is contradictory in nature; it prompted some to an in-depth search for truth, and others to militant ignorance and immorality.

The founder of skepticism was Pyrrho of Elis (c. 360 - 270 BC). The philosophy of the skeptics came to us thanks to the works of Sextus Empiricus. His works give us an idea of the ideas of the skeptics Pyrrho, Timon, Carneades, Clitomachus, Aenesidemus.

According to the teachings of Pyrrho, a philosopher is a person who strives for happiness. It, in his opinion, lies only in equanimity, combined with the absence of suffering.

Anyone who wants to achieve happiness must answer three questions:

what things are made of;

how they should be treated;

what benefit we are able to obtain from our attitude towards them.

Pyrrho believed that no answer could be given to the first question, just as it could not be asserted that something definite exists. Moreover, any statement about any subject can with equal right be contrasted with a statement that contradicts it.

From the recognition of the impossibility of unambiguous statements about things, Pyrrho derived the answer to the second question: the philosophical attitude towards things consists in abstaining from any judgments. This is explained by the fact that our sensory perceptions, although reliable, cannot be adequately expressed in judgments. This answer also predetermines the answer to the third question: the benefit and benefit arising from abstaining from all kinds of judgments consists of equanimity or serenity. This state, called ataraxia, based on the renunciation of knowledge, is considered by skeptics as the highest level of bliss.

The efforts of the skeptics Pyrrho, Aenesidemus and Agrippina, aimed at shackling human curiosity with doubt and slowing down the movement along the path of progressive development of knowledge, were in vain. The future, which seemed to skeptics as a terrible punishment for believing in the omnipotence of knowledge, nevertheless came and none of their warnings could stop it.

Question 10. Philosophy of patristics.

A characteristic feature of the stage of medieval philosophy patristics (2nd–8th centuries), is that thinkers, in order to confirm their ideas turn to the most authoritative and ancient source - the Bible.

Patristics is the direct successor of the apostolic tradition, which has the highest after Old Testament authority. The philosophy created by the apostolic tradition is the first in Christianity. And due to the traditionalism of thinking of the representatives of patristics, it is considered as a prototype of any future philosophizing and its classic example. Based on this, they construct their works as explanations of individual provisions of the Old and New Testaments.

A feature of the writings of the church fathers of the patristic period is that, along with knowledge of the texts of the Holy Scriptures, they reflect all the richness and diversity of ancient philosophy. Patristics created a tradition that found its continuation in scholasticism. This makes it possible to consider patristics and scholasticism as phenomena of the same order, firstly, due to their common method of philosophizing, and secondly, due to their reliance on the same principles that mediate the content of philosophical works. These principles include:

theocentrism (monotheism) - recognition of God as the source of all things;

creationism - recognition that God created everything out of nothing;

providentialism - recognition that God is in control of everything;

personalism - recognition that man is a “person”, created by God in his own image and endowed with a conscience;

Relationism - the recognition that the most reliable way of knowing the most important truths for a person is to comprehend the meaning of the Holy Scriptures;

eschatology – the history of mankind is the struggle to save the world, as man turns away from God;

the dual nature of Jesus Christ - both God (works miracles) and man (possesses a human body).

At the stage of patristics, a great contribution to the development of philosophy was made by such fathers of the Christian church as: Tertullian (160 - 220), Origen (c. 185 - 253/254), Cyprian of Carthage (after 200 - 258), Eusebius Pamphilus (c. 260 - 339), Athanasius the Great (295 - 373), Gregory the Theologian (Nazianzen) (329/330 - 390), Basil the Great (c. 330 - 379), Ambrose of Milan (333/334 - 397), Gregory of Nyssa (335 - after 394), Jerome of Stridon (347 - 419/420), Augustine the Blessed (354 - 430), etc.

The range of problems that interested representatives of patristics was wide. And yet it remained in the foreground the problem of man and his structure in the world. What was significant here was the problem of the relationship between knowledge and faith. Priority was given to faith. At the same time, knowledge was often seen as a means to strengthen faith. Another important issue discussed during the patristic period and later is the problem of free will. At the same time, some medieval philosophers denied free will, others allowed it, but limited it to the possible intervention of God, and others defended the idea that people are free in their will, but the world is not free from the will of God.

Another widely discussed set of issues related to ethics. One of them was the problem of good and evil in the world. Many Christian philosophers of the patristic period believed that evil in the world has its source in the deeds of people, which are the realization of their free will, affected by errors. Other thinkers saw the source of evil in the machinations of the devil.

Ancient Greek Philosophy: Cynics, Skeptics, Stoics and Epicureans

When we turn to philosophy and its postulates, we usually do not think about the path this science has taken, where it originated and how it developed. And most importantly - what was the reason for its appearance.

Throughout life, man has always been driven by curiosity; he wanted to know what was there, beyond the forest, beyond the horizon, beyond the clouds.

However, one could simply observe the events taking place with curiosity and take them for granted, or one could do it “differently.”

“In a different way” meant not just to look, but to see and try to analyze, not only to state certain events, but to try to figure out and understand why they happened, what are the reasons for certain events, phenomena, actions, and what can be their consequences.

Well, let's go into history, which tells us that the word “philosophy” itself (φιλοσοφία), according to dictionaries, has ancient Greek roots and literally means: “love of wisdom.”

Curiosity has always been the source of knowledge of the world and its laws, and it was the Greeks who succeeded in this.

However, in fairness, it is worth noting that the foundations of philosophy were laid in the so-called pre-Greek period.

As confirmed historical sources, already in the 6th century. BC Chinese and Indian sages demonstrated to those in power the foundations of philosophical thinking, that is, knowledge of the world, but the treatises of ancient philosophers can be “counted on one hand,” and they do not give a complete picture of the development of philosophical thinking during this period in the East.

As for Ancient Greece, it was here that philosophy spread and gained incredible popularity.

Among the European cultures of Ancient Greece, priority was rightfully given to the study of the laws of natural development and the political structure of society, because it was on Greek soil that outstanding philosophers laid the foundations for the democratic structure of social life, confirming its progressiveness and “social usefulness”; here the concepts of knowledge of the world were formed.

To study the structure of the world, philosophical schools were created in Ancient Greece, each of which chose its own method of understanding the world and declared it the most productive and correct.

"Pre-Socratic" period Greek philosophy

The early period of the development of philosophy in Greece (VI century BC) is usually called “pre-Socratic”. As is already clear from its name, classical Greek philosophy arose later with the entry into the “philosophical arena” of Socrates. The most famous "pre-Socratic" philosophers were Pythagoras, Thales, Zeno and Democritus. Appearance classical philosophy- still to come.

In the meantime, they are struggling with the question that will allow them to lay the foundations of classical philosophy: “What is being?”, and each builds their own model of the world and its knowledge.

But if we are familiar with the names of Democritus (and with the latter - to a greater extent as a mathematician rather than a philosopher), then the names of Thales and Zeno are hardly familiar to those who have not been deeply involved in the study of philosophy.

So it is to Thales that we owe the opportunity to get acquainted with various complex phenomena by breaking them down into simple components.

It was Thales, when studying the world around him, who suggested that all complex and even difficult-to-explain phenomena will become completely understandable if you know with the help of what simple laws they exist. This method of studying the world is called reductionism.

By the way, he used this method and, together with another “pre-Socratic”, Leucippus, became the author of the theory of atomism, proving that all complex objects of this world consist of atoms, which at that time could be considered the smallest and simplest unit, both philosophical and physical.

As for Zeno, in his philosophical treatises and discussions about the surrounding world, he argued that the concepts of set, movement and space contradict each other, but it is precisely on these contradictions that it is possible to prove the principles of their existence in the surrounding world.

Each “pre-Socratic” had his own school, headed it and gathered under his banner those who shared his point of view on the world around him and were ready to defend it in philosophical debates and discussions with representatives of other schools.

Notable contributions to the development of philosophy pre-Socratic period contributed by Diogenes Apollonian, Heraclitus and other philosophers.

Philosophical school of Socrates

The time of Socrates came in the 4th century. BC uh.. It is he who owns the formation philosophical concept, implying a transition from consideration and study of the surrounding world to man.

During the time of Socrates, philosophical schools appeared, the object of study of which was man.

The most ardent and famous supporters of Socrates were his students Xenophon and Plato. It was thanks to the philosophical works of Plato, which almost completely reached modern researchers, that it became possible to judge the formation and development of classical philosophy in Ancient Greece. The theory of ideas developed and developed by him and his students belongs to Plato.

Cynics

One of the students and champions of the theories developed was Antisthenes of Athens, who subsequently opened his own philosophical school, the most famous student of which was Diogenes of Sinope.

Antisthenes became the creator of a philosophical movement called Cynicism, and the followers of this movement began to be called Cynics.

The essence of the concept of cynicism, developed by Antisthenes, directly contradicted generally accepted views on human life, as well as the necessary and sufficient conditions for a happy life.

According to cynics, a person does not need much to be happy. And he is unhappy because he has surrounded himself with a mass of unnecessary things, created various types of conventions that complicate and poison his own life, therefore, in order to live well, it is necessary to free himself from these conventions and behave like a dog, which is characterized by courage and gratitude, the ability to “stand up for yourself” and be content with little.

The Cynics so ardently defended the postulates of their school that after the death of the best student of the school, Antisthenes Diogenes of Sinope, a marble sculpture of a dog was installed on his grave as a monument.

The Cynics considered the main object of their concepts to be man with his demands and needs, joys and sorrows. In their opinion, a person has too much extra, unnecessary things in life, which only interferes with living happily.

The closer to nature, the simpler and more “natural”, the happier life will be; to be happy, you don’t need to theorize: only practical skills and habits necessary for basic existence - these are the philosophical conclusions of the Cynics.

Society is not able to give a person anything good, but only nature is the only source of a person’s happy life.

Another postulate of the Cynics was the dominant role of subjectivism: the subject, the individual (person) with his own habits, views and attitudes is important. An individual has the right, as the cynics believed, to reject social attitudes and demands if they suppress the personality, his will, and the desire for independence.

As for Antisthenes himself, his desire for an extremely simple life, not burdened with excesses, gave rise to the image of a wandering beggar with a cloak thrown over his naked body, a staff that was used as a weapon of defense, and a beggar’s bag for alms. It was this attire that distinguished the Cynics from other philosophers.

It is worth noting that the individualistic concept of the Cynics and their “equipment” were adopted by people who were not law-abiding, as well as by those who, not possessing high moral principles, embarrassed others with their shocking appearance, while receiving great pleasure. Calling themselves Cynics, they nevertheless had nothing in common with philosophers. It is no coincidence that over time such people acquired a new name, consonant with the original, but transformed - cynics.

It is interesting that the postulates of the Cynics were at one time adopted by Nietzsche and Schopenhauer, who turned “individual freedom” into “free will of the individual” - between these two concepts there was a “distance of enormous size”, and the new theory gave birth to “monsters of history”.

Skeptics

Another philosophical direction of classical Greek philosophy was skepticism (translated from ancient Greek as “exploring”, “considering”), and those professing the postulates of skepticism began to be called skeptics.

They considered doubt to be a unique method of cognition, while in philosophy it was about doubting the reliability of truth. What is called into question gives rise to the need to study, consider the truth from all sides and search for reliable facts that repeatedly confirm the truth.

On the wave of doubts, a mass of all kinds of directions of skepticism appeared: from philosophical to everyday; from moderate to aggressive.

It was believed that moderate skepticism is a reliable weapon in the fight against dogmatists who do not bother to empirically (practically) confirm the formulated dogmas.

Any versions and theories, according to skeptics, must be tested. The truth must be confirmed - nothing can be taken on faith (as with dogmatists).

It should be noted that initially skepticism had positive value in the development of philosophical thought, as it forced us to look for variants of the truth of this or that statement. Truth was not taken for granted, but over time, skeptics, so to speak, moved from the practical plane of searching for truth to the theoretical, which led to the fact that any theoretical assumption was not only questioned, but the very possibility of finding truth was denied.

The requirement to seek truth empirically over time turned into empty moralizing and denial of everything that cannot be verified in practice.

The position of skeptics is neutral observation of the course of life, dispassionate acceptance of everything that happens in it, including suffering - this, according to the founder of skepticism, Perron, writer and philosopher, is the way to achieve happiness.

Perron and his supporters argued that skepticism was based on two postulates, the first of which formulated happiness as tranquility, and the second of life as the result of the first.

Perron formulated a series of questions that were supposed to prove that skepticism should be the basis of human happiness.

He himself gave answers to these same questions:

1) What are the qualities of things? “We don’t know what these qualities are.”

2) How should you behave towards things? - It is best to refrain from discussing this topic.

3) What could be the consequences of our behavior towards things? - Happiness can only come from abstinence. It also gives peace.

Despite the positive aspects of the theory, skepticism in a fairly short time became a destructive philosophical trend.

Skeptics fostered criticism and negativism with their postulates, which in turn gave rise to disbelief and denial of the obvious and positive.

Stoics

In their perception of the world and understanding of happiness, the Stoics turned out to be quite close to the skeptics in a number of ways.

The founder of the Stoic philosophical school, Zeno of Citium, held meetings of students of his school near the portico of the “Picturesque Stoa”, hence its name.

The Stoics believed that all people are children of the Cosmos, which means that they are all equal and have equal opportunities for self-knowledge. Moreover, every person is a receptacle of virtue.

However, the fate of people, “children of the Cosmos,” is completely in his power. Therefore, the main task is to live in harmony with nature and oneself, since a person himself cannot change anything in this life.

According to the Stoics, a society can be considered harmonious, where ALL people live in complete harmony, remembering that good ennobles, and evil leads to death. However, any person must act in accordance with his own perception of the world and his desires.

The path to inner freedom is the renunciation of pleasures and the suppression of passions.

The understanding of death from the point of view of the Stoics is interesting. They did not consider it evil, but on the contrary, they believed that it was the most appropriate way out for those who could not leave a worthy mark in this life. In this case, death is a kind of atonement for the evil that man did on earth.

Epicureans

More than 70 years after the death of the great ancient philosopher Plato, the philosopher Epicurus opened his school.

Epicurus himself and his followers and students called themselves “garden philosophers”: everything was simple - the Epicureans gathered for their meetings in the garden bought by their teacher. It was a philosophical school whose doors were open to both women and slaves.

The inscription on the school gate, which said that everyone who enters its doors will feel good, because pleasure is the greatest good, encouraged the search for happiness and deliverance from suffering.

According to the Epicureans, it is possible to achieve harmony and happiness by getting rid of fears, be it fear of the gods or death. They believed that happiness could be achieved and evil could be overcome. To achieve harmony, a person must limit his needs, be prudent and balanced.

The Epicurean philosophers did not consider man a hostage to fate (fate) and believed that to be happy he needed friends, peace of mind and the absence of physical suffering, and they considered life itself to be the main pleasure of this world.

1. The relationship between philosophical doubt and skepticism
2. Skepticism
3. The evolution of ancient skepticism
4. General principle of skepticism

The relationship between philosophical doubt and skepticism

To some extent, skepticism is always present in philosophy, and in this sense, philosophy itself is a consequence of skepticism, that is, doubt about the truth of traditional views on the nature of things. Therefore, moderate skepticism or “methodological” skepticism is an indispensable condition for the very possibility of philosophy.

On the other hand, the nature of such a great phenomenon as philosophical doubt can only purely psychologically resemble “moderate skepticism.” In its essence, it is rather akin to faith, for the philosophical so-called. doubt is that internal, absolutely inseparable, immanent attraction of thought that constitutes philosophical thought as a phenomenon that occupies a completely independent place among other types of human thought and cannot be reduced to anything else. It has a deeply positive pathos (tonoV) of mastering the Unknown through difficulties, aporias, and the selfless intensification of philosophical research. The doubt of such a skeptic, oddly enough, has the character of self-confidence and, therefore, results in calmness and firmness of spirit within oneself, in which there is no touch of sadness and which are the direct opposite of doubt. This is equanimity professed by skepticism.

Skepticism

But here we will talk about fundamental skepticism. He is distinguished by his consistency in skepticism, bringing his skeptical conclusions to their logical conclusion. And its end is doubt in the possibility of mental life itself in general.

Ancient skepticism - the 3rd philosophical direction of the Hellenistic era - existed from the end. IV century BC e. to the 3rd century n. e. It was a reaction to the philosophy of the Stoics, and to a lesser extent, Epicureanism. The largest representatives of this trend are Pyrrho (360–270 BC), Carneades (c. 214–129 BC), Sextus Empiricus (2nd half of the 2nd century).

Based on Heraclitus’s provisions on the variability, fluidity of the world, and the lack of clear certainty in it, skeptics come to the conclusion that it is impossible to achieve objective knowledge about the world, and, consequently, the impossibility of a rational justification for the norms of human behavior. The only correct line of behavior in these conditions is abstinence from judgment (epoch, εποχή) as a means of achieving ataraxia (equanimity towards everything external). But since it is practically impossible to live in a state of absolute silence and inaction, then wise man must live in accordance with laws, customs or prudence, recognizing, however, that such behavior is not based on any firm conviction. Greek skepticism was not, unlike cynicism, a practical philosophy of life. It represented only a skeptical philosophical reaction to the teachings of other schools of thought.

The evolution of ancient skepticism

The founder of Greek skepticism was Pyrrho. In his opinion, the knowledge gained by Plato, Aristotle and others was in vain, since no one can be completely confident in their knowledge of the world. Knowledge of the world consists of judgments, but at the same time, too strong a connection of judgments to the concepts they designate raises doubts about their truth. Consequently, the truth of judgments cannot be proven; “things-in-themselves” exist separately from our attempts to describe them. – In many respects, skepticism can be seen as a return, in the next round of development, to the philosopher who gave the initial impetus to this development, namely Socrates. Socrates was the first to proclaim that the wisest are those who know that they know nothing. The philosophical enthusiasm of Socrates inspired Plato and Aristotle to create bold theories, so in a sense, the goal of the skeptics can be considered to remind posterity of the behests of the great teacher.

Subsequently, skepticism of the Pyrrhonian type fades away somewhat, and the so-called skepticism appears in Plato’s Academy. academic skepticism with such representatives as Carneades and Arcesilaus - this is the 2nd century. BC Pyrrhonian skepticism (Pyrrhonism) is revived in Aenesidemus and Agrippa (1st century BC, the works of these philosophers have not survived). The representative of late ancient skepticism was the philosopher-physician Sextus Empiricus. In the III–IV centuries. the school still exists, and elements of skepticism can be found in the physician Galen.

General principle of skepticism

The general mode of reasoning of skepticism consists, as Sextus Empiricus puts it, in the ability to show that any statement has the same value and significance as its opposite, and therefore contributes nothing to positive or negative belief. Thanks to this, abstinence from approval arises, according to which we do not choose anything and do not deny anything, and from this abstinence then arises freedom from any mental movement. The principle of skepticism is therefore the following proposition: every reason is opposed by an equally strong opposite reason.

Separating the sensible and the conceivable, skepticism, in an argument against them, can seem to win; however, the idea is neither one nor the other, and it does not touch the realm of the rational at all. The misunderstanding caused by skepticism in the minds of those who do not know the nature of the idea consists precisely in this, that they believe that the true must necessarily be clothed in one form or another, and that it is therefore either a certain concept or a certain being. In fact, skepticism does not fight against the concept as a concept, that is, against the absolute concept, but, on the contrary, the absolute concept is precisely the weapon of skepticism, and it is just not aware of it.

So, although skepticism pursued a seemingly negative goal, it had a positive influence, since it forced serious attention to the problem of the truth and reliability of knowledge, which was of utmost importance for the development of philosophy.

Skepticism (from the Greek skeptikos - considering, exploring) is a philosophical direction that puts forward doubt as a principle of thinking, especially doubt about the reliability of truth. Moderate skepticism is limited to knowledge of facts, showing restraint in relation to all hypotheses and theories. In the ordinary sense, skepticism is a psychological state of uncertainty, doubt about something, forcing one to refrain from making categorical judgments.

Ancient skepticism as a reaction to the metaphysical dogmatism of previous philosophical schools represented, first of all, by Pyrrho, then by the secondary and new academies (Arkesilaus), etc. late skepticism (Sextus Empiricus and others).

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

1) Older Pyrrhonism, developed by Pyrrho himself (c. 360-270 BC) and his student Timon of Phlius, dates back to the 3rd century. BC e. At that time, skepticism was of a purely practical nature: its core was ethics, and dialectics was only the outer shell; from many points of view, it was a doctrine similar to early Stoicism and Epicureanism.

2) Academicism. As a matter of fact, during the period when the series of Pyrrho’s students was interrupted, the skeptical trend dominated the Academy; this was in the 3rd and 2nd centuries. BC e. "in the Middle Academy", the most prominent representatives of which were Arcesilaus (315-240) and Carneades (214-129 BC).

3) Younger Pyrrhonism found its supporters when skepticism left the walls of the Academy. Studying the work of representatives of the Academy more than late period, it can be seen that they systematized skeptical argumentation. The original ethical position faded into the background, and epistemological criticism came to the fore. The main representatives of this period were Aenesidemus and Agrippa. Skepticism gained many supporters in this last period among doctors of the “empirical” school, among whom was Sextus Empiricus.

Losev A.F. calls the earliest stage of skepticism, led by Pyrrho, intuitive-relativistic. Skepticism subsequently developed within Plato's Academy. For the first time we find skeptical teaching from the head of the Secondary Academy Arkesilaus. This is the direction Losev A.F. calls it intuitive-probabilistic. It was further developed by the head of the New Academy, Carneades. This period is called reflective-probabilistic. This academic skepticism gradually weakened and turned into eclecticism, which is known from Philo of Larissa and Antiochus of Ascalon (II-I centuries BC), who headed the so-called Fourth and Fifth Academy. A more solid and consistent position of skepticism is occupied by a distant follower and renewer of Pyrrhonism, the skeptic of the 1st century. BC Aenesidemus, whose skepticism is called systematic, or reflective-relativistic.

It was followed by the logical-relativistic skepticism of Agrippa and Menodotus (1st century AD) and the skepticism of Sextus Empiricus and Saturninus is considered the final completion of ancient skepticism, or absolute skepticism, which borders on nihilism, although it is far from being reduced to it. II-III centuries AD).

CHAPTER 2. PHILOSOPHICAL TEACHINGS OF ANCIENT SKEPTISM

Skepticism is a characteristic feature of all ancient philosophy; As an independent philosophical direction, it functions during the period of relevance of Stoicism and Epicureanism. The largest representatives are Pyrrho and Sextus Empiricus.

Pyrrho and his school

The first to introduce skepticism into the system and give it an ethical coloring was Pyrrho of Elis (c. 360 BC - 280 BC), whose activities date back to the emergence of the Stoic and Epicurean schools; but this activity consisted mainly of personal teaching, while the literary representative of his direction was his student Timon of Phlius. But the very content of this teaching determined that it did not lead to a close school union; and therefore it disappears with the next generation.

The founder of ancient skepticism, Pyrrho, considered a philosopher to be someone who strives for happiness. Little is known about Pyrrho's life. It is not unlikely that in his homeland he became acquainted with Alido-Arthrian, as well as Megarian sophistry; whether this happened through the mediation of Brison, who was allegedly the son of Stilpon, remains under great doubt. A reliable date is the fact that he, together with Anaxarchus, a follower of Democritus, participated in Alexander’s campaign in Asia. He subsequently lived and taught in his home town; nothing is known about his writings.

If we are talking about a skeptical school, then by the very essence of the matter it is not an organized union for scientific work, like the four other schools; although Greek historians here also establish diadochi, both for this and for subsequent times it should be assumed that they meant only the most significant representatives of the skeptical way of thinking. First of all, Timon belongs to them, who lived approximately between 220-230, finally settling in Athens, from whose extensive literary activity, mainly fragments of his works have been preserved in “mocking poems” in which he ridiculed philosophers.

Pyrrho's teaching is called Pyrrhonism. This name is meaningfully identified with skepticism. Skeptics doubted everything, refuted the dogmas of other schools, but did not affirm anything themselves. Skeptics denied the truth of any knowledge and rejected any evidence.

The direct origin of Pyrrhonism from sophistry is reflected partly in the fact that it relies on Protagoras’ relativism, and partly in its reproduction of the skeptical arguments of the Cynic and Megarian teachings. In view of the relativity of both perceptions and concepts, Pyrrho argues that if the senses and reason, taken separately, are misleading, then much less can truth be expected from the combined action of these two deceivers.

Perception presents things to us not as they are, but as they are as a result of accidental relations; nevertheless, concepts, not excluding ethical ones, are conventional and do not follow from natural necessity. Therefore, along with each statement, one can defend its opposite: of contradictory propositions, one is worth no more than the other; therefore, one should not speak confidently about anything and should refrain from judgment. Since we know nothing about things, they are indifferent to us: whoever constantly refrains from judgment is not subject to mental disturbances arising from erroneous ideas. The moral value of abstaining from judgment lies in the fact that it alone leads to ataraxia, which for skeptics is a moral ideal.

Same value, given to ataraxia by both Epicurus and Pyrrho, in connection with a decisive aversion to scientific research, suggests that both teachings have a common source in the ideas of the younger followers of Democritus, some Anaxarchus and Nauzifan; but still nothing can be said for sure about this. It is obvious that the Democritus' worldview, rather than teleological systems, should have contributed to the development of quiet morality; but both the hedonic direction and the one-sided development of Protagoras’ relativism, which for Democritus was only a secondary aspect of his teaching, can only be noted as a falling away from Democritus and a return to sophistry.

Skeptics come to the conclusion that feelings themselves do not carry truth. The senses cannot judge themselves, and therefore they cannot determine whether they are true or false. That is, we can say that this or that object is red or green, sweet or bitter, but we do not know what it really is. He's like that only for us. According to Piron, any statement we make about any subject can be countered with equal right and with equal force by a statement that contradicts it.

From the impossibility of making any statements about any objects, Pyrrho concludes that the only appropriate way for a philosopher to relate to things can only be to refrain from making any judgments about them. If we refrain from all judgments about things, then we will achieve equanimity (ataraxia), which is highest degree happiness accessible to the philosopher.

Examples from his personal life are given as an illustration of the serene peace necessary for correct skepticism. Pyrrho, being with his students on a ship during a storm, gave them as an example a pig, which at that time was calmly devouring its food, when all the passengers were unusually worried and afraid of disaster. This is how imperturbable, in his opinion, a true sage should be...

Equally important, and perhaps even more important, was the ethical area of Pyrrhonian skepticism. Although Pyrrho himself did not write anything, enough material has reached us both about his skepticism in general and about the ethical section of his philosophy. A number of terms are important here, which, with the light hand of Pyrrho, became widespread throughout subsequent philosophy.

This is the term "epoche", which meant "abstinence" from all judgment. Since we know nothing, then, according to Pyrrho, we should refrain from making any judgments. For all of us, Pyrrho said, everything is “indifferent,” “adiaphoron,” is another popular term, and not only among skeptics. As a result of abstaining from all judgments, we must act only as everyone usually does, according to the morals and orders in our country.

Therefore, Pyrrho used two more terms here that can only amaze anyone who is studying ancient philosophy for the first time and has a desire to delve into the essence of ancient skepticism. These are the terms "ataraxia", "equanimity", and "apatheia", "insensibility", "dispassion". This last term is ignorantly translated by some as “absence of suffering.” This is exactly how it should be internal state a sage who refused a reasonable explanation of reality and a reasonable attitude towards it.

Plato's skepticism

Usually Plato's successors (academics) are divided into the Old, Middle and New Academy. (Some also accept the 4th and even the 5th academy).

The New Academy, which is a continuation of Plato's Academy, first opposes Stoic and Epicurean dogmatism. The most significant figures were Arcesilaus and Carneades.

The founding of the Middle Academy is attributed to Arcesilaus, the New Academy represents the views of Carneades. Both, however, are related to skepticism, and the skeptics themselves found it difficult to indicate the difference between their point of view and the academic one. Representatives of skepticism already considered both of these philosophers to be skeptics, but they still made some kind of distinction between academics and pure skeptics.

During the period of dominance of the Middle and New Academy, pure Pyrrhonism already fell silent, and fell silent for a long time, almost a century and a half. But in the 1st century. BC, when academic skepticism is already becoming obsolete, coming into contact with the dogmatic systems it criticizes itself, and above all with the system of Stoicism, Pyrrhonism reappears on the scene, but now not in such a naked and naive form as it was initially, in the person of Aenesidemus and other skeptics, and it appears in the form of a fairly developed system, the completion of which will be in the 2nd-3rd centuries. AD Sextus Empiricus.

Arcesilaus (315-240 BC) - ancient Greek philosopher, head of the second (Secondary) academy. He represented a different type of personality than the respected Pyrrho and the sarcastic Timon; he was the type of skeptic - a secular man, and as such, grace must have been the dominant feature of his thinking. Arcesilaus was a man who knew how to organize his life, was a lover of beauty, art and poetry, and was known for his independent and chivalrous character.

He gave the school a skeptical direction, preaching “abstinence from judgment” (epoche); only the probable, he believed, was within the achievable range, and was sufficient for life.

Having received a thorough education and having listened to conversations between the peripatetic Theophrastus and the academician Crantor, he developed, under the influence of the philosophy of Pyrrho, a special skeptical worldview that refuted the teachings of the Stoics and consisted in the fact that (in the world) there is no indisputable criterion for determining truth and that any position can be disputed by those or other arguments that also seem probable; therefore, the achievement of the absolutely true is inaccessible to human consciousness, and, therefore, it is necessary to limit ourselves to the probable alone, which, according to the teachings of Arcesilaus, is quite sufficient for our practical activity.

Under Arcesilaus, a new phase began in the development of the school. He used the ironic method of Socrates and Plato in a new skeptical spirit, for a massive and unyielding attack on the Stoics. Of the two, one thing: either the Stoic sage must agree that he has only opinions, or, if it is given, only the sage knows the truth, he must be an “akataleptic”, i.e. dissenter, and therefore a skeptic. While the Stoic recommended “suspension of judgment” only in cases of lack of evidence, Arcesilaus generalizes: “nothing is absolutely obvious.”

The term "epoche" was most likely discovered by Arcesilaus, and not by Pyrrho, precisely in the heat of the anti-Stoic controversy. Pyrrho, however, already spoke about “adoxia”, i.e. about non-participation in judgment. It is clear that the Stoics had to react vividly to Arcesilaus’s attempt to radically shake the concept of “consent,” without which it is impossible to solve existential problems and action is impossible. To this Arcesilaus responded with the argument of “eulogon,” or prudence. - It is not true that as a result of withholding judgment, moral action becomes impossible. In fact, the Stoics, when explaining generally accepted actions, spoke of “duty”, which has its own basis.

And skeptics say that it is quite appropriate to perform a duty without absolute certainty of the truth. Moreover, whoever is able to act intelligently is happy, and happiness is special case wisdom (phronesis). So it turns out that Stoicism, from within itself, is led to recognize the absurdity of claims to moral superiority.

Arcesilaus is credited with "esoteric dogmatism" next to "exoteric skepticism", i.e. He was a skeptic to the public, but a dogmatist to his students and confidants within the walls of the Academy. However, our sources only allow us to speculate.

Thus, for Arcesilaus, who does not recognize any reasonable evidence, the criterion of truth is only practical reasonableness, which either indicates the success of the enterprise or does not indicate it. In other words, instead of Pyrrhon's pure and unconditional relativity, Arcesilaus (and this remains his Platonic trait) still recommends understanding sensory fluidity and choosing from it what creates success for a person. This vitally practical success, which is never completely reliable, is for him the criterion of truth. Therefore, we would call Arcesilaus's skepticism practical-probabilistic, utilitarian-probabilistic, or directly, intuitively given probability.

Something of Plato's doctrine of reason remains here, of course. However, it is strongly relativized here, namely to the degree of practical probability. This is pragmatic-probabilistic skepticism.

Carneades (b. 214 BC, Cyrene, North Africa - d. 129 BC, Athens) - Greek philosopher, founder of the new, or third Academy.

Arriving in 156 BC. e. to Rome and while living there, he studied philosophy, developed extreme skepticism and denied knowledge and the possibility of final proof. As the first theorist of the concept of probability, he distinguishes between three degrees of probability:

· ideas are only probable for those who adhere to them;

· representations are credible and not disputed by those concerned;

· the ideas are absolutely indisputable.

Carneades's strongest requirement in relation to the probability he sets is that from a simple statement of the singularity of the representation, we must move on to the analysis of all other moments that are in one way or another involved in the single representation we are studying. In other words, the highest criterion of truth lies in such probability, which is established and studied in connection with all other objects adjacent to it, which can either reveal its truth, or violate this truth, or even completely exclude it.

At the same time, Carneades understands perfectly well that in his doctrine of the three criteria of truth, he, strictly speaking, has in mind only one single criterion, namely probability, but not that direct and uncritical one, not that too intuitive one that Arcesilaus spoke about, but scientifically developed as a specifically given structure.

The most important thing in academic skepticism is precisely the doctrine of probability in different senses of the word: either in the sense of the word that everything that exists and is expressed can be disputed, or in the sense of the word that evidence is not at all a necessity for thought, because much in life, although it does not allow proof, it is still quite clear.

Carneades expressed his philosophical views orally, so the content of his views was preserved in the works of other thinkers - Cicero, Eusebius. Also, the popularization of Carneades' skepticism was facilitated by the literary activity of his students - Clitomachus, Charmides, many of whose works have not survived, but there are numerous references to them.

SKEPTICISM

(from the Greek skeptikos - examining, exploring) - philosopher. a direction that questions the knowledge of reality or some fragment of it. S. can touch upon the boundaries of knowledge and assert that no absolute, undoubted, complete or perfect knowledge is available to man; that no knowledge, even if achieved, can be recognized as such; that no certain knowledge concerning certain objects (eg God, oneself, values, the world as a whole, causality, etc.) is achievable; that certain types of knowledge cannot be obtained by certain methods (for example, through reasoning, inference, direct observation, etc.). S. may refer to the method of obtaining knowledge and argue that each must be subject to never-ending tests; that all methods of obtaining knowledge do not give undoubted results; that knowledge in all or certain areas is based on unprovable assumptions, etc.
The beginning of antiquity S. put Pyrrho from Elis in. 4th century BC Based on Democritus' doctrine of unreliability sensory knowledge, skeptics denied the possibility of obtaining reliable knowledge. They also rejected the formation of the causes of phenomena, denied (“by nature”) the existence of good and evil, etc.

Philosophy: Encyclopedic Dictionary. - M.: Gardariki. Edited by A.A. Ivina. 2004 .

SKEPTICISM

(from Greek- examining, exploring) ancient, ancient Greek Philosopher direction founded by Pyrrho from Elis in con. 4 V. to n. e. Starting from the teaching of Democritus about the unreliability of knowledge based on evidence from the senses. Skeptics, according to Diogenes Laertius, did not admit the possibility of reliable knowledge and did not believe in the possibility of rational justification for norms of behavior. Skeptics rejected the existence of a cause of phenomena, repeating the arguments of the Eleatic school, rejected movement and emergence; denied the objective (“by nature”) existence of good and evil (Diogenes Laertius IX 97-99; 90; 100-101). Declaring unity. the criterion of truth, skeptics considered all philosophers etc. directions as dogmatists and considered them fools. Timon of Phlius was Pyrrho's student. (OK. 325- 235 up to n. e.) , who caustically ridiculed in poetry philosophers who did not share the ideas of S. (Diogenes Laertius IX 109-115). S.'s ideas were adopted by Plato's Secondary Academy, represented by Arcesilaus, and the New Academy, represented by Carneades. Aenesidemus from Knossos (1V. BC eh.?) revived S. as independent. direction, put forward ten so-called skeptic tropes - arguments against the possibility of reliable knowledge (Diogenes Laertius IX 79-88), to which Agrippa added five more (Diogenes Laertius IX 88-99; Sextus Empiricus, Pyrrhonian principles I 164-177).

Teaching antique S. is known to us primarily from the later compendiums of Sextus Empiricus (2-3centuries) .

Richter R., S. in philosophy, lane With German, T. 1, St. Petersburg, 1910; Losev A.F., Cultural-historical. antique S. and Sextus Empiricus, in book: Sextus Empiricus, Op., T. 1, M., 1975, With. 5-58; Goedeckemeyer A., Die Geschichte des griechischen Skeptizismus, Lpz., 1905; Patrick M. M., The Greek skeptics, N.?., 1929; Weische A., Cicero und die Neue Akademie. Untersuchungen zur Entstehung und Geschichte des antiken Skeptizismus, Munster, 1961.

Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary. - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. Ch. editor: L. F. Ilyichev, P. N. Fedoseev, S. M. Kovalev, V. G. Panov. 1983 .

SKEPTICISM

(from the Greek skeptikos examining, examining)

philosophical direction that puts forward doubt as a principle of thought, especially in the reliability of truth. Moderate skepticism is limited to knowledge of facts, showing restraint in relation to all hypotheses and theories. Ancient skepticism as a metaphysical skepticism of previous philosophical schools is represented primarily by Pyrrho, then by the middle and new academies (Arkesilaus, Carneades) and the so-called late skepticism (Aenesidemus, Sextus Empiricus, etc.). Aenesidemus points out ten principles (tropes) of skepticism: the first six are living beings; people; sense organs; states of the individual; positions, distances, places; phenomena according to their connections; the last four principles are the mixture of the perceived object with other objects; relativity in general; on the number of perceptions; dependence on the level of education, morals, laws, philosophical and religious views. In the Newest, we again draw attention to the fact that in every “purely” scientific knowledge, faith plays a large role: for example, in the correspondence, even if not complete, of the categories of being and knowledge. In the ordinary sense, skepticism is psychological uncertainty, doubt about something, forcing one to refrain from making categorical judgments. See also Basic attitude, Speeches.

Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary. 2010 .

Emphasizing the relativity of man. knowledge, S. played positively. role in the fight against various forms of dogmatism and posing a number of problems of knowledge, although he was unable to resolve them. Revealing the incompleteness of our knowledge, their historical conditions of the process of cognition, S. absolutizes this relativity and ultimately comes to doubt the possibility of k.-l. objective knowledge in general. Proclaiming the rejection of judgments in principle, S. at the same time is constantly forced to accept a definition. factual judgments. The change of theories in science is interpreted by S. as evidence of the unreliability of all knowledge in general. Historical S.'s role in the ideological struggle and societies. life was different depending on what was the subject of his criticism and was questioned.

In ancient Greek. philosophy skeptic contained in criticism Eleatic school, Heraclitus, the sophists - the Eleans, in the philosophy of the Megarian school, the Cynics, the Cyrenian school. In development, I am actually skeptical. schools distinguish three periods: 1) early S., the founder of which was Pyrrho; 2) S., developed at the Platonic Academy under its leaders Arcesilaus and Carneades; 3) late S., represented by Aenesidemus, Agrippa, Sextus Empiricus and others. The futility of attempts to find truths as feelings. cognition and thinking (to select a criterion, a selection criterion is necessary, etc.), emphasizing differences moral standards at different nations, the foundations of any religion, finding out how different theories refute each other, that each one can be proven, and this leads either to a circle in the proof, or to an arbitrary choice of axioms, or to an infinite regress, arguments indicating that the existence of causality is unprovable , - these are the most important arguments (" "), which are antique. Skeptics argue for the equivalence of opposing statements and withholding judgment. But act, accepting the definition. decisions, forces the antique. C. admit that although there may be no criterion of truth, there is a criterion of practicality. behavior. This criterion must be based on “reasonable probability” (Arkesilaus). Ancient S. encourages us to follow what our sensations lead us to (eat when we feel hungry, etc.), follow the laws and customs of the country, and engage in certain activities. activities (including scientific), etc. Leaving a position that equally distrusts sensation and thinking, antiquity. S. gives preference to feelings. knowledge, closely approaching empiricism and experimental science. Experimental science—medicine—is practiced by the last representatives of antiquity. With: Menodotus, Theodos, Sextus and Saturninus. Ancient Greek skeptics are developing, compliance with which increases the knowledge gained by observation and experiment (“three degrees of probability” in the Academy, “reminiscent” of Sextus, three types of experience in Menodotus).

The Middle Ages played a progressive role as a form of criticism of the church. dogmatism [for example, in Abelard in op. “Yes and no” (“Sic et non”), etc.]. To an even greater extent this was characteristic of the Northern Renaissance. Throughout the 16th–18th centuries. both progressive and reactionary. thinkers called S. any criticism of religion and dogmatism. metaphysics in general. Skeptical. ideas were contained in the works of Nicholas of Cusa, Erasmus of Rotterdam, Agrippa of Nettesheim, but were most fully and vividly expressed in Montaigne. S.'s stamp also lies on the works of F. Sanchez, J. Vallee, O. Talon, Bodin, Charron.

S. of the ancients was a reaction to the theoretical. constructions created by thought that did not know the restrictions imposed on the factual. knowledge. In contrast, the S. Renaissance was preceded by enslavement to tradition and authority. Therefore, the starting point of the new S. is a rebellion against the power of authorities and the dogmatism of generally accepted opinions, a demand for freedom of thought, a call not to take anything for granted. His ch. enemy - . If antique skeptics questioned everything established by reason, asserting its powerlessness, then S. of the Renaissance questioned everything that had hitherto been taken on faith, and proclaimed it the supreme judge. Thus, he opposed fideism. At the same time, S. Renaissance demanded an experimental study of nature and societies. life, clearing the way for the science of modern times. Attacking the political and ethical the principles of feudalism, he defended the bourgeoisie. ideas of nature. equality of people and individualism.

S. Renaissance was eclectic and contradictory. Demanding that all questions be submitted to the judgment of reason, he repeated the arguments of the Pyrrhonists against reason; showing the limitlessness of the development of knowledge, he questioned the possibility of reliable knowledge and reached the point of being clearly agnostic. statements. In the 17th century skeptic the ideas of the Renaissance were developed by Bayle, Lamothe-Levier and others. These ideas were the starting point of philosophy. development of Gassendi, Descartes, Voltaire, Diderot.

Another form of S. was S. Yuma. Both the ancient skeptics and the skeptics of the Renaissance did not doubt the existence of an objective world. Questioning our knowledge, they understood it as the correspondence of knowledge to this reality. Hume questioned the very existence of the objective world. From this view. The question of whether our knowledge is reflected correctly (which, perhaps, is not true at all) became meaningless. All objects of knowledge perhaps arise and exist only in cognition - in thought (mathematics) or in sensations (other knowledge).

In the further development of the bourgeoisie. Agnosticism played a major role in philosophy (Kant, positivism, neopositivism), and S. is found only as a tendency (for example, in irrationalism). The views of the founders of positivism - Comte, Spencer, J. S. Mill - were directly related to Hume's and Kant's. In fact, the neo-Kantians of the Marburg school (Cohen, Natorp, Cassirer) and the Baden school (Windelband, Rickert) take the same position on this issue. Elements of S. are also characteristic of the epistemology of pragmatism (Peirce, James, Dewey), as well as positivists such as Mach and Avenarius. In a certain sense, we can talk about the presence of elements of S. in the epistemology of neopositivism. This, in particular, concerns the attitude of neopositivists to the so-called. metaphysics, to philosophy. knowledge in general.

V. Boguslavsky. Moscow.

Lit.: General: Richter R., S. in philosophy, trans. from German, vol. 1, St. Petersburg, 1910; Shpet G. G., Skeptic and him, M., 1919; Boguslavsky V.M., At the origins of the French. atheism and materialism, M., 1964; Hönigswald R., Die Skepsis in Philosophie und Wissenschaft, Gött., 1914; Rodhe S. E., Zweifel und Erkenntnis. Über das Problem des Skeptizismus und den Begriff des Absoluten, Lund–Lpz., ; Ρreyre E. Α.. The freedom of doubt. Reflections of a natural sceptic, L., 1953; Topitsch E., Vom Ursprung und Ende der Metaphysik, W., 1958.

A n t i c h n y S.: Maccoll N., The Greek skeptics, from Pyrrho to Sextus, L.–Camh., 1869; Brochard V., Les sceptiques grecs, P., 1887; Hartenstein K., Über die Lehren der antiken Skepsis..., Halle/Saale, 1888; Creadaro L., Lo scetticismo degli academici, v. 1–2, Mil., 1889–93; Сaldi G., Lo scetticismo critico della scuola pirroniana, Üdine, 1896; Goedeckemeyer A., Die Geschichte des griechischen Skeptizismus, Lpz., 1905; Detmar V., Karneades und Hume, Lpz., 1910; Bevan E., Stoics and skeptics, Oxf., 1913; Patrick M. M., The Greek skeptics, N. Υ., 1929; Heintz W., Studien zu Sextus Empiricus, Halle/Saale, 1932; Gomperz H., Problems and methods of early Greek science, "J. of the history of ideas", 1943, v. 4, fasc. 2; Robin L., Pyrrhon et le scepticisme grec, P., 1944; Maréchal J., Le point de départ de la métaphysique, 3 ed., Brux.–P., 1944; Dal Pra M., Lo scetticismo greco, Mil., 1950.

S. in the philosophy of modern and contemporary times: Sartini V., Storia dello scetticismo moderno, Firenze, 1876; Owen J., The skeptics of Italian Renaissance) 3 ed., L., 1908; Charbonnel Roger J., La pensée italienne au 16 siècle et la courant libertin, P., 1919; Hoopes R., Fideism and skepticism during the Renaissance Three major witnesses, "Huntington Library Quarterly", 1951, v. 14, No. 4; Cornford F. M., sapientiae, Camb., 1952; Popkin R. H., The sceptical crisis and the rise of modern philosophy, "Review of Metaphysics", 1953, v. 7, p. 132–51, 306–22, 499–510.

Philosophical Encyclopedia. In 5 volumes - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. Edited by F. V. Konstantinov. 1960-1970 .

SKEPTICISM

SKEPTICISM (Greek σκεπτικός - seeking, considering, exploring) is a philosophical movement created in the 4th century. BC e. Pyrrho of Elis (c. 360-270 BC). Pyrrho practiced abstinence from judgment (), “he called nothing either beautiful or ugly, neither just nor unjust, and in general believed that nothing truly exists..., is not one thing more than another”; “For everything there is an opposite” (Diogenes Laertius, K, 61, 74). Ancient skeptics argued that the claims of various philosophical schools to absolute truth were unjustified, and the truth of all knowledge was relative. A representative of the Second Academy - another line of skepticism - Arcesilaus (c. 315-240 BC) opposed the Stoic doctrine of “agreement,” which does not guarantee truth, and called for abstinence from judgment. In the Third (New) Academy, Carneades of Cyrene (c. 214-129 BC) considered all knowledge unreliable: the senses lead us into, we can perceive the non-existent - hallucinations, dreams, illusions; The mind, unable to resolve aporias, also deceives; it is necessary to refrain from claiming “ absolute truth”, while varying degrees of plausible or “probabilistic” (έύλογον) statements have existence. The later Pyrrhonism is represented by Aenesidemus (c. 1st century BC), who formulated ten skeptical “tropes” (“Pyrrhonian speeches” (c. 43 BC), Agrima and Sextus Empiricus (2nd - early 3rd century). AD), the author of the only works surviving from ancient skepticism (“Three Books of Pyrrhon’s Propositions” and “Against the Scientists”), Sextus also restores common sense, and equanimity (ataraxia) appears in him as abstinence from dogmatic judgments. Skepticism was revived in the 16th and 17th centuries as a work. ancient philosophers, primarily Sextus Empiricus, and as a further development of their ideas (“new Pyrrhonism”). New European skepticism is associated primarily with criticism of scholastic methods, dogmatism, the so-called. generally accepted opinions, guided by authorities (Erasmus of Rotterdam), with a high appreciation of the experience of ancient skepticism. In the treatise “Nothing is Known” (1581) by the French philosopher and doctor of Portuguese origin Fr. Sanchez (1552-1632) criticizes scholastic methods, and criticism is recognized as the only criteria of science, the main obstacles to comprehending the truth are indicated - the imperfection of the senses, and the boundaries of human perception are noted. M Montaigne occupies a special place, for whom philosophizing means doubting. Montaigne's skeptical position was accepted by his friend P. Chardon, who had a great influence on J. Gassenda. J. Bayle highly appreciated the ideas of Sextus Empiricus, who combined the skeptical principle of abstaining from judgments and thesis of equivalent arguments for and against with the recognition of the “natural light” of universal reason and the absolute truth of the self-evident axioms of mathematics and logic. Bayle was critical of the systems of Descartes, Spinoza, and Leibniz. Doubts about the reliability of human knowledge determined the epistemological concept of D. Hume, which became the starting point of modern European agnosticism (Kant, positivism).

L. A. Mikeshina

New Philosophical Encyclopedia: In 4 vols. M.: Thought. Edited by V. S. Stepin. 2001 .

Synonyms: