Russian philosophy is a phenomenon of world philosophical thought. Its phenomenality lies in the fact that Russian philosophy developed exclusively independently, independently of European and world philosophy, and was not influenced by numerous philosophical trends of the West - empiricism, rationalism, idealism, etc. At the same time, Russian philosophy is distinguished by depth, comprehensiveness, and a fairly specific range researched problems, sometimes incomprehensible to the West.

The characteristic features of Russian philosophy are:

strong exposure to religious influence, especially Orthodoxy and paganism;

a specific form of expression of philosophical thoughts - artistic creativity, literary criticism, journalism, art, “Aesopian language” (which is explained by political lack of freedom and strict censorship);

integrity, the desire of almost all philosophers to deal not with individual problems, but with the whole complex of current problems;

the great role of problems of morality and morality;

concreteness;

widespread among the masses, understandable to ordinary people.

The fundamentals of the subject of Russian philosophy were:

human problem;

cosmism (perception of space as a single integral organism);

problems of morality and ethics;

the problem of choosing the historical path of development of Russia - between East and West (a very specific problem of Russian philosophy);

problem of power;

problem of the state;

the problem of social justice (a significant layer of Russian philosophy is “saturated” with this problem);

the problem of an ideal society;

problem of the future.

The following main stages of Russian philosophy can be distinguished:

the period of the birth of ancient Russian philosophy and early Christian philosophy of Rus';

philosophy of the period of the Tatar-Mongol yoke, the origin, formation and development of the centralized Russian state (Muscovite Russia and Russia);

philosophy of the 18th century;

philosophy of the 19th century;

Russian and Soviet philosophy of the 20th century.

1. The period of the birth of Old Russian philosophy and early Christian

philosophy of Rus' dates back to the 9th - 13th centuries. (corresponds to the era from the emergence of the Old Russian state - Kievan Rus to the time of feudal fragmentation and the Mongol-Tatar conquest).

The main themes of early Russian philosophy were:

moral and moral values;

explanation of Christianity, attempts to connect it with paganism;

state;

Among the most prominent representatives of philosophy of this period are:

Hilarion (the main work is “The Tale of Law and Grace”, in which Christianity is popularized and analyzed, its role in the present and future of Rus');

Vladimir Monomakh (the main work is “Instruction”, a kind of philosophical moral code, where instructions are given to descendants, problems of good and evil, courage, honesty, perseverance, as well as other moral issues are analyzed);

Clement Smolyatich (the main work is “Epistle to Presbyter Thomas”, the main theme of philosophy is the problems of reason and knowledge);

Philip the Hermit (the main work is “Lamentation”, touching on the problems of the relationship between soul and body, carnal (material) and spiritual (ideal).

2. The period of the struggle for liberation from the Mongol-Tatar yoke, the formationand the development of a centralized Russian state (Muscovite Rus') both in history and in philosophy it falls on the XIII - XVII centuries.

The main themes characteristic of this period of philosophy were:

preservation of Russian spirituality;

Christianity;

struggle for liberation;

structure of the state;

cognition.

Among the prominent philosophers of this period:

Sergius of Radonezh (XIV century - philosopher-theologian, whose main ideals were strength and power, universality and justice of Christianity; consolidation of the Russian people, overthrow of the Mongol-Tatar yoke;

Philosophy (XVI century) - also dealt with issues of Christian theology, defended the idea of ​​​​the continuity of Christianity ("Moscow - Third Rome") along the line Rome - Constantinople - Moscow;

Maximilian the Greek (1475 - 1556) - defended moral values, advocated modesty, asceticism, was an ideologist of the monarchy and royal power, the main goals of which were caring for the people and justice;

Andrei Kurbsky (1528 - 1583) - was an ideologist of oppositional socio-political philosophy, advocated limiting the despotism of the tsarist government, freedom, law, class-representative monarchy, and conducted correspondence polemics with Ivan the Terrible;

Nil Sorsky, Vassian Patrikeev - advocated the reform of the Church, the eradication of church idleness, pomp, bringing the Church closer to the people, were the ideologists of the so-called movement of “non-acquisitors” (they fought against the “Josephites” - supporters of preserving the former church foundations);

Avvakum and Nikon also fought for the renewal of the Church, but in an ideological sense; Nikon - for the reform of rituals and the elevation of the Church to the level of another type of power along with the state, Avvakum - for the preservation of old rituals;

Yuri Krizhanich (XVII century) - opposed scholasticism and its spread in Russian theology; firstly, he dealt with issues of epistemology (cognition); secondly, he put forward rational and experimental (empirical) knowledge; He saw God as the root cause of all things.

3. Russian philosophyXVIII V. includes two main stages in its development:

philosophy of the era of Peter's reforms

This includes the work of Feofan Prokopovich, V.N. Tatishcheva, A.D. Cantemira. The main focus of their philosophy was socio-political: questions of the structure of the monarchy; imperial power, its divinity and inviolability; the rights of the emperor (to execute, pardon, appoint an heir himself and others); war and peace.

materialistic philosophy of the middle and second half of the 18th century.

The main representatives of the materialist trend were M.V. Lomonosov, A.N. Radishchev.

M.V. Lomonosov (1711 - 1765) in philosophy was a supporter of mechanistic materialism. He laid the foundation for the materialist tradition in Russian philosophy. Lomonosov also put forward an atomic (“corpuscular”) theory of the structure of matter, according to which all objects around and matter in general consist of tiny particles (“corpuscles,” that is, atoms) - material monads.

Attitude of M.V. Lomonosov to God - deistic. On the one hand, he assumed the existence of God the Creator, but, on the other hand, he did not endow Him with supernatural power and capabilities.

In Lomonosov's philosophy, a large role is also given to ethics, morality, morality.

A.N. took a consistently materialist position. Radishchev (1749 - 1802). In addition to substantiating the materialistic principles of existence, Radishchev paid much attention to socio-political philosophy. Its credo is the struggle against autocracy, for democracy, legal and spiritual freedom, and the triumph of law.

4. Russian philosophyXIX V. included a number of directions: Decembrist; monarchical;

Westernizing and Slavophile; revolutionary-democratic; atheistic; theological; philosophy of cosmism. These areas are discussed in more detail in question 58.

5. Russian (and Soviet) philosophyXXV. represented mainly by: the philosophy of Marxism-Leninism; philosophy of cosmism; natural science philosophy; philosophy of "Russian diaspora".

RUSSIAN PHILOSOPHY- in a broad sense, a set of philosophical ideas, images, concepts present in the entire context of Russian culture, from its inception to the present day. There are narrower interpretations of Russian philosophy: as expressed in purely verbal ways and associated primarily with the literary tradition; as a function of religious thought; as a product professional activity; as a reflection of developed Western philosophy, therefore dependent and formed no earlier than the 18th century; as a unique soil phenomenon associated with the activities of the Slavophiles, Vl.Solovieva and their followers; as part of European philosophy, which became an equal partner of Western thought at the turn of the 19th–20th centuries, etc. There can be as many definitions of Russian philosophy as there are definitions of philosophy in general. Each of them highlights a certain aspect of the phenomenon called Russian philosophy, so it is advisable to consider it from the perspective of the broadest interpretation, which implicitly includes and implies all the others.

BACKGROUND OF RUSSIAN PHILOSOPHY. The genesis of Russian culture and the proto-philosophical thought that arose in its bosom goes into the depths of pre-Christian Rus', where it is difficult to establish the starting point. The pagan model of the universe, which was the result of a centuries-long preceding path, adopted by the 10th century. final forms. Its principles are as follows: indissolubility with natural cycles, worship of the elements, non-distinction between material and spiritual principles, the cult of totems and veneration of ancestors as methods of social determination. The most ancient universal human mythologies such as the “marriage of heaven and earth” and archetypes of consciousness such as the “world tree” served as a figurative and symbolic interpretation of existence. The triple vertical structure of the universe (heaven, earth, underworld), the fourfold horizontal division of space (north, east, west, south), binary oppositions (top-bottom, male-female, day-night) contained non-verbal models of explanation of the world and man, which will subsequently be transformed into verbalized and rationalized concepts. With external primitivism, the elements of philosophical understanding of existence, present in the depths of mythological consciousness, play an important role. Sources for the reconstruction of the archaic type of thinking are historical chronicles (records about the Magi in the “Tale of Bygone Years”), fragments of pagan sanctuaries (Peryn temple in Novgorod), the tetrahedral and three-tiered Zbruch idol (a three-dimensional model of the universe), semiotic studies of language (V.V. Ivanov, V.N. Toporov), distinguished pre-Christian layers of culture (B.A. Uspensky, G.A. Nosova), systematization of heterogeneous ethnographic and archaeological material (B.A. Rybakov).

INITIAL PERIOD. The development of Russian philosophy began after the baptism of Rus'. Christianity, instead of the balanced naturalistic pantheism of paganism, introduces a tense confrontation between spirit and matter, a dramatic conflict of good and evil, God and the devil; the idea of ​​an eternal cycle is replaced by the concept of a vector, eschatological, finalistic type. Yesterday's pagan, who lived in a limited tribal consciousness - now a neophyte - is called to personal moral responsibility, his life is connected to the world universe, the fate of his native ethnic group becomes part of human history. The main paradigms of the Old Russian worldview are embodied in a variety of verbal (chronicles, collections, lives, teachings, epistles), non-verbal (architecture, iconography, sculpture), and mixed (singing art, illuminated manuscripts) sources. The temple was not only a place of prayer, but also a three-dimensional model of the cosmos and society with a special system of painting and organization of space. If the Western medieval genius created the verbal Summa theologiae of St. Thomas Aquinas, then the ancient Russian one created a unique high iconostasis, a non-verbal analogue of such a creation, expressed by aesthetic means. At the same time, veneration of Sophia the Wisdom of God arose, reflected in the diversity of cultural and national creations. sophiology . Gradually, on the basis of the autochthonous heritage and transplanted Byzantine samples, a local type of Orthodox culture and the corresponding philosophical thought are being developed, which are both part of the pan-European civilization in its Eastern Christian version. The conceptual basis of philosophical constructions were ideas borrowed from Greek translated literature: the Bible, the exegetical and apocryphal works surrounding it, the works of the Church Fathers, historical chronicles, and hagiographic literature. From the “Source of Knowledge” by John of Damascus, the reader learned about the definitions of philosophy: “The mind of beings (knowledge of what exists)... the mind of the divine and human... the teaching of death... likening to God... cunning with cunning and artistry with artistry... love of Wisdom" (Manual of the RSL, Trinity, f. 304. I., No. 176, l. 36–37). At the same time, the natural philosophical treatise “The Six Days” of John, Exarch of Bulgaria, the “Collection of Tsar Simeon” (known as the “Izbornik 1073”) and the “Life of Cyril the Philosopher”, which contains the first definition of philosophy in the Slavic language: “things for God and men”, came to Russia reason, as far as a person can draw closer to Bose, as Detelius can teach a person, in the image and likeness of being who created him” (Manager of the RSL, MDA, f. 173, no. 19, l. 367 vol.). Later, these definitions were supplemented by Maxim the Greek, Andrei Kurbsky, and Metropolitan Daniel. Among the original works, it is worth highlighting: “The Discourse on Law and Grace” by Hilarion, with which Russian historiosophy begins; “The Tale of Bygone Years,” containing a complex of aesthetic, natural-philosophical, philosophical and historical ideas; “The Life of Theodosius of Pechersk” by the chronicler Nestor as an expression of the ethics of monastics and “The Teachings of Vladimir Monomakh” as an example of secular ethics; “Message from Metropolitan Nicephorus to Vladimir Monomakh” is the first epistemological treatise on the three parts of the soul and five types of sensory knowledge; “The Prayer of Daniel the Imprisoner” is a monument of aphorism. In Kievan Rus, the foundations of domestic philosophizing were laid, currents of thought were formed, a range of ideas was defined, the terminology of abstract thinking was developed, the main intentions of development were outlined, and the typological features of Russian philosophy were formed (panetism, historiosophicity, anthropologism, anti-scholasticism, sophistry, dispersal in the context of culture).

MIDDLE AGES. After the Mongolian devastation, the single ancient Russian culture and with it philosophical thought turned out to be divided into three branches: Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian. There are connections between them; in the 17th–18th centuries. they will be united on the territory of a single state until the end of the 20th century. will not again be divided into independent entities. The typological differences that have arisen and, at the same time, the consanguinity of the three currents of East Slavic philosophy require careful analysis and a balanced assessment, especially when studying such thinkers of the transitional type as Simeon of Polotsk, Feofan Prokopovich, Grigory Skovoroda, Alexander Potebnya. New phenomena arose in the political and spiritual life of Muscovite Rus': Eurasian geopolitical thinking, hesychasm that came from Athos, the pro-imperial doctrine “Moscow is the Third Rome,” book printing as the beginning of a new civilizational stage. From the Balkans come translations of the works of Dionysius the Areopagite, “Dioptra” by Philip Monotrope; glossaries of the encyclopedic type are being compiled, like Azbukovniki, the Bible is completely translated in Novgorod and published in print by Ivan Fedorov in Ostrog in Ukraine. Icon painting, chronicle writing, and hagiography reached their highest peak. Disputes about the paths of development of the country and methods of government are reflected in the polemics between Ivan the Terrible and Andrei Kurbsky. An opponent of the “Russian Nero” flees to Lithuania, paving the way to the West for many subsequent dissidents. In the circle he created, new translations of John of Damascus are being made, the prince himself writes the first works on logic in Russian. The greatest thinker of the High Middle Ages in Russia was Maxim Grek . He brought the art of philological analysis, philosophical dialogue, and theological hermeneutics. Together with non-covetous people, he defended the principles of “spiritual work,” but the Josephites won, proposing a symphony of the state and the Church. Gradually, a conflict arises between the growing imperial power and the ideal of Holy Rus', which in modern times is transformed into a conflict between the authorities and the thinking part of society that defends moral ideals. The maximalism of power will give rise to the maximalism of ways to resist it, which will activate destructive tendencies that will subsequently blow up the Russian Empire. A wide range of ideas is contained in the works of Epiphanius the Wise, Joseph of Volotsky, Nil Sorsky, Artemy Troitsky, Ivan Peresvetov, Zinovy ​​Otensky, Vassian Patrikeev and other thinkers of the 15th–16th centuries.

BAROQUE CENTURY. The 17th century became a transition from the medieval type of thinking to the new European one. Within the framework of the Baroque style, there is a typological rapprochement of domestic culture with European culture through Ukrainian, Belarusian, and Polish mediation. The soft Europeanization of Russia on the model of Catholic Slavic Poland is replaced under Peter the Great by hard Westernization of the Protestant type. The first to shake the foundations was Patriarch Nikon, who wanted to become the “Russian pope.” The first split occurred (which would be followed by Peter's and Soviet), destroying the integrity of Russian society. The conservatism of the Old Believers helped preserve ancient Russian values ​​right up to our time. In the growing Western influence, the leading role was played by Latinists, led by Simeon of Polotsk. They were opposed by Grecophiles: Epiphanius Slavinetsky, who left a number of translations, incl. from Erasmus of Rotterdam, and Karion Istomin, who played on the coincidence of the names of Princess Sophia and Sophia the Wisdom in verses. A lot of literature is translated from Polish, Latin, German: “The Economy of Aristotle” by Sebastian Petrici, “Problemata” by Andrzej Glyaber, “Selenography” by Jan Hevelius, which expounded the ideas of Copernicus, “Lucidarius”, “The Tale of Aristotle” (from Diogenes Laertius). An important event was the founding of the Slavic-Greek-Latin Academy in 1687, where the Likhud brothers first began to teach ethics, metaphysics, and logic in the spirit of late scholasticism. The bearer of European education, the concept of enlightened absolutism, and the idea of ​​Slavic unity was the Croatian Yuri Krizanich. In the treatise “Politics”, he gave a new, in the spirit of the Latin scheme septem artes liberalis, systematization of knowledge, which distinguishes wisdom (comprehension of God, the world, man), knowledge (understanding of the nature of things), philosophy (“the desire for wisdom”, which is inherent in each individual, but among philosophers it becomes an all-consuming attraction).

NEW TIME. In modern times, Russian philosophy experienced the strongest influence of Western philosophy. There was a synchronization of cultural evolution, domestic thought became part of the pan-European intellectual universe. However, this accelerated process was not without costs. Petrine reforms, which turned Russia into an absolutist monarchy of the European type (with Eurasian characteristics), contributed primarily to the development of those forms social life, science, education, secular culture, which corresponded to imperial strategic interests. A second split in society occurred and the emergence of a small pro-Western noble elite, separated from the bulk of the population. The center of power, wealth, and influence was St. Petersburg, strikingly different from other cities of the ever-growing empire. The antipode of the built vertical of power appears to be a small man, about whom Russian intellectuals will grieve since the times of Gogol and Dostoevsky. The ideologist of Peter’s reforms was the head of the “scientific squad” Feofan Prokopovich, the author of the “Spiritual Regulations”, who carried out the reform of the Church in the Protestant spirit and became the first chief prosecutor of the Synod. Having received a good education in Kyiv, Lvov, Krakow, Rome, critical of Thomistic scholasticism, he adopted a number of ideas of Spinoza, Descartes, Leibniz and put forward a plan for changing spiritual education in the spirit of “scientific theology”, which, using textbooks translated from German, taught Russian youth up to before the reforms of Metropolitans Platon (Levshin) and Philaret (Drozdov), who created a national theological school. His opponent Stefan Yavorsky wrote the anti-Protestant “Stone of Faith,” which was banned in Russia and published by the Jesuits in Europe in Latin. It asserted the superiority of Divine laws over human ones and protested against the forced secularization of society.

For the 18th century. characterized by opposition and complementarity of various trends: scientism and mysticism, Voltairianism and elderism, pro-Westernism and patriotism, Normanism and anti-Normanism. The largest representative of scientific consciousness was M.V. Lomonosov , combining respect for European knowledge with love for national history and culture. Considered in Soviet times the founder of natural-scientific materialism in Russia, he was a deist of the Newtonian type, and his enthusiastic odes about God's greatness were inspired by the lines of the Psalter. St. Tikhon of Zadonsk, trying to escape synodal tutelage, founded a monastery near Voronezh and wrote “Spiritual Treasure Collected from the World” as an experience of ascetic asceticism. St. Paisius Velichkovsky compiled the Philokalia and became the spiritual father of the eldership, the center of which would be Optina Pustyn, which attracted the best minds of Russia in the 19th century. An expression of extra-church mysticism was Freemasonry, opposing both the official Church, which seemed to be a bureaucratic, inert institution, and the spread of Voltairianism, a secularized intelligentsia ideology with a cult of a critically thinking individual. The conductors of European Rosicrucianism and Martinism were the German professors of the Moscow University founded in 1755 I. Staden and I. Schwartz, its adherents were Prince I.V. Lopukhin, the author of the essay “On the Inner Church,” enlightener N.I. Novikov, architect V.I. .Bazhenov and many others who believed in the union of “brotherhood and love” for the sake of creating a new global faith and the formation of a higher “hidden man”. Mystical and social utopianism were one of the products of the philosophy of the Enlightenment, adopted in Russia from its French ideologists. Another product was revolutionism, which found fertile soil in our Fatherland. Its prominent representative was A.N. Radishchev, from whom they fashioned an idol of the revolutionary movement and materialism. In reality, he appears as a restless, contradictory personality, typical of a courtly mind, captivated by the ideas of the mind and inclined to the worldly delights of the brilliant age of Baroque and Rococo. Having written his “Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow” under the influence of Stern’s “Sentimental Journey”, he was exiled to Siberia, where, thinking about the meaning of life, he created a treatise “On Man, On His Mortality and Immortality” of semi-materialistic, semi-idealistic content, ending with a pathetic phrase : “...believe, eternity is not a dream.” The physical and spiritual death of the first Russian revolutionary is tragic: having become disillusioned with the ideas of the French Enlightenment, which led to the bloody revolution and the establishment of Napoleon's tyranny, as well as in the work of the imperial commission to create new civil legislation, where he was involved after returning from exile, he commits suicide. Radishchev's drama became a significant warning for future generations of Russian revolutionaries about their own fate, the shock and destruction of the foundations of social existence. Radishchev’s opponent appears to be Catherine II, as the ideal of a “philosopher on the throne”, once realized in our history, who personified the concept of an enlightened government striving for stability and prosperity of the state. The smart German woman understood what was beyond the minds of many Russian statesmen and cultural figures by blood - Russia cannot be understood and it cannot be governed without knowledge of traditions, history, and a special geopolitical position between the West and the East. It is significant that V.N. Tatishchev And M.M.Shcherbatov create the first multi-volume “Russian Histories”, in which modern research methods are combined with the ancient Russian chronicle tradition. For the first time, professional philosophy is emerging into an increasingly broad movement, represented by university professors N.H. Popovsky, D.S. Anichkov, S.E. Desnitsky, A.A. Barsov and others, as well as professors of theological academies Feofilakt Lopatinsky, Gavriil Buzhinsky, Kirill Florinsky and others. Their literary and teaching activities are mainly educational in nature; they actively introduce the achievements of Western thought, which reveals the student nature of Russian philosophy of the new European type, which bore mature fruits in the next century. According to the old tradition, talented self-taught people, unconstrained by official and corporate frameworks, dominated. A typical representative of them was G. Skovoroda, sometimes called the “Russian” and sometimes the “Ukrainian Socrates.” A wandering poet, musician, teacher, despising the delights of the world, he strives to “philosophize in Christ.” In his anthropology and epistemology, the secret knowledge of the heart appears as a secret way of knowing the world and oneself. In his symbolic works, created under the influence of Catholic Baroque style, the Ukrainian philosopher, who wrote in Russian, appears as one of the most talented thinkers of the Sofian artistic style, characteristic of the East Slavic region. Overall 18th century. appeared important stage development of Russian philosophy, which prepared its rise in the next century.

STRUGGLE OF CURRENTS. Early 19th century illuminated the “Alexandrovskaya spring” - a short-term period of liberal projects, the soul of which was M.M. Speransky. Along with supporters of the legitimate, evolutionary transformation of Russia into a country of the bourgeois type, radicals appeared who united in secret societies and thirsty for a decisive break-up of the entire economic, political, and legal structure. The movement known as the Decembrists is heterogeneous. Its leaders were P.I. Pestel, who dreamed of republican rule and developed the “Russian Truth” (an appeal to the ancient Russian code of the same name, as well as the terms “veche” and “duma”, were supposed to recall the pre-monarchist past of Russia), and N.M. Muravyov, wrote 3 draft Constitutions, which provided for the liberation of peasants, the preservation of private property, the introduction of the principle of separation of powers and federalization of the state. In conditions of ideological polarization, protective movements arise. Chapter Russian Academy Sciences A.S. Shishkov publishes “Discourses on Love for the Fatherland,” where he condemns “harmful Western mentalities” and insists on the closure of philosophy departments at universities, which happened during the police reign of Nicholas I. A well-known triad is developed: “Orthodoxy, autocracy, nationality " Even the head of the sentimentalists, N.M. Karamzin, wrote a “Note on Ancient and New Russia,” which argued for the need for a monarchical system. “Columbus of Russian Antiquities” substantiated this in the multi-volume “History of the Russian State.” The monarch, as God's anointed one, stands above the classes and is the guarantor of the unity and prosperity of society. The thunderstorm of 1812 awakened national consciousness in all spheres of creativity, incl. in philosophy. How did the reaction to Westernization come about? Slavophilism , whose extremes were balanced Westernism , and together they formed a two-faced Janus, facing the past and the future, the original and the foreign. In the history of Slavophilism, we can conditionally distinguish its forerunners (M.P. Pogodin, S.P. Shevyrev), early classics (I.V. Kireevsky, A.S. Khomyakov, K.S. Aksakov), representatives of the official nationality (Yu. F. Samarin, S.S. Uvarov), late apologists (N.Ya. Danilevsky, N.N. Strakhov), neo-Slavophiles of the early 20th century. and their modern successors (V.I. Belova, V.G. Rasputin, A.I. Solzhenitsyn), if the term “Slavophilism” is replaced by the more adequate “Russophilism”. In contrast to German philosophy, which was based on the Protestant and partly Catholic spirit, the Slavophiles sought to create philosophy, historiosophy and anthropology in the Orthodox interpretation. Kireyevsky in his work “On the Necessity of New Beginnings for Philosophy” anticipated the development of the concepts of integral knowledge and unity. Khomyakov advocated conciliarity as a free unity within the Orthodox Church, for the communal nature of Russian life, the reconciliation of classes and the great mission of Russia, called upon to replace the decrepit Europe in the world process. From the standpoint of religious personalism, the principle of which is a substantial connection with God, Samarin denounced Western individualism. A thinker of the religious-soil type is N.V. Gogol, the prophet of the Christian transformation of culture and the sacred service of art. The philosopher who provoked the Controversy between Slavophiles and Westerners was P.Ya. Chaadaev. “A shot in the night” (A.I. Herzen) sounded his “Philosophical Letters”. In contrast to the official optimistic ideology, he spoke about the dark past, the meaningless present and the unclear future of a country that risks falling hopelessly behind dynamic Europe. He extended his Christian philosophy beyond the boundaries of Orthodoxy and noted the civilizational merit of Catholicism, which forged the spiritual core of Western self-awareness. The “Basmanny Philosopher” was highly declared to be crazy, but in a country where the official characterization is perceived with the opposite sign, he was ensured enormous success, especially among Westerners. Ardent admirers of German philosophy, united in the circles of philosophers and Stankevich, in Western-type salons, were fond of Hegelianism, Kantianism, and Schellingism. Among Westerners, a radical wing (V.G. Belinsky, A.I. Herzen, N.P. Ogarev), a moderate center (T.N. Granovsky, P.V. Annenkov), liberals (V.P. Botkin, K. D. Kavelin, E. Korsh), a wide range of concepts is being developed - from “Russian socialism” to progressivist theories of development. Under their influence, a “state school” arose in the person of B.N. Chicherin, S.M. Solovyov, V.O. Klyuchevsky.

POLYPHONY OF THOUGHT. In the 2nd half. 19th century several actively self-propagating philosophical and social movements are emerging, which partially carried over into the next century; For the first time, a situation of polyphony of thought arises that is not persecuted by the authorities, which led to its true flourishing. Anarchism (M.A. Bakunin, P.A. Kropotkin), populism (rebellious, educational, conspiratorial), positivism (P.L. Lavrov, E.V. De-Roberti, V.V. Lesevich), materialism (N G. Chernyshevsky, N. A. Dobrolyubov, D. I. Pisarev), neo-Kantianism (Alexander I. Vvedensky, G. I. Chelpanov, I. I. Lapshin), Marxism (G. V. Plekhanov, V. I. Lenin, A. Bogdanov) in mutual polemics raised the general tone of philosophical thinking and created the diversity of ideas necessary for its vibrant development. Separately from political passions, philosophy developed in theological academies (F.A. Golubinsky, F.F. Sidonsky, V.N. Karpov, S.S. Gogotsky, P.D. Yurkevich). Among the philosophizing writers were F.M. Dostoevsky with his tragic pre-existentialism, L.N. Tolstoy with his symphonies human life and religious rationalism. N.Ya. Danilevsky in the sensational “Russia and Europe” developed the concept of cultural and historical types, anticipating Spengler and Toynbee and influencing future Eurasians. Byzantine apologist K.N. Leontiev noted the petty-bourgeois idolatry of the bourgeois West, anticipating the emergence of totalitarian regimes. “Common cause” (patrification) was put forward by N.F. Fedorov, who laid the foundations of Russian cosmism. If the pinnacle of poetic gift in the literature of the 19th century. A.S. Pushkin appeared, then the pinnacle of the philosophical spirit became Vl. Soloviev, the first original Russian philosopher on a pan-European scale. In it, Russian thought, having undergone Western training and turned to its own roots, gave a magnificent synthesis of them. He criticizes positivism and the abstract principles of rationalism, which corresponded to the latest trends in Europe and, even more so, to the Slavophile tradition. He puts forward the concept of integral knowledge, dreams of combining national truth with universal truth, mysticism with exact knowledge, Catholicism with Orthodoxy, calling to overcome the temptation of the West (“godless man”) and the temptation of the East (“inhuman deity”). A prophetic philosopher, inspired by the image of Sophia, created fundamental teachings about God-manhood, unity, and the justification of good. Died in 1900, he completes Russian philosophy of the 19th century. and anticipates her ascent, full of tragic vicissitudes, in the new century.

FLOOR AND TRAGEDY. Originally 20th century brought a further rise in national thought against the backdrop of a general flourishing of culture " silver age”, which became “golden” in terms of the abundance of bright names and creative achievements for Russian philosophy. In the pre-storm situation of the collapse of the empire, consciousness worked intensely, in the existential shocks of wars and revolutions, at the cost of cruel suffering, unique experience was accumulated and comprehended, and that insight of truth came that cannot be found in any universities and academies. At the beginning of the century it was created developed infrastructure in the form of religious and philosophical societies, magazines, associations; collections were published, which especially excited the Vekhi society; The delights of the symbolists seemed alluring, among whom A. Bely, Vyach. Ivanov, D. S. Merezhkovsky worked with equal success in aesthetics, philosophy, and literature. The inimitable philosophical impressionism of V.V. Rozanov, who moved from an unsuccessful scientific style in the treatise “On Understanding” to a paradoxical and confessional way of expressing an elusive thought. The dominant trend is the evolution characteristic of many from Marxism to idealism and further to Orthodoxy as the spiritual foundation of national self-awareness. The followers of Vl. Solovyov were the brothers S.N. and E.N. Trubetskoy; the first to develop the doctrine of Logos; the second, who had an artistic nature, influenced by the music of Beethoven, ancient Russian icon painting, sophiology - the doctrine of the Absolute and summed it up in the confessional “Meaning of Life”, written in hungry Moscow in 1918. Personalists, or panpsychists, A.A. Kozlov and L.M. .Lopatin, under the influence of Leibniz's monadology in the interpretation of Teichmüller, created the concept of the subjective perception of the space-time continuum and the substantiality of the personality cognizing the world. The philosophy of law was substantiated by P.I. Novgorodtsev, who exposed the harmful influence of Marxism on Russian society in his Book “On the Social Ideal”. “The religious meaning of philosophy” was defended by I.A. Ilyin, who was considered the ideologist of the white movement; he wrote a number of brilliant works about Russia and Russian culture, in which he called for repentance and “the path of spiritual renewal.” The philosophy of L. Shestov is pre-existential, through the tragedy of existence and the horrors of the era, an individual striving for spiritual freedom, “on the scales of Job” realizing his union with God. S.L. Frank devoted his life to the creation of “living knowledge”, combining the theoretical power of European thought and the “philosophy of life” addressed to people. The doctrine of intuitionism in the harmony of the ontological and epistemological aspects of being was thoroughly developed by N.O. Lossky. His son V.N. Lossky became a prominent theologian who examined the mystical theology of the Eastern and Western Churches. The concept of personality, closely related to the problem of the Absolute, understood as coinsidentia oppositorum (coincidence of opposites), and Christian historiosophy were developed by L.P. Karsavin. Christian Neoplatonism, denial of Western ratio, glorification of the divine Logos are present in the philosophy of V.F. Ern. Russian thought 1st half. 20th century is so varied and rich that it is impossible to list all the names, but the three most significant deserve mention. N.A. Berdyaev, a popular apologist in the West for the “philosophy of freedom”, who created a number of fascinating works on personalism, eschatological metaphysics, the meaning of creativity, inspired by the pathos of anthropodicy as the justification of man, in 1946 published the book “Russian Idea” in Paris, where he gave his interpretation a hot topic discussed since the time of Vl. Solovyov. S.N. Bulgakov underwent an evolution from Marxist economism to the Orthodox Church. His spiritual odyssey is instructive in many respects, and his varied creativity belongs to the apogee of Russian thought of the 20th century. The “non-evening light” was revealed in the truth of the Gospel, the search for the “City of God” led him as a prodigal son to the Father’s threshold, his sophiology and philosophy of the name caused a contradictory attitude, even to the point of church condemnation, which does not detract from the importance of Father Sergius Bulgakov for Russian philosophy. The creativity of Father P. Florensky is varied. His “Pillar and Ground of Truth” is dedicated to Orthodox theodicy. In the spirit of Christian Platonism, he strove for the universal embrace of existence and the identification of the spiritual fundamental principle in it. Truth is revealed in divine love, creativity is inspired by Sophia. The doctrine of consubstantiality connects ancient, Christian and modern European philosophy. Subtle linguistic observations, revealing the meaning of the iconostasis, the philosophy of symbol, and the outlined features of “concrete metaphysics” attract the attention of researchers to this day. During the Soviet period, another split occurred, separating the old traditions from communist titanism, which dreamed of a new society, a new man and even a new nature. Russian philosophy, however, did not disappear, although they sought to either destroy it or integrate it into Marxist ideology. It was divided into three directions: implicitly contained within the framework of official science (for example, the work of A.F. Losev, artificially squeezed into the framework of aesthetics), dissident (the witty exposure of A.A. Zinoviev) and emigrant, which retained the intentions of pre-revolutionary philosophy and, having to the West, enriched European thought and saved the reputation of our country. Now, “after the break,” a complex process is taking place to restore lost unity, revive forgotten names and teachings, and create infrastructure for the future development of Russian philosophy.

HISTORIOGRAPHY. The historiography of Russian thought is extensive and varied, it includes a wide range of judgments - from excessive praise of existing or imagined merits to the complete denial of them. The first special study belongs to Archim. Gabriel Voskresensky (1840), who began counting from the Old Russian period and noted the influence of the Platonic tradition as a characteristic feature. Ya.N. Kolubovsky, who collected “Materials for the History of Philosophy in Russia,” spoke reservedly about its level. E.A. Bobrov was more optimistic. “The fate of Russian philosophy” was attempted to be clarified by M. Filippov, who believed that it could only be discussed with the advent of Westerners and Slavophiles. Many have written about the coincidence of Russian philosophy and literature. S.N. Bulgakov defined Russian philosophy as “life understanding”; Berdyaev saw great potential in her; O. G. Florovsky considered the “philosophy of integral knowledge”, which first arose on domestic soil; I. Ilyin derived her birth “from suffering”; B.P. Vysheslavtsev symptomatically called his work “Eternal in Russian Philosophy”; Ern thought it “essentially original”; Frank rejected "nationalist conceit"; Losev believed that Russian philosophy presents a “super-logical, super-systematic picture of philosophical trends.” E.S. Radlov and G.G. Shpet compiled essays on Russian philosophy; the first - with a moderate assessment of its merits, highlighting Vl. Solovyov, the second - with a sarcastic one, noting that the development of ideas in it is “impure, pre-scientific, primitive, un-Sophical.” Abroad, B.V. Yakovenko wrote about the “unoriginality of Russian philosophy,” S. Levitsky created popular essays based on the major works of V.V. Zenkovsky and N.O. Lossky. Soviet historiography, which tendentiously and selectively interpreted Russian philosophy from the standpoint of materialist dialectics, is represented by several multi-volume series and individual publications of limited significance; The post-Soviet one is just developing. In Western literature, Russian philosophy is assessed mainly in Eurocentrist terms, in Eastern literature - in relation to its models of philosophizing.

Literature:

1. Gabriel(Voskresensky),archim. Russian philosophy. Kazan, 1840;

2. Filippov M. The fate of Russian philosophy. St. Petersburg, 1904;

3. Ivanov-Razumnik R.V. History of Russian social thought, vol. 1–2. St. Petersburg, 1907;

4. Radlov E. Essay on the history of Russian philosophy. Pg., 1920;

5. Yakovenko B.V. Essays on Russian philosophy. Berlin, 1922;

6. Levitsky WITH. A. Essays on the history of Russian philosophical and social thought. Frankfurt am Main, 1968;

7. History of philosophy in the USSR, vol. 1–5. M., 1968–88;

8. Galaktionov A.A.,Nikandrov L.F. Russian philosophy 9–20 centuries. L., 1989;

9. Shpet G.G. Essay on the development of Russian philosophy. - Op. M., 1989;

10. Zenkovsky V.V. History of Russian philosophy. L., 1991;

11. Lossky N.O. History of Russian philosophy. M., 1991;

12. Florovsky G. Paths of Russian theology. Vilnius, 1991;

13. Russian philosophical poetry. Four centuries, comp. A.I. Novikov. St. Petersburg, 1992;

14. Vanchugov V.V. Essay on the history of “original Russian” philosophy. M., 1994;

15. Khoruzhy S.S. After the break. Paths of Russian philosophy. M., 1994;

16. Zamaleev A.F. Lectures on the history of Russian philosophy. St. Petersburg, 1995;

17. Sukhov A.D. Russian philosophy: features, traditions, historical destinies. M., 1995;

18. Russian philosophy. Dictionary, ed. M.A.Maslina. M., 1995;

19. Russian philosophy. Small encyclopedic dictionary. M., 1995;

20. One hundred Russian philosophers. Biographical Dictionary, comp. A.D. Sukhov. M., 1995;

21. Philosophers of Russia 19–20 centuries. Biographies, ideas, works. M., 1995;

22. Serbinenko V.V. History of Russian philosophy 11–19 centuries. M., 1996;

23. History of Philosophy: West – Russia – East, ed. N.V. Motroshilova, book. 1–4. M., 1996–98;

24. Novikova L.I.., Sizemskaya I.N. Russian philosophy of history. M., 1997;

25. Gromov M.N. Structure and typology of Russian medieval philosophy. M., 1997;

26. Masaryk Th. Zur Russischen Geschichts- und Religionsphilosophie, Bd 1–2. Jena, 1913;

27. Fedotov G.P. A Treasury of Russian Spirituality. N. Y., 1948;

28. Russian Philosophy, ed. J.Edie, J.Scanlan, M.Zeldin, G.Kline, v. 1–3, Knoxville, 1976;

29. Berlin I. Russian Thinkers. N.Y., 1978;

30. Walicki A. A History of Russian Thought from the Enlightenment to Marxism. Stanford, 1979;

31. Goerdt W. Russische Philosophie: Zugänge und Durchblicke. Freiburg – Münch., 1984;

32. Copleston F.S. Philisophy in Russia: from Herzen to Lenin and Berdyaev. Notre Dame (Ind.), 1986;

33. Zapata R. La philosophie russe et soviétique. P., 1988;

34. Piovesana G. Storia del pensiero filosofico russo (988–1988). Mil., 1992;

35. Spidlik Th. L'idée russe. Une autre vision de l'homme. Troyes, 1994; A History of Russian Philosophy, ed. V. Kuvakin, v. 1–2. Buffalo, 1994.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Good work to the site">

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

Introduction

2.2 Matter

2.3 Movement

2.4 Space and time

3.2 Development

3.3 Idea of ​​law

3.3.1 Dynamic law

3.3.2 Statistical law

3.4 Individual, special and general

3.5 Part and whole, system

3.7 Essence and phenomenon

3.8 Idea of ​​causality

3.9 Reason, conditions and occasion

3.10 Dialectical and mechanistic determinism

3.11 Necessary and accidental

3.12 Possibility, reality and probability

3.13 Quality, quantity and measure

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

Russian philosophical thought is an organic part of world philosophy and culture. Russian philosophy addresses the same problems as Western European philosophy, although the approach to them and the ways of understanding them were deeply national in nature. The famous historian of Russian philosophical thought V.V. Zenkovsky noted that philosophy has found its own path in Russia - “not alienating the West, even learning from it constantly and diligently, but still living with its own inspirations, its own problems...”. In the XlX century. “Russia has entered the path of independent philosophical thought.” He further notes that Russian philosophy is not theocentric (although it has a strong religious element) and not cosmocentric (although it is not alien to natural philosophical quests), but above all anthropocentric, historiosophical and committed to social issues: “it is most occupied with the theme of man, of his fate and paths, about the meaning and goals of history." These same features of Russian philosophical thought were also noted by such researchers of Russian philosophy as A.I. Vvedensky, N.A. Berdyaev and others.

Despite the fact that Russian philosophical thought is represented by a variety of directions, orientations and schools, when solving philosophical problems, it was dominated by a creatively active character, a pronounced moral attitude, and a constant focus on the historical destinies of Russia, on the place of the Russian people in the family of European nations. Therefore, without mastering the national spiritual heritage, it is impossible to understand the history and soul of the Russian people, to comprehend the place and role of Russia in world civilization.

Everything that a person knows about the world around him and about himself, he knows in the form of concepts and categories. Categories are the most general, fundamental concepts of a particular science or philosophy. All categories are concepts, but not all concepts are categories. We think about the world as a whole, about man’s relationship to the world in categories, i.e. in extremely general terms.

Each area of ​​knowledge has its own special categories.

The categories are interconnected and, under certain conditions, transform into each other: the random becomes necessary, the individual becomes general, quantitative changes entail changes in quality, the effect turns into a cause, etc. This fluid interconnection of categories is a generalized reflection of the interconnection of the phenomena of reality. All categories are historical categories, so there is not and cannot exist any one fixed system of categories.

1. General characteristics and main stages of development of Russian philosophy

Russian philosophical thought is an organic part of world philosophy and culture. Russian philosophy addresses the same problems as Western European philosophy, although the approach to them and the ways of understanding them were deeply national in nature. The famous historian of Russian philosophical thought V.V. Zenkovsky noted that philosophy has found its own path in Russia - “not alienating the West, even learning from it constantly and diligently, but still living with its own inspirations, its own problems...”. In the 19th century “Russia has entered the path of independent philosophical thought”1. He further notes that Russian philosophy is not theocentric (although it has a strong religious element) and not cosmocentric (although it is not alien to natural philosophical quests), but above all anthropocentric, historiosophical and committed to social issues: “it is most occupied with the topic of man, his fate and paths, about the meaning and goals of history.” These same features of Russian philosophical thought were also noted by such researchers of Russian philosophy as A.I. Vvedensky, N.A. Berdyaev and others.

Despite the fact that Russian philosophical thought is represented by a variety of directions, orientations and schools, when solving philosophical problems, it was dominated by a clearly expressed moral attitude, a constant appeal to the historical destinies of Russia. Therefore, without mastering the national spiritual heritage, it is impossible to understand the history and soul of the Russian people, to comprehend the place and role of Russia in world civilization.

The formation of philosophical thought in Ancient Rus' dates back to the X-XII centuries - a time of profound socio-political and cultural changes in the life of the Eastern Slavs, due to the education ancient Russian state-- Kievan Rus, the influence of Byzantine and Bulgarian cultures, the emergence of Slavic writing and the adoption of Christianity by Russia. These factors created favorable conditions for the emergence of ancient Russian philosophy.

The initial stage in the development of Russian philosophical thought is associated with the appearance of the first literary works containing original philosophical ideas and concepts. Chronicles, “teachings”, “words” and other monuments of Russian literature reflected the deep interest of Russian thinkers in historiosophical, anthropological, epistemological and moral problems.

During this period, a unique way of philosophizing emerged, conditioned by the type of philosophical tradition adopted along with Christianity, characterized by V.V. Zenkovsky as “mystical realism.” The most significant works of this period include “The Sermon on Law and Grace” by Hilarion, “The Tale of Bygone Years” by Nestor, “The Epistle to Thomas” by Kliment Smolyatich, “The Sermon on Wisdom” and “The Parable of the Human Soul and Body” by Kirill Turovsky, “ Teaching" by Vladimir Monomakh, "Message to Vladimir Monomakh" by Metropolitan Nikifor, "Prayer" by Daniil Zatochnik.

The next stage in the development of ancient Russian philosophy covers the XIII-XIV centuries - a time of severe trials caused by the Tatar-Mongol invasion. The enormous damage inflicted on Ancient Rus' did not, however, interrupt the cultural tradition. Monasteries remained the centers of development of Russian thought, in which not only the traditions of the spiritual culture of Rus' were preserved, but work continued on translating and commenting on Byzantine philosophical works. Among the monuments of Russian thought of this period, the most significant in ideological content are “The Tale of the Destruction of the Russian Land”, “The Legend of the City of Kitezh”, “Words” of Serapion of Vladimir, “Kievo-Pechersk Patericon”. The most important themes for Russian thought of this period were spiritual perseverance and moral improvement.

A new stage in the development of Russian philosophy covers the period from the end of the 14th to the 16th centuries, characterized by the rise of national self-awareness, the formation of a Russian centralized state, the strengthening of ties with the Slavic south and the centers of Byzantine culture.

Hesychasm, a mystical trend in Orthodox theology that arose on Mount Athos in the 13th-14th centuries, rooted in the moral and ascetic teaching of Christian ascetics in the 4th-7th centuries, had a significant impact on Russian philosophical thought of this period. The hesychast tradition in Russian thought is represented by the teachings and activities of Nil Sorsky, Maxim the Greek and their followers.

An important place in the spiritual life of Muscovite Rus' was occupied by the polemics between the Josephites and non-covetous people. First of all, the ideological struggle of their spiritual leaders - Joseph of Volotsky and Nil Sorsky, which covered such deep moral, political, theological and philosophical problems as social service and the vocation of the church, ways of spiritual and moral transformation of the individual, attitude towards heretics, the problem of royal power and its divine nature.

One of the central places in Russian thought of the XV-XVI centuries. was occupied by the problem of state, power and law. The view of the Moscow Orthodox kingdom - Holy Rus' - as the successor of Byzantium, called upon to fulfill a special historical mission, was reflected in the historiosophical concept “Moscow is the third Rome” formulated by Elder Philotheus. Problems of power and law were leading in the polemics of Ivan the Terrible and Andrei Kurbsky; the works of Fyodor Karpov and Ivan Peresvetov, who defended the ideas of strengthening autocratic rule, are devoted to them.

The problems of man, moral improvement, and the choice of paths to personal and social salvation were the focus of attention of the outstanding Byzantine humanist-enlightenment figure Maxim the Greek, whose philosophical work became the greatest achievement of Russian medieval philosophy.

The most prominent representatives of Russian freethinking were Fyodor Kuritsin, Matvey Bashkin, and Feodosii Kosoy.

The final stage of the development of Russian medieval philosophy is characterized by contradictory processes of forming the foundations of a new worldview, the clash of traditional spiritual culture with the growing influence of Western European science and enlightenment. The most significant figures of Russian thought of this period are Archpriest Avvakum, a successor and strict adherent of the spiritual traditions of ancient Russian culture, and his opponents, Simeon of Polotsk and Yuri Krizhanich, guides of Western European education and culture. The most important themes of their thoughts were man, his spiritual essence and moral duty, knowledge and the place of philosophy in him, problems of power and the role of various social strata in the political life of society.

A significant role in the dissemination of philosophical knowledge was played by the largest centers of education and culture - the Kiev-Mohyla and Slavic-Greek-Latin academies, in which a number of philosophical disciplines were taught.

The beginning of the 18th century was the final period in the history of Russian medieval philosophy and the time of the emergence of the prerequisites for its secularization and professionalization, which laid the foundations for a new stage in the development of Russian thought.

When characterizing the features of the development of philosophy in Russia, it is necessary, first of all, to take into account the conditions of its existence, which, in comparison with Western European ones, were extremely unfavorable. At a time when I. Kant, W. Schelling, G. Hegel and other thinkers freely expounded their philosophical systems in German universities, in Russia the teaching of philosophy was under the strictest state control, which did not allow any philosophical free-thinking for purely political reasons. The attitude of state power to philosophy is clearly expressed in famous saying Trustee of educational institutions Prince Shirinsky-Shikhmatov “The benefits of philosophy have not been proven, but harm is possible.”

Until the second half of the 19th century. philosophical problems were mastered in Russia mainly in philosophical and literary circles outside the official structures of education, which had two consequences.

On the one hand, the formation of Russian philosophy took place in the course of the search for answers to the questions posed by Russian reality itself. Therefore, it is difficult to find in the history of Russian philosophy a thinker who would engage in pure theorizing and would not respond to pressing problems.

On the other hand, these same conditions led to such an abnormal state for philosophy itself, when, when perceiving philosophical teachings, political attitudes acquired a dominant significance and these teachings themselves were assessed primarily from the point of view of their “progressiveness” or “reactionary”, “usefulness” or "uselessness" for solving social problems.

Therefore, those teachings that, although not distinguished by philosophical depth, responded to the topic of the day, were widely known. Others, which later formed the classics of Russian philosophy, such as, for example, the teachings of K. Leontyev, N. Danilevsky, Vl. Solovyov, N. Fedorov and others, did not find a response from their contemporaries and were known only to a narrow circle of people.

When characterizing the features of Russian philosophy, one must also take into account the cultural and historical background against which it was formed. In Russia, during its history, there was a kind of interweaving of two different types of cultures and, accordingly, types of philosophizing: rationalistic, Western European and Eastern, Byzantine with its intuitive worldview and living contemplation, included in Russian self-consciousness through Orthodoxy. This combination of two different types of thinking runs through the entire history of Russian philosophy.

The existence at the crossroads of different cultures largely determined the form of philosophizing and the problems of Russian philosophy. As for the form of philosophizing, its specificity was successfully defined by A.F. Losev, who showed that Russian philosophy, unlike Western European philosophy, is alien to the desire for an abstract, purely rational taxonomy of ideas. In a significant part, it “represents a purely internal, intuitive, purely mystical knowledge of existence.”

On the content side, Russian philosophy also has its own characteristics. It represents, to one degree or another, all the main directions of philosophical thinking: ontology, epistemology, ethics, aesthetics, philosophy of history, etc. However, there are also leading themes for it. One of them, which determined the very specificity of Russian philosophy, was the theme of Russia, comprehension of the meaning of its existence in history. The formation of Russian philosophical thought began with this topic, and it remained relevant throughout its development.

Another leading theme was the theme of man, his fate and the meaning of life. Increased attention to the problem of man determined the moral and practical orientation of Russian philosophy. A feature of Russian philosophical thinking was not just a deep interest in moral issues, but the dominance of moral attitudes in the analysis of many other problems.

Original Russian philosophy in its innovative quests was closely connected with the religious worldview, behind which stood centuries of Russian spiritual experience. And not just with a religious, but with an Orthodox worldview. Speaking about this, V.V. Zenkovsky notes that “Russian thought has always (and forever) remained connected with its religious element, with its religious soil.

Currently, the invaluable spiritual experience gained by Russian philosophy acts as a necessary basis for spiritual rebirth.

Philosophy of Russia in the era of enlightenment.

The 18th century in the spiritual life of Russia became the century of secularization, i.e. various spheres of society left the influence of the church and acquired a secular character. The process of creating a new, secular culture began with Peter the Great's transformations, which were associated with the intense influence of Western ideology on Russian culture. Europeanization was not a simple transition from greatly weakened Byzantine influence to increasing Western influence. After the initial mechanical borrowing of Western European values, the triumph of national spirituality began.

An important phenomenon during this period was the creation of a circle called the “Scientific Squad of Peter I”. Its prominent participants were F. Prokopovich (1681-1736), V.N. Tatishchev (1686-1750), A.D. Cantemir (1708-1744). A major representative of this squad was V.N. Tatishchev, who laid the foundations of secular philosophy as an independent field of human creative activity. He saw philosophy and specific sciences as an important means of renovating Russian society. Philosophy, according to Tatishchev, is the most important science, concentrating in itself the highest, cumulative knowledge, for only it is capable of answering the most complex questions of existence. “True philosophy is not sinful,” but useful and necessary.

The thinker proposed his classification of sciences based on their social significance. He identified the sciences as “necessary”, “useful”, “fashionable” (or “amusing”), “curious” (or “vain”) and “harmful”. The category of necessary sciences included “speech” (language), economics, medicine, jurisprudence, logic and theology; Useful ones include grammar and eloquence, foreign languages, physics, mathematics, botany, anatomy, history and geography. Dapper sciences, in his opinion, have only entertainment value, for example, poetry, music, dancing, etc. Curious sciences include astrology, alchemy, palmistry, and harmful sciences include necromancy and witchcraft. In fact, Tatishchev considered all knowledge to be sciences.

Destroying the theological explanation of history, he placed the level of knowledge and the degree of spread of enlightenment as the basis for social development. Belief in the power of reason and historicism united him with Western enlighteners. Believing that Russia was faced with the task of radically reforming educational institutions and creating new ones, Tatishchev proposed his own fairly developed program for the development of education.

He solved the problem of the relationship between soul and body from a dualistic position, declaring the bodily organization of man to be the domain of philosophy, and attributing the soul to the competence of religion. At the same time, he was characterized by religious skepticism and criticism of the church. He seeks to secularize public life, to free it from church control, while arguing that the church should be subject to state control.

Being a rationalist and supporter of natural law, Tatishchev connected the development of society with such natural factors as agriculture, trade and education.

In an effort to substantiate the “new intelligentsia,” he proceeded from the doctrine of “natural law,” which recognizes the inviolable autonomy of the individual. For the first time in Russian literature, he develops the idea of ​​utilitarianism, based on rational egoism.

The intensive development of natural science in Russia contributed to the formation of secular philosophy. The first Russian thinker of world significance was M.V. Lomonosov (1711-1765), who, according to A.S. Pushkin, “our first university,” “the greatest mind of modern times.” Being a deist, Lomonosov laid the foundation for the materialist tradition in Russian philosophy. His recognition of God as the architect of the world, who does not interfere in the course of world events, led to the recognition of the theory of dual truth. According to the latter, a representative of natural science and a teacher of theology should not interfere in each other's affairs.

While studying natural sciences, Lomonosov attached paramount importance to experience. He believed that the law of experience must be supplemented by “philosophical knowledge.” In an effort to create a philosophy of nature, he did not reduce knowledge of nature to purely empirical systematization, but strived for philosophical generalizations.

Giving a definition of matter, the Russian thinker wrote: “Matter is what the body consists of and on what its essence depends.” At the same time, he avoided identifying matter and substance, reducing matter to physicality. In his opinion, no absolute space exists: the world is filled entirely and is a combination of two types of matter - “own” and “foreign”. Matter is eternal and indestructible and always remains within the limits of existence.

According to Lomonosov, everything that happens in the world is connected with the processes of matter movement. There are three forms of motion: 1) translational, 2) rotational, 3) oscillatory, which pass from one body to another. He understood movement from a mechanistic point of view: “Bodies are set in motion by pushing alone.” Thus, the source of movement itself was left in the shadow.

Following Lomonosov, materialist ideas in philosophy were developed by A.N. Radishchev (1749-1802), who wrote the philosophical work “About Man, His Mortality and Immortality.” Taking the position of deism, he considered God “the first cause of all things,” who is outside the spatio-temporal relations of nature, since “God alone can have the concept and knowledge of the necessity of God’s existence.” The material world, once set in motion by the impetus of the creator, continues to independently move and develop.

Defending materialist positions, Radishchev wrote that “the existence of things, regardless of the power of knowledge about them, exists in itself.” A person, in the process of interacting with nature, learns about it through experience, which is “the basis of all natural knowledge.” Sensory experience, according to Radishchev, must be supplemented by rational experience, since “the power of knowledge is one and inseparable.”

Radishchev paid main attention to social and philosophical problems, creating a unique doctrine about man. Man, in his opinion, is a product of nature, “the most perfect of creatures,” living in unity with people and the cosmos; he has reason and speech, as well as the capacity for social life. The human hand as an instrument of activity played a major role in the formation of man and his subsequent activities.

The thinker believed that the human soul is immortal and is reborn after the death of the body in other bodies, which ensures the endless perfection of the human race. The purpose of life is to strive for perfect bliss.

Radishchev repeatedly noted the effect of natural conditions on the development of “human intelligence”, on the customs and morals of people. The location of people was also associated with their needs, the satisfaction of which was carried out through various inventions. At the same time, personal interest was considered the main motive of human aspirations.

Thus, the influence of Western European ideology contributed to the development of philosophy in Russia, although it was not unambiguous. By joining the philosophical culture of the West, Russian thinkers seemed to shorten the path of their own ascent to the heights of philosophical thinking, on the one hand, and on the other, their own creativity was constrained by the influence of Western culture.

2. Main categories of philosophy

Categories are forms of reflection in thought of the universal laws of the objective world.

2.1 Genesis

In all philosophical systems without exception, the reasoning of thinkers of any level of intellectual giftedness began with an analysis of what surrounds a person, what is at the center of his contemplation and thought, what lies at the foundation of the universe, what the universe, the Cosmos is, what things are made of and what they represent phenomena occurring in their infinite diversity - i.e. of what constitutes the phenomenon of Being as a whole. And much later, man began to think about himself, about his spiritual world.

What is existence?

By being in the broadest sense of the word we mean the extremely general concept of existence, of beings in general. Being and reality as all-encompassing concepts are synonymous. Being is everything that is. These are material things, these are all processes (physical, chemical, geological, biological, social, mental, spiritual), these are their properties, connections and relationships. The fruits of the wildest imagination, fairy tales, myths, even the delirium of a sick imagination - all this also exists as a type of spiritual reality, as a part of existence. The antithesis of being is nothingness.

Even at a superficial glance, existence is not static. All concrete forms of the existence of matter, for example, the strongest crystals, giant star clusters, certain plants, animals and people, seem to float out of non-existence (after all, they were exactly like this once did not exist) and become real existence. The existence of things, no matter how long it lasts, comes to an end and “floats away” into oblivion as a given qualitative certainty. The transition into non-existence is thought of as the destruction of a given type of existence and its transformation into another form of existence. In the same way, the emerging form of being is the result of the transition of one form of being to another: it is meaningless to try to imagine the self-creation of everything from nothing. So non-existence is thought of as relative concept, but in the absolute sense there is no non-existence.

The book of Genesis is the first book of Holy Scripture (the first book of Moses). In a burning but not consumed bush, an unburnt bush, the Lord who appeared on Mount Horeb to Moses announced His name to him thus: “I am who I am (IEHOVAH). And he said, Thus shall you say to the children of Israel: Jehovah has sent me to you” (Exodus 3:14).

In existentialism, for human existence, the spiritual and material are fused into a single whole: this is spiritualized existence. The main thing in this existence is the consciousness of temporality (existence is “being towards death”), constant fear of the last possibility - the possibility of not being, and therefore the consciousness of the pricelessness of one’s personality.

2.2 Matter

philosophy being matter determinism

The first thing that strikes a person's imagination when he observes the world, is an amazing variety of objects, processes, properties and relationships. We are surrounded by forests, mountains, rivers, seas. We see stars and planets, admire the beauty of the northern lights, the flight of comets. The diversity of the world is beyond counting. You need to have great power of thought and a rich imagination in order to see their commonality and unity behind the diversity of things and phenomena of the world.

All objects and processes of the external world have this common feature: they exist outside and independently of consciousness, being reflected directly or indirectly in our sensations. In other words, they are objective. First of all, on this basis, philosophy unites and generalizes them in one concept of matter. When it is said that matter is given to us through sensations, this means not only the direct perception of objects, but also the indirect one. We cannot see or touch, for example, individual atoms. But we feel the action of bodies consisting of atoms.

Matter cannot be seen, touched, or tasted. What they see and touch is a certain type of matter. Matter is not one of the things that exists along with others. All existing concrete material formations are matter in its various forms, types, properties and relationships. There is no “faceless” matter. Matter is not the real possibility of all forms, but their actual existence. The only relatively different property from matter is consciousness, spirit.

Every somewhat consistent philosophical thinking can deduce the unity of the world either from matter or from the spiritual principle. In the first case, we are dealing with materialistic, and in the second, with idealistic monism (from the Greek one, only). There are philosophical teachings that take the position of dualism (from the Latin dual).

Some philosophers see the unity of objects and processes in their reality, in the fact that they exist. This is truly what unites everything in the world. But the principle of the material unity of the world does not mean the empirical similarity or identity of specific existing systems, elements and specific properties and patterns, and the community of matter as a substance, as a bearer of diverse properties and relationships.

The infinite universe, both in the great and in the small, both in the material and in the spiritual, relentlessly obeys universal laws that connect everything in the world into a single whole. Materialistic monism rejects views that distinguish consciousness and reason into a special substance opposed to nature and society. Consciousness is both knowledge of reality and its component part. Consciousness does not belong to some otherworldly world, but to the material world, although it opposes it as spirituality. It is not a supernatural unique thing, but a natural property of highly organized matter.

Matter in the physical sense has a varied, discontinuous structure. It consists of parts of various sizes, qualitative certainty: elementary particles, atoms, molecules, radicals, ions, complexes, macromolecules, colloidal particles, planets, stars and their systems, galaxies.

“Continuous” forms are inseparable from “discontinuous” forms of matter. These are different types of fields - gravitational, electromagnetic, nuclear. They bind particles of matter, allow them to interact and thereby exist.

The world and everything in the world is not chaos, but a naturally organized system, a hierarchy of systems. The structure of matter means internally dissected integrity, a natural order of connection of elements within the whole. The existence and movement of matter is impossible outside of its structural organization. The concept of structure applies not only to the various levels of matter, but also to matter as a whole. The stability of the basic structural forms of matter is due to the existence of its unified structural organization.

One of the attributes of matter is its indestructibility, which manifests itself in a set of specific laws for maintaining the stability of matter in the process of its change.

2.3 Movement

Movement is a way of existence of things. To be means to be in motion, change. There are no unchanging things, properties and relationships in the world. The world develops and decomposes; it is never something complete. Movement is uncreated and indestructible. It is not brought in from outside. The movement of beings is self-movement in the sense that the tendency, the impulse to change state, is inherent in reality itself: it is the cause of itself. Since movement is uncreated and indestructible, it is absolute, immutable and universal, manifesting itself in the form of specific forms of movement.

If the absoluteness of movement is due to its universality, then relativity is due to the specific form of its manifestation. The forms and types of movement are diverse. They correspond to the levels of structural organization of existence. Each form of movement has a specific carrier - substance.

The movement of any thing occurs only in relation to some other thing. The concept of movement of an individual body is pure nonsense. To study the movement of an object, we need to find a reference system - another object in relation to which we can consider the movement of interest to us.

In the endless flow of the never-ending movement of existence, there are always moments of stability, manifested primarily in the preservation of the state of movement, as well as in the form of equilibrium of phenomena and relative peace. No matter how an object changes, as long as it exists, it retains its certainty. To find absolute peace means to cease to exist. Everything that is relatively at rest is inevitably involved in some kind of movement and, ultimately, in the endless forms of its manifestation in the universe. Peace always has only a visible and relative character.

2.4 Space and time

Space is a form of coordination of coexisting objects and states of matter. It lies in the fact that objects are located outside each other (next to each other, on the side, below, above, inside, behind, in front, etc.) and are in certain quantitative relationships. The order of coexistence of these objects and their states forms the structure of space.

Phenomena are characterized by the duration of their existence and the sequence of development stages. Processes occur either simultaneously, or one earlier or later than the other; such, for example, are the relationships between day and night, winter and spring, summer and autumn. All this means that bodies exist and move in time. Time is a form of coordination of changing objects and their states. It lies in the fact that each state represents a sequential link in the process and is in certain quantitative relationships with other states. The order in which these objects and states change forms the structure of time.

Space and time are universal forms of existence and coordination of objects. The universality of these forms of existence lies in the fact that they are the forms of existence of all objects and processes that were, are and will be in the infinite world. Not only the events of the external world, but also all feelings and thoughts occur in space and time. Everything in the world extends and lasts. Space and time have their own characteristics. Space has three dimensions: length, width and height, and time has only one - the direction from the past through the present to the future.

Space and time exist objectively, their existence is independent of consciousness. Their properties and patterns are also objective and are not always the product of human subjective thought.

3. Relationship between categories

The categories are interconnected and, under certain conditions, transform into each other: the random becomes necessary, the individual becomes general, quantitative changes entail changes in quality, the effect turns into a cause, etc. This fluid interconnection of categories is a generalized reflection of the interconnection of the phenomena of reality. All categories are historical categories, so there is not and cannot exist any one fixed system of categories, given once and for all. In connection with the development of thinking and science, new categories (for example, information) arise, and old ones are filled with new content. Any category in the real process of human cognition, in science, exists only in the system of categories and through it.

3.1 Universal connectivity and interaction

There is nothing in the world that stands apart. Any object is a link in an endless chain. And this universal chain is not broken anywhere: it unites all objects and processes of the world into a single whole, it is universal in nature. In an endless web of connections is the life of the world, its history.

A connection is the dependence of one phenomenon on another in some respect. The main forms of communication include: spatial, temporal, genetic, cause-and-effect, essential and non-essential, necessary and accidental, natural, direct and indirect, internal and external, dynamic and static, direct and inverse, etc. Communication is not a subject , not a substance, it does not exist on its own, outside of what is connected.

The phenomena of the world are not only mutually dependent, they interact: one object influences another in a certain way and experiences its influence on itself. When considering interacting objects, it is necessary to keep in mind that one of the sides of the interaction can be leading, determining, and the other - derivative, determined.

Research into various forms of connections and interaction is a primary task of cognition. Ignoring the principle of universal connection and interaction has a detrimental effect in practical affairs. Thus, deforestation leads to a decrease in the number of birds, and this is accompanied by an increase in the number of agricultural pests. The destruction of forests is accompanied by shallowing of rivers, soil erosion and thereby a decrease in crop yields.

3.2 Development

There is nothing completely finished in the Universe. Everything is on the way to something else. Development is a certain directed, irreversible change in an object: either simply from old to new, or from simple to complex, from a lower level to an increasingly higher one.

Development is irreversible: everything passes through the same state only once. It is impossible, say, for an organism to move from old age to youth, from death to birth. Development is a double process: in it the old is destroyed and in its place a new one arises, which asserts itself in life not through the unhindered deployment of its potentials, but in a severe struggle with the old. Between the new and the old there is a common similarity (otherwise we would have only many unrelated states), and differences (without a transition to something else there is no development), and coexistence, and struggle, and mutual negation, and mutual transition. The new arises in the womb of the old, then reaching a level incompatible with the old, and the latter is denied.

Along with the processes of upward development, there is also degradation, the disintegration of systems - a transition from higher to lower, from more perfect to less perfect, a decrease in the level of organization of the system. For example, the degradation of biological species that are becoming extinct due to the inability to adapt to new conditions. When the system as a whole degrades, this does not mean that all its elements are subject to decay. Regression is a contradictory process: the whole decomposes, but individual elements can progress. Further, the system as a whole can progress, and some of its elements can degrade, for example, the progressive development of biological forms as a whole is accompanied by the degradation of individual species.

3 .3 Idea of ​​law

Knowledge of the world convinces us that the Universe has its own “code of laws”, everything is included within their framework. The law always expresses the connection between objects, elements within an object, between the properties of objects and within a given object. But not every connection is a law: a connection can be necessary and accidental. The law is the necessary, stable, repeating, essential connections and relationships of things. It indicates a certain order, sequence, and trend in the development of phenomena.

It is necessary to distinguish between the laws of structure, functioning and development of the system. Laws can be less general, operating in a limited area (the law of natural selection), and more general (the law of conservation of energy). Some laws express a strict quantitative relationship between phenomena and are fixed in science by mathematical formulas. Others cannot be described mathematically, such as the law of natural selection. But both laws express an objective, necessary connection between phenomena.

3 .3.1 Dynamic law

A dynamic law is a form of causal relationship in which the initial state of the system uniquely determines its subsequent state. Dynamic laws come in varying degrees of complexity. They are applicable to all phenomena in general and to each of them separately, of course, from among those that are subject to this law; Thus, every stone thrown upward, obeying the law of gravity, falls down.

3 .3.2 Statistical law

Science, while unable to predict the behavior of individual components of some systems, accurately predicts the behavior of the whole. The randomness in the behavior of the individual is subject to the laws of life of the whole. A statistical regularity characterizes a mass of phenomena as a whole, and not each part of this whole. If an accident must occur on every million kilometers of a journey, then this does not apply to everyone who has traveled this path: an accident can “overtake” a person even on the first kilometer.

3 .4 Single, special and general

3.4.1 Single

The individual is an object in the totality of its inherent properties, which distinguish it from all other objects and constitute its individual, qualitative and quantitative certainty.

The idea of ​​the world only as an infinite variety of individuals is one-sided, and therefore incorrect. Infinite diversity is only one side of existence. Its other side lies in the commonality of things, their properties and relationships.

3 .4.2 Singular and general - special

General is one thing in many ways. Unity can appear in the form of similarity or commonality of properties, relationships of objects combined into a certain class, set. The general properties and relationships of things are recognized on the basis of generalization in the form of concepts and are designated by common nouns: “man”, “plant”, “law”, “cause”, etc.

Each individual contains the general as its essence. For example, the statement that a given act is a feat means recognizing a certain general quality behind a given single action. The general is, as it were, the “soul”, the essence of the individual, the law of its life and development.

Objects may have varying degrees of generality. The individual and the general exist in unity. Their concrete unity is special. In this case, the general can act in two ways: in relation to the individual it acts as general, and in relation to a greater degree of generality - as special. For example, the concept “Russian” acts as a singular concept in relation to the concept “Slav”; the latter acts as a general thing in relation to the concept of “Russian” and as a special thing in relation to the concept of “man”. So, individual, special and general are correlative categories that express the mutual transitions of reflected objects and processes.

The action of a general pattern is expressed in the individual and through the individual, and any new pattern initially appears in reality in the form of a single exception from general rule. The potential general in the form of the individual, being at first random, gradually increases in number and gains the force of law, acquiring the status and power of the general. At the same time, such isolated “exceptions” that correspond to the development trend resulting from the entire set of conditions turn into the general. The general does not exist before and outside the individual; The individual cannot always be generalized. Their unity is what is special. This category overcomes the one-sidedness and abstractness of both and takes them in concrete unity.

Correct accounting of the individual, special and general plays a huge cognitive and practical role. Science deals with generalizations and operates with general concepts, which makes it possible to establish laws and thereby equip practice with foresight. This is the strength of science, but this is also its weakness. The individual and special are richer than the general. Only through strict analysis and consideration of a single, special experiment through observation, deepening and concretization of the laws of science are achieved. The general is revealed in the concept only through the reflection of the individual and special. Thanks to this, the scientific concept embodies the richness of the special and individual.

3 .5 Part and whole, system

A system is an integral set of elements in which all the elements are so closely related to each other that they act in relation to the surrounding conditions and other systems of the same level as a single whole. An element is a minimal unit within a given whole that performs a specific function in it. Systems can be simple or complex. A complex system- this is one whose elements are themselves considered as systems.

Any system is something whole, representing a unity of parts. The categories of whole and part are correlative categories. No matter how small a particle of existence we take (for example, an atom), it represents something whole and at the same time a part of another whole (for example, a molecule). This other whole is, in turn, a part of some larger whole (for example, an animal organism). The latter is part of an even larger whole (for example, planet Earth), etc. Any whole that is accessible to our thoughts, no matter how large, is ultimately only a part of an infinitely large whole. Thus, one can imagine all bodies in nature as parts of one whole - the Universe.

According to the nature of the connection between the parts, various wholes are divided into three main types:

1. unorganized (or summative) integrity. For example, a simple accumulation of objects, like a herd of animals, a conglomerate, i.e. mechanical connection of something dissimilar (rock made of pebbles, sand, gravel, boulders, etc.). In an unorganized whole, the connection between the parts is mechanical. The properties of such a whole coincide with the sum of the properties of its constituent parts. Moreover, when objects enter or leave an unorganized whole, they do not undergo qualitative changes.

2. organized integrity. For example, atom, molecule, crystal, solar system, Galaxy. An organized whole has different levels of order depending on the characteristics of its constituent parts and the nature of the connection between them. In an organized whole, its constituent elements are in a relatively stable and regular relationship.

The properties of an organized whole cannot be reduced to the mechanical sum of the properties of its parts: the rivers are “lost in the sea, although they are in it and although it would not exist without them.” Zero in itself is nothing, but as part of an integer its role is significant. Water has the property of extinguishing fire, but its constituent parts separately have completely different properties: hydrogen itself burns, and oxygen supports combustion.

3. organic integrity. For example, an organism, a biological species, a society. This is the highest type of organized integrity, system. Its characteristic features are self-development and self-reproduction of parts. Parts of an organic whole outside the whole not only lose a number of their significant properties, but also cannot exist at all in a given qualitative certainty: no matter how modest the place of this or that person on Earth and no matter how little what he does, he still carries out the work , necessary for the whole.

Content is what constitutes the essence of an object, the unity of all its constituent elements, its properties, internal processes, connections, contradictions and trends. The content includes not only the components, this or that object, elements, but also the method of their connections, i.e. structure. In this case, different structures can be formed from the same elements. By the way the elements in a given object are connected, we recognize its structure, which gives relative stability and qualitative certainty to the object.

Form and content are one: there is not and cannot be formless content and form devoid of content. Their unity is revealed in the fact that a certain content is “clothed” in a certain form. The leading party, as a rule, is the content: the form of the organization depends on what is being organized. Change usually starts with content. During the development of content, a period is inevitable when the old form ceases to correspond to the changed content and begins to inhibit its further development. A conflict ensues between form and content, which is resolved by breaking the outdated form and the emergence of a form that corresponds to the new content.

The unity of form and content presupposes their relative independence and the active role of form in relation to content. The relative independence of form is expressed, for example, in the fact that it may lag somewhat behind the content in development. The relative independence of form and content is also revealed in the fact that the same content can be clothed in different forms.

3.7 Essence and phenomenon

Essence is the main, fundamental, defining thing in an object; it is the essential properties, connections, contradictions and trends in the development of an object. Language formed the word “essence” from existence, and the real meaning of essence is more simply expressed by the concept “essential”, which means important, main, determining, necessary, natural. Any law of the world around us expresses an essential connection between phenomena.

A phenomenon is an external manifestation of an essence, a form of its manifestation. Unlike essence, which is hidden from human sight, phenomenon lies on the surface of things. But a phenomenon cannot exist without what appears in it, i.e. without its essence.

The phenomenon is richer, more colorful than the essence because it is individualized and occurs in a unique totality external conditions. In a phenomenon, the essential appears together with the inessential, accidental in relation to the essence. But there are no accidents in a holistic phenomenon - it is a system (a work of art). A phenomenon may correspond to its essence or not correspond to it, the degree of both may be different. The essence is revealed both in the mass of phenomena and in a single essential phenomenon.

3 .8 Idea of ​​causality

When one phenomenon, under certain conditions, modifies or gives rise to another phenomenon, the first acts as a cause, the second as a consequence. Causality is a connection that turns possibility into reality, reflecting the laws of development. The chain of cause-and-effect relationships is objectively necessary and universal. It has neither beginning nor end, is not interrupted either in space or in time.

Any effect is caused by the interaction of at least two bodies. Therefore, the phenomenon-interaction acts as the true cause of the phenomenon-effect. Only in the simplest particular and limiting case can a cause-and-effect relationship be represented as a one-sided, unidirectional action. For example, the reason for the fall of a stone to the Earth is their mutual attraction, subject to the law of universal gravitation, and the fall of the stone to the Earth itself is the result of their gravitational interaction. But since the mass of the stone is infinitely less than the mass of the Earth, the effect of the stone on the Earth can be neglected. And as a result, the idea of ​​unilateral action arises, when one body (Earth) acts as the active side, and the other (stone) acts as the passive side. However, in more complex cases, one cannot abstract from the reverse influence of the action carrier on other bodies interacting with it. Thus, in the chemical interaction of two substances it is impossible to distinguish the active and passive sides. This is even more true when elementary particles transform into each other.

The temporal relationship between cause and effect is that there is a time interval in the form of a delay between the beginning of the action of the cause (for example, the interaction of two systems) and the beginning of the manifestation of the corresponding effect. Cause and effect coexist for a while, and then the cause fades away, and the effect eventually turns into new reason. And so on ad infinitum.

The interaction of cause and effect is called the feedback principle, which operates in all self-organizing systems where perception, storage, processing and use of information occur, such as in the body, electronic device, society. Without feedback, stability, management and progressive development of the system are unthinkable.

The cause acts as active and primary in relation to the effect.

A distinction is made between a complete cause and a specific cause, main and non-main. A complete cause is the totality of all events, in the presence of which an effect is born. Establishing a complete cause is only possible in fairly simple events in which a relatively small number of elements are involved. Typically, research is aimed at uncovering the specific causes of an event. A specific cause is a combination of a number of circumstances, the interaction of which causes an effect. In this case, specific causes cause an investigation in the presence of many other circumstances that already existed in a given situation before the onset of the investigation. These circumstances constitute the conditions for the action of the cause. A specific cause is defined as the most significant elements of a complete cause in a given situation, and its remaining elements act as conditions for the action of a specific cause. main reason- this is the one that, out of the totality of reasons, plays a decisive role.

The reasons are internal and external. The internal cause operates within a given system, and the external cause characterizes the interaction of one system with another.

The reasons can be objective and subjective. Objective reasons are realized beyond the will and consciousness of people. Subjective reasons lie in the purposeful actions of people, in their determination, organization, experience, and knowledge.

It is necessary to distinguish between immediate causes, i.e. those that directly cause and determine a given action, and indirect causes that cause and determine the action through a number of intermediate links.

3.9 Reason, conditions and occasion

In order for a cause to produce an effect, certain conditions are required. Conditions are phenomena that are necessary for the occurrence of a given event, but do not themselves cause it. The mode of action of a given cause and the nature of the effect depend on the nature of the conditions. By changing the conditions, you can change both the mode of action of the cause and the nature of the effect.

...

Similar documents

Structure and specificity of philosophical knowledge. The concept of matter in philosophy, being and non-being. The idea of ​​development in philosophy: determinism and indeterminism. Sensual and rational in cognition. The philosophical problem of intuition. Stages and directions of development of philosophy.

course of lectures, added 06/14/2009


The main stages of the development of Russian philosophy. Slavophiles and Westerners, materialism in Russian philosophy of the mid-19th century. Ideology and basic principles of the philosophy of Russian pochvennichestvo, conservatism and cosmism. Philosophy of unity by Vladimir Solovyov.

test, added 02/01/2011


Main features, originality, stages and directions of Russian philosophy of the 19th century. Faith as a direct perception of existence. A special understanding in Russian philosophy of the relationship between being and consciousness. The most important representatives of Russian philosophy of the 19th century.

abstract, added 03/22/2009


The task of philosophy and the subject of its study. Categorical structure of thinking. The methodological role of categories in science, their relationship with each other. Purpose, list and characteristics of the main categories of philosophy. The phenomenon of Being, the material unity of the world.

test, added 11/12/2009


Historical stages of development of philosophy ( Ancient Greece, Middle Ages, Modern times) and its outstanding representatives (Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Hegel, Schopenhauer, Marx, Freud). The essence and laws of existence, movement, space, time, reflection, consciousness.

cheat sheet, added 06/18/2012


Specific features and distinctive features of Renaissance philosophy, ancient Greek and medieval teaching. Prominent representatives and fundamental ideas of the philosophy of the New Age and the Enlightenment. The problem of being and truth in the history of philosophy and jurisprudence.

test, added 07/25/2010


Being: existing and existing, the emergence of the category of being. The problem of epistemology, being in European philosophy, in medieval philosophy and in the philosophy of Thomas Aquinas. Man is the focus of modern philosophy. Kant is the founder of ontology.

article, added 05/03/2009


The concept of philosophy as a science, its relationship with religion, politics, ethics, history and art. Directions and topics of philosophical research. Historical stages in the development of philosophy. Views of representatives of various schools. Categories of being and substance.

cheat sheet, added 11/21/2010


Categories as forms of thinking, table of categories. The doctrine of the antinomies of pure reason, the relationship between the categories of reason and ideas of reason in Kant’s philosophy. The beginning of logic, the problem of deriving all logical categories from pure being in Hegel’s philosophy.

abstract, added 11/15/2010


Worldview form of social consciousness. Features and main directions of research in philosophy of various eras and sections. Outstanding philosophers of different times, their merits and theories. The form of existence of matter. The essence of the concept of space and time.

Briefly and clearly about philosophy: the main and most important thing about philosophy and philosophers
Features of the development of Russian philosophy

Russian philosophy embodied the creative searches of the Russian people, and revealed unique features of national character and thinking. The philosophical ideas of Russian thinkers (N. Berdyaev, Vl. Solovyov, F. Dostoevsky, L. Tolstoy, M. Bakunin, etc.) represent an independent philosophical direction with a unique national identity.

With the adoption of Christianity in Rus', Byzantine Christian theology took a monopoly position in worldview. The development of the ancient heritage was carried out indirectly, refracted through the prism of this religious doctrine. The religious struggle between Orthodoxy and Catholicism, which lasted for several centuries, also reduced philosophical contacts with Western Europe to a minimum.

The processes of liberation from religious control of public life, begun by Peter I, led to the fact that Russian philosophical thought began to develop in close connection with the philosophy of Western European peoples. Throughout the entire 18th century, Russian thought was forced to quickly make up for what it had “lost” through mastering the scientific and philosophical results achieved by that time in European countries. Therefore, Russian philosophical thought developed under the predominant influence of French materialism of the 18th century, classical German philosophy and German romantic philosophers of the first half of the 19th century, primarily F. Schelling.

The protracted nature of serfdom in Russia and the autocracy also contributed to the uniqueness of the focus and style of philosophizing. We are talking about the ideology of noble radical revolutionaries, about radical peasant democracy, including populism, Slavophilism - pochvenism, Westernism and Tolstoyism. The same circumstances led to a significant role in the history of Russian philosophy of Orthodox Christianity, to the development of a national religious and philosophical tradition. The specifics of Russia's social development also gave rise to a special layer of people not found anywhere else, namely the intelligentsia.

Ideas of Western European philosophy in the Russian application

The liberation of Russia from religious control, begun by Peter I, led to the fact that Russian philosophical thought began to develop in close connection with the philosophy of Western European peoples. Initially, this connection was more or less one-sided, since, naturally, it presupposed the mastery of scientific and philosophical results achieved by that time in European countries.

Russian philosophers used the mental material that arose on a more developed sociocultural basis and included it, while appropriately processing it, into structures of national origin. The main points in this process were:

Theories of natural law and the contractual origin of the state, adopted in Russia long before the formulation of the tasks of anti-feudal transformations and interpreted in a wide range of programs of several political directions (conservative, educational, radical);

Theories of utopian socialism that arose in early XIX centuries as an alternative to developing capitalism and adopted by the liberal and radical noble movements, populists, revolutionary democrats of the late 19th - early 20th centuries, who were irreconcilably opposed to the idea of ​​the consistent development of Russia;

Anthropological materialism, which in Russia has become the main theoretical system of almost all directions of the revolutionary movement;

Idealist dialectics, subjected to materialist processing and understood as a method of revolutionary negation;

Mystical religious and philosophical systems, primarily J. de Maistre and J. Boehme, transferred to the soil of Russian Orthodoxy.

The penetration of advanced European philosophical ideas into Russia, their creative processing on a national basis, the originality of which was based on the uniqueness of Russian history and the original perception and interpretation of Christian doctrine, caused by the opposition of Russian Orthodoxy to all other Christian churches, gave rise to the phenomenon that we today call Russian philosophy .

Explanation of the practical orientation of philosophical and social theories

The desire to overcome backwardness, the struggle to abolish serfdom, and then autocracy, which lasted for many years, determined the close connection of philosophical and social theories with the practice of the revolutionary movement. Therefore, so-called system creation and abstract philosophizing are almost completely absent in Russian philosophy. All philosophers were included in the sphere of practical-political issues that worried their contemporaries. Of course, there were inclinations towards speculative speculation, but not in the same form and not to the same extent as it was, for example, in Germany. Therefore, the government’s attitude towards philosophy was very wary. It was believed that “the benefits of philosophy have not been proven, but harm is possible.” Philosophy in Russia was subjected to systematic persecution, and from the middle of the 19th century its teaching was prohibited in all higher educational institutions of the country. Therefore, philosophy sought a way out in journalism, literary criticism, and art, closely intertwined with other forms of social consciousness, especially literature. As A. Herzen once noted, for a people “deprived of public freedom, literature is the only platform from the height of which they make them hear the cry of their indignation and their conscience.”

Russian philosophical literature was full of polemics, sharp criticism of existing orders, accompanied by the promotion of various positive social programs. But at the same time, she is self-critical, since she was forced to quickly respond to all changes in the social and political life of the country, which means that stagnation of thinking was excluded. But at the same time, dogmatism remained in relation to its “creed,” that is, to the chosen direction of social thought.

Philosophy, detached from life and locked in speculative constructions, could not count on success in Russia. Therefore, it was in Russia, earlier than anywhere else, that philosophy was consciously subordinated to solving pressing problems facing society.

Areas of philosophical interests of Russian enlighteners of the second half of the XVIII century

To understand the philosophical process in Russia in terms of content, it is of great importance to trace concepts and problems that successively pass through several historical periods. They gave rise to diverse combinations of worldviews and were used simultaneously by all contending parties, movements, and directions (of course, in divergent interpretations and conclusions). Now it is impossible to trace all the cross-cutting concepts and problems, but it makes sense to highlight some of them, which are quite relevant today. This is the problem of the relationship between Russia and the West, and social issues, etc.

Russian philosophy achieved its highest development, the establishment of its currents and schools, the entry of its most significant representatives onto the world stage, and the full-blooded realization of its national characteristics in the last three centuries of its existence - the 18th-20th centuries.

Russian enlighteners of the second half of the 18th century (A. N. Radishchev, Ya. P. Kozelsky, D. S. Anichkov, I. A. Tretyakov, S. E. Desnitsky, etc.) continued such advanced traditions of Russian enlightenment as the department of philosophy from theology, the connection of philosophy with natural science, social sciences and life. They constantly emphasized the social, civic nature of philosophy.

Another area of ​​their philosophical interests was epistemology, or “knowledge of truth,” that is, the problems of the origin, development and improvement of human knowledge, the nature of this knowledge, the origin and relationship of soul and body, etc.

Finally, educators pay a lot of attention to the problem of man, which synthesizes their first two interests.

They rejected the idealistic view of the relationship between soul and body. In cases where medicine, physiology, psychology did not provide grounds for materialistic statements, they, by refusing to solve the problem, declared its idealistic interpretation untenable (Ya. P. Kozelsky in “Philosophical Proposals”, A. N. Radishchev in the treatise “On Man” , its mortality and immortality"). .....................................

During this period, Russian philosophical and socio-political thought continued its development. On the one hand, ideas and a range of sources stand out that rallied the people in the difficult conditions of foreign domination and dictatorship, called them to fight, appealed to spiritual fortitude; on the other hand, there is a complication of philosophical problems, elements of a critical attitude towards reality arise.

The genre and thematic coverage is expanding, new works of foreign literature are being translated and distributed, and our own original creations are being created.

By the end of the 14th century, Rus' had accumulated the strength to make a decisive turning point in its political, economic and spiritual development, to overthrow the foreign rule that was holding back its potential and to unite the lost and fragmented lands of the once united Kyiv state into Russian state with its center in Moscow.

At the end of the 14th century, the unification policy of the Moscow principality was crowned with a major military success - the victorious battle on the Kulikovo field in 1380.

This success, although the Horde subsequently attacked Rus' repeatedly with devastating raids, instilled confidence in victory over the conquerors, whose “bitter” yoke was overthrown a hundred years later. The battle itself, in its significance, is the most important event Russian history.

The Battle of Kulikovo caused a patriotic upsurge; many works of literature, art, folk art.

A new optimistic vision of the world appears in the literary works of the Kulikovo cycle: “Zadonshchina”, “The Tale of the Massacre of Mamayev”, short and lengthy chronicles about the Battle of Kulikovo, “The Tale of the Life and Repose of Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich” and a number of other written sources.

Several temple-monuments were erected in honor of the victory.

Among them is the Kremlin “very wonderful” Church of the Nativity of the Virgin Mary (on the day of the church holiday, September 8, 1380, a battle took place), built by the widow of Dmitry Donskoy, Princess Evdokia in 1393.

It has survived to this day.

Many works of painting, graphics, and sewing reflected the spiritual uplift caused by the turning point in the history of the development of the Russian people.

The most striking work is “Zadonshchina,” created by the Ryazan resident Sophony directly in the wake of this event.

After a short introduction, “Zadonshchina” tells about the troubles of the Russian land, then the ideas of a description of the campaign and battle, grief for the fallen soldiers and a solemn ending. The author comprehends the events from the tragic Battle of Kalka to the “Mamaev Massacre”, glorifies the capital city of Moscow, gives a picture of the national gathering of forces: “In Moscow, horses are neighing, glory is ringing throughout the Russian land, trumpets are blowing in Kolomna, tambourines are beating in Serpugov, great fortunes are standing the Great Don is on his way.”

The sadness on the Russian land was finally replaced by joy, the author exclaims, but the joy of the proud conquerors sank.

The victory was paid for with great sacrifices, but the honor of Rus' was restored.

Confidently, with a consciousness of triumph and faith in the future, the words of Dmitry Donskoy, addressed to Vladimir Andreevich, Prince of Serpukhov, sound: “And let us go, brother, Prince Vladimir Andreevich, to our Zalesk land to the glorious city of Moscow and sit down, brother, in our reign, and You have gained honor, brother, and a glorious name!”

Created later, “The Tale of the Massacre of Mamayev” is the most extensive work of the Kulikovo cycle. This work is fictionalized, it contains a number of details (about the ambassadors to Mamai, about Dmitry’s visit to the Trinity Monastery and the blessing of Sergius of Radonezh for the battle, about the duel between Peresvet and Chelubey, and so on). The narrative contains historical inaccuracies. For example, Metropolitan Cyprian is described as one of the inspirers of the military affairs of Dmitry Donskoy, although in reality the Grand Duke expelled the Metropolitan - he was in Kyiv during the battle.

Both genuine and invented details were introduced in order to emphasize the unity of Rus': princes and boyars, rulers and people, secular and spiritual authorities, in order to emphasize that only this unity could ensure the final victory over the enemy.

Such adjustment of real history to ideological principles is characteristic not only of ancient Russian, but also of all world literature, especially in tense and responsible periods of the existence of peoples and states.

This work condemns the Ryazan prince Oleg, who took an ambivalent position, which is assessed as a stupid betrayal. The story of Oleg’s ingratiation with Mamai ends philosophical quote from biblical texts: ... “the wicked will perish, taking upon themselves vexation and reproach.”

The note that Oslyabya and Peresvet are sent to fight “the filthy Polovtsi” has its own deep implication, for the Battle of Kulikovo was one of the most important centuries, but not the first and not the last, in the thousand-year struggle of Rus' with the steppe nomads, whose names were combined in the historical memory of the people.

Before the campaign, Dmitry goes to the Archangel Cathedral to pray for the success of the enterprise and turns to his ancestors who lie in the grand ducal pantheon. Having strengthened his spirit in the righteousness of his cause, the prince bravely sets off on his journey.

^Many warriors of the opposing troops before the terrible battle felt the terrifying shadow of death. In general, “The Tale” is not a dry chronicle, but an excited, full of deep, often philosophical, thoughts, a story about the inevitability, cruelty and great meaning of the battle of two worlds: a people defending the right to their own existence and a multi-tribal army of conquerors, hungry for prey, of which there are so many from all sides it has come and will come again to plunder the Russian land.

The image of the Kulikovo field, sagging from an unprecedented number of people before a great thunderstorm that will shake all lands, is vividly described. Both armies clashed in a brutal battle, the ground turned red with blood - it is marked with tongues of fire in the miniatures of the face lists, where martyr's crowns descend from the cloud onto the heads of the dying soldiers.

The victory brought Dmitry eternal glory and the nickname Donskoy. The apostate Oleg Ryazan fled from his principality, and “the Great Prince installed his governors in Ryazan.”

“The Tale of the Massacre of Mamaev” ends with such a significant phrase about strengthening the power of Moscow.

The centers of formation of the Great Russian nationality were Rostov, Suzdal, Vladimir and Moscow. Non-Slavic tribes living in the area between the Oka and Volga rivers also took a small part in the formation of the Russian nationality.

During this period, a number of remarkable folklore monuments emerged in the field of oral folk art. In Novgorod, epics arose about Vasily Buslaev and Sadko the rich guest. The theme of the heroic struggle of the Russian people against the Tatar-Mongol and other invaders is reflected in many folk works. Based on the songs of the Russian people, the stories that have come down to us about the Battle of Kalka, about the glorious defender of the Ryazan land from the hordes of Batu Evpatiy Kolovrat, about the defender of Smolensk Mercury, were created.

The uprising in 1327 in Tver against the Tatar Baskak Shevkal is described in the song about Shchelkan Dudentievich. This song was widely distributed outside the Tver Principality. When chanting the victory of the Russian people over the hordes of Mamai on the Kulikovo Field, old, well-known images of the ancient Kyiv heroes were used by the compilers of epics to create works dedicated to the struggle against the Golden Horde yoke.

Russian literature of that time, reflecting the processes taking place in society, was devoted to substantiating the historical need for the formation of a single state. A whole cycle of legends was associated with the struggle of Rus' against the Tatar-Mongol yoke under the leadership of Moscow.

The heroic defense of his capital, abandoned by the princes and boyars, is told in the story of the destruction of Moscow by Tokhtamysh in 1382. The story vividly describes the feat of the urban population. The “cry” about the ruin of Moscow is deeply imbued. The “Sermon on the Life and Death of the Russian Tsar, Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich” conveys the idea of ​​the need for strong grand-ducal power. This work was in tune with the unification processes that were taking place in the country.

The conquest of Constantinople and the Slavic countries of the Balkan Peninsula by the Turkish invaders also evoked a response in Russian literature. Nestor Iskander's story about the capture of Constantinople was very popular in Rus'. In the story, using the example of the defense of the city, the idea of ​​​​the need to defend the fatherland, which is so close to the Russian people, clearly emerges.

In Moscow of the 14th-15th centuries, chronicle collections appeared at the princely court and the metropolitan see. They carried out the idea of ​​the political unification of Russian lands. The international significance of Moscow, as the capital of the emerging unified Russian state, determined interest in issues of world history. The famous writer Pachomius Logofet compiled the “Russian Chronograph”, in which he conveys the idea of ​​​​the unity of the Slavic peoples. In his work, he explores the history of the development of fraternal peoples, draws parallels between their historical destinies and the historical fate of the Russian people, and substantiates the need for a connection between Rus' and the southern and western Slavs.

In addition to the military and political struggle, in addition to the economic rise, the growth of national self-awareness, the concentration of the spiritual forces of society, and the cultivation of high moral qualities of the individual were important.

These goals were served by hagiographic literature, which had a teaching character in the Middle Ages and developed into one of the most developed genres in Ancient Rus'. Particularly important for the objective role of this literature in the period under review are the biographies of figures of national history created by ancient Russian authors.

“...The ancient Russian biographer embraced Russian life with his historical gaze bolder and broader than the chronicler,” wrote historian V. O. Klyuchevsky.

If in the XII-XIII centuries images of people are static and monumental, reminiscent of heraldic figures, then in the hagiography literature XIV- the beginning of the 15th century, everything moves, everything changes, full of emotions, full of expression. In Russian hagiography, elements of the manifestation of an emotionally expressive style are associated with the names of Cyprian, Epiphanius the Wise, and Pachomius Logothetes.

The hagiographic genre reaches deep philosophical depth in the works of Epiphanius the Wise. It is known about this writer and thinker that he was born in Rostov, took monastic vows in a local monastery, lived most of his life in the Trinity-Sergius Monastery, traveled to Palestine and Mount Athos, and died around 1420.

His main works are “The Life of Stefan of Perm” and “The Life of Sergius of Rodonezh”.

A widely educated man, generously gifted by nature, Epiphanius writes humble words about himself: that he is weak in mind and ignorant of words, immediately refuting himself with his writing talent.

Epiphanius, who knew Stefan personally and talked with him a lot, collected all the factual information after his death and wrote his life story in a solemn, elevated style.

In the center of the description is a description of Stephen's high spiritual feat - the enlightenment of the pagan people who lived in the Perm land. Stefan created the alphabet for a people who did not have a written language, which is why he is compared with the Slavic first teacher Cyril the Philosopher and the enlightened Hellenes.

The Perm land received the beginning of spiritual enlightenment. Stephen was an educator high level, who introduced the small people to the developed Slavic and European civilization, becoming the prototype of those Russian enlighteners who brought cultural achievements to many peoples of the multinational Russian state.

Epiphany does not idealize reality. He vividly and psychologically authentically depicts the pagan rituals of the Permians, their worship of the sacred birch tree, and describes the confrontation between Stephen and the sorcerer Pam, who defended the ancient beliefs of the local population.

The priest Pam is trying to compromise Stefan, through whom the power of Moscow will lay a heavy hand on the wild but free population. Here the hagiographer begins to understand the complexity and ambiguity of the relations between the grand ducal power and the peoples subordinate to it, which will grow into a serious national issue, and it will become one of the most difficult in the future. Russian Empire and later history.

Thus, within the framework of hagiographic literature, complex problems of the political and cultural development of Russia were comprehended.

More documentary and narrative is “The Life of Sergius of Rodion of Onega,” which Epiphanius wrote in his declining years.

Epiphanius covers in detail the childhood and youth years of the youth Bartholomew (secular name Sergius). Hagiographic literature usually describes how a saint from a young age amazes everyone with his academic success. But in this life, the boy could not understand book literacy for a long time, until the elder who appeared to him enlightened Bartholomew.

After the death of his parents, the young man leaves his father's house, goes with his brother to a deserted forest place and erects the first small wooden temple in the name of the Trinity.

The theme of the Trinity runs through all life, which will be interpreted in Rus' not only in literature, but also in art as one of the most philosophical symbols expressing the mystery of natural and human existence.

In the same temple he built, he took monastic vows at the age of twenty-three under the name Sergius and began his monastic life.

In the biography of Sergius there are many key episodes that express the true essence of this man. One of them is indicative, called “On the poverty of Sergius’ clothes and on a certain peasant.”

Sergius always wore the poorest, thinnest and simplest clothes. And one day a peasant who had heard about his glory came to bow to him. Instead of a noble, richly dressed, full of grandeur, surrounded by the servants of the spiritual ruler, he saw an old man working in the garden, poorly dressed and shabby. Accustomed to distinguishing the mighty of this world by their external splendor, the ignorant farmer could not immediately comprehend the spiritual greatness of the elder. Only later, after a friendly conversation, after the honor shown to Sergius by the visiting prince, did the ashamed peasant become imbued with deep respect for the ascetic.

Similar episodes, expressing a philosophical parable about true greatness and external veneration, are often found in world literature. According to Diogenes Laertius, the philosopher Zeno deliberately seated one of his students, distinguished by his beauty and wealth, on a dirty bench so that he would not dirty his clothes, and then gave him a place among the beggars so that he would rub against their rags in order to humble his arrogance: “There is nothing more indecent than pride, and especially in young people.”

Not a single written source has been preserved from Sergius, he did not create a single work, but for his wisdom he was glorified by his contemporaries and even more so by his descendants (like Socrates, who did not write books and, despite this, became the personification of ancient Greek wisdom).

Sergius of Radonezh was involved in the destinies of many great people of Rus'. The head of the Russian church, Metropolitan Alexy, like the great princes, convinced Sergius to become his successor, but he did not want to leave the Trinity, where he was laid after his death in the temple he himself built.