8 philosophical ideas that will revolutionize your world
Forming Inspiration / / December 19, 2019
Anselm of Canterbury: "God really exists, because we have a concept of God"
The proof of the existence of God - one of the main problems of Christian theology. And the most interesting argument in favor of the divine being pushed Italian theologian Anselm of Canterbury.
Its essence is as follows. God is defined as the totality of all perfections. He is the absolute good, love, good and so on. Existence - is one of the perfections. If something exists in our minds, but it does not exist outside of it, then it is imperfect. Because God is perfect, so the idea of its existence should show its real existence.
God exists in the mind, therefore, it exists outside of it.
It's pretty interesting argument showing that was our philosophy in the Middle Ages. Although he was refuted by the German philosopher Immanuel Kant, try on their own to reflect on them.
Rene Descartes' thought, therefore, exist "
Can you at least say anything with absolute certainty? Is there at least one idea in which you not a bit in doubt? You say, "Today I woke up. In this I am sure. " Sure? What if your brain got in an hour ago
flask scientists and now they are sending electrical signals to it to artificially create your memories? Yes, it seems unlikely, but theoretically possible. And we are talking about absolute certainty. What then are you sure?Rene Descartes found is not subject to question knowledge. This knowledge is in man himself: I think, therefore I exist. This statement is not in doubt. Think about it: even if your brain is in a flask, your very way of thinking, even if it is wrong, there is! Let all that you know is false. But you can not deny the existence of what is false thinking.
Now that you know the most indisputable statement of all possible, has become almost a slogan of the whole European philosophy: cogito ergo sum.
Plato: "In reality, there are concepts of things, not the things themselves"
The main problem of the ancient Greek philosophers were searching for life. Do not worry, this beast is not terrible. Genesis - is that there is. That's all. "Then what is it to look - you might say - that is, everywhere." Everywhere, but that's only You take a thing, think of it as being somewhere disappears. For example, your phone. He kind of is, but you understand that it will break down and dispose of it.
In general, everything that has a beginning has an end. But life has no beginning and no end by definition - it just is. It turns out, because your phone has some time and its existence depends on this time, it being some unreliable, unstable, relative.
Philosophers differently solved this problem. Someone said that there is no life at all, someone stubbornly continued to insist on the fact that being is, and someone - that man can not say anything definite about the world.
Plato argued and found the strongest position, which had an incredibly strong impact on the development of the whole of European culture, but which is difficult to accept intuitively. He said that the existence of the concept have things - ideas, do the same things belong to another world, the world of formation. In your phone there is a part of life, but to himself as a material thing being not typical. But your idea of the phone, as opposed to the phone itself, depends neither on time nor on anything else. It is eternal and unchanging.
Plato paid a lot of attention to the proof of this idea, and the fact that he is still considered by many as the greatest philosopher in history, it should make you a little bit to keep the willingness clearly reject the position of reality ideas. It is better to read the "Dialogues" of Plato - it is worth it.
Immanuel Kant: "A man builds the world around them"
Immanuel Kant - a giant philosophical thought. His teaching became an original waterline, Department of Philosophy "to Kant's" philosophy of "after Kant."
He first expressed the idea that in our days, may not sound like a bolt from the sky, but of which we have quite forgotten in everyday life.
Kant showed that everything with which man is concerned, it is the result of the creative forces of man himself.
The monitor in front of your eyes, there is no "outside of yourself", you have created this monitor. The easiest way to explain the essence of the idea is physiology: the image of the monitor is formed by your brain, and it was with him you have a business, not a "real monitor."
However, Kant thought in philosophical terms, and physiology as a science did not yet exist. In addition, if the world exists in the brain, where the brain then there? So instead of "brain" of Kant used the term "a priori knowledge", that is, the knowledge that There is a man from the moment of birth, and allows him to create a display of something inaccessible.
He identified the different types of knowledge, but its primary forms, which are responsible for the sensible world, are space and time. That is, no time, no space is not without a man, a grid, glasses, through which a person looks at the world, at the same time creating it.
Albert Camus: "Man - this is absurd"
Is life worth to live it?
Did you have ever such a question? Probably not. And the life of Albert Camus was literally riddled with despair what this question is impossible to answer in the affirmative. The man in this world is like Sisyphus, endlessly performing the same pointless work. Out of this situation is not what a person is doing, it will always remain a slave life.
Man - a being absurd, wrong, illogical. The animals have needs, and in the world there are things that can satisfy them. In humans, there is a need in the sense - in what is not.
human being is such that it requires thinking in everything.
However, its existence is meaningless. Where there should be a sense of meaning, it is nothing, emptiness. Everything loses its foundation, none of the values is not the foundation.
Existential philosophy of Camus is very pessimistic. But you must admit, certain grounds for pessimism is there.
Karl Marx: "The whole of human culture - an ideology"
According to the theory of Marx and Engels, the history of mankind - is the story of the suppression of some classes by others. In order to maintain its power, the ruling class distorts the knowledge about the real social relations, creating the phenomenon of "false consciousness." Exploited classes simply do not realize that they are exploiting.
All the generation of bourgeois society philosophers declared ideology, that is, a set of false values and ideas of the world. This religion, and politics, and any pattern of human - we basically live in a false, false reality.
All our beliefs are false a priori, because they originally appeared as a way of hiding from us the truth in the interests of a particular class.
The man is simply not possible to look at the world objectively. After all, the ideology - it is a culture, an innate prism through which he sees things. Ideological need to recognize even an institution as a family.
That in this case, really? Economic relations, that is, such a relationship in which the formed mode of distribution of vital goods. In communist society the ideological mechanisms will fail (that is, there will be no state, no religion or families), and between the people to establish the true relationship.
Karl Popper: "A good scientific theory can be disproved"
In your opinion, if there are two scientific theories and one of them is easily refuted, and the other is impossible to undermine which of them will be more scientific?
Popper, science methodology, showed that the scientific criterion - is falsifiability, ie the possibility of refutation. The theory must not only have a slim evidence, it should have the potential to be broken.
For example, the statement "the soul exists" is not a science, because it is impossible to see how to disprove it. After all, if the soul is immaterial, then how can you make sure if it exists? But the statement "all the plants carry out photosynthesis" is quite a science, as to refute it, it suffices to find at least one plant that does not convert the energy of light. It is possible that he was never found, but the possibility of refutation of the theory should be obvious.
Such is the fate of any scientific knowledge: it is never absolute and is always ready to resign.