Read the biography of the philosopher: briefly about life, basic ideas, teachings, philosophy
ANSELM OF CANTERBURY
(1033-1109)
Theologian and philosopher, representative of the early scholasticism of the Augustinian trend, church leader. He fought for the independence of the church against the kings of England. He developed the so-called ontological proof of the existence of God from the very concept of God. I saw in faith the premise of rational knowledge: "I believe in order to understand."
Anselm was born in 1033 in Aosta, in northern Italy, on the border with Piedmont. His father Gundulf, a Lombard, was distinguished by wastefulness. Ermenberg's mother came from local nobles and was a distant relative of the Counts of Maurienne, the rulers of the region. The family at first belonged to the prosperous, but everything was maintained through the efforts of Ermenberga, a pious Christian and kind housewife. Gundulf, after the death of his wife, pretty soon let everything down.
Anselm had a younger sister, with whom he subsequently corresponded throughout his life. Edmer - probably from the words of Anselm - reports a religious feeling that awakened early in him. At the age of fifteen, he tried several times to become a monk, but met with the resistance of his father. After the death of his mother, Anselm still left home, accompanied by a house cleric. For three years Anselm wandered around Burgundy and France. Nothing is known about his activities during these years. Historians suggest that he may have studied in some schools.
Finally, Anselm ended up at the famous Lanfranc school in Bec (Normandy), in a monastery, of which Herluin was abbot. Lafranc had studied in Bologna in his youth and could have counted on a good position, but he preferred to avoid municipal concerns. He invited students to whom he taught everything he knew: the subjects of the trivium - rhetoric, grammar, dialectics and law. He was an excellent speaker and teacher.
The students of the monastery school were not monks, and many, having completed the course, left the monastery. Anselm, who took up his studies with great zeal, began to make progress, and over time, Lanfranc entrusted him with some classes.
In 1060 Anselm became a monk at Bec. In 1062, William II founded the monastery of St. Stephen at Caen on the Orne. He invited Lanfranc Anselm as abbot to this monastery, while Herluin made prior in Beck instead of Lanfranc.
Of all the subjects of the trivium, Anselm apparently preferred dialectics. In Beck, he wrote the dialogue "About the Literate", "Monologion" and "Proslogion". There was also an opportunity to argue with Gaunilo, which resulted in three dialogues: "On Truth", "On the Fall of the Devil" and "On Freedom of Choice". At the same time, he remained a sensitive mentor and educator. The monastery, according to the charter, was at that harsh time an almost military organization: duties, occupations, relations were strictly regulated. Anselm had a gentle nature and preferred to manage the means available to him: exhortation, explanation, and angry silence, which often worked better than words.
In his free time, that is, at night, Anselm proofread and corrected manuscripts from the library's storage. In 1066, the English king Edward the Confessor died. William, Duke of Normandy, ascended the throne, defeating the troops of his brother-in-law Harald, who had sat on the throne after the childless Edward. Thus Wilhelm became the "Conqueror".
In 1070, Lanfranc was appointed archbishop of Canterbury, bringing with him charters for monasteries and trying to carry out reforms in the spirit of the Gregorian reform.
In 1078, at the end of August, the abbot of Herluin died. Anselm was chosen to take his place. He became the second abbot of the Bek Monastery. The burden of administrative and economic concerns fell on Anselm's shoulders. He was now to manage life in the monastery, and on the other hand, represent the monastery in the county court. Since that time, Anselm has established stronger ties with England. In the first year of his abbey, he visits Lanfranc at Canterbury.
During his visit to England on the business of the monastery, Anselm became better acquainted with the Conqueror, who fell in love with him very much. Edmer says that Anselm was the second person, besides Lanfranc, to have influence over Wilhelm. At the end of his life, the Conqueror had to return to Normandy and suppress the uprising raised there against him by the local barons. In July 1087, passing through the smoking ruins of the French city of Manta, severely punished by him, Wilhelm unsuccessfully fell off his horse, pierced his stomach and died two months later in Rouen. Feeling the approach of death, he sent for Anselm to Beck. He arrived, stopped not far from Rouen, but he himself, being ill, could not sit at the duke's bed, and they communicated through messengers.
The two eldest sons - Robert and Wilhelm the Red (Ruf) inherited the worst qualities from their father: unbridled and rude temper. Robert inherited Normandy, the ancestral duchy. William the Red was crowned in England. A year after the death of Wilhelm, Lanfranc died - Wilhelm the Red was in no hurry to appoint a new archbishop, calmly appropriating the income of church lands.
Anselm was expected to be the next Archbishop of Canterbury. Who could better replace Lanfranc? But four years had already passed, the church was widowed, and Anselm, knowing about the rumors, stubbornly did not want to go to England on any business.
At the beginning of 1093, the king, who was in Gloucester, fell dangerously ill, William the Red, and was forced to send for Anselm. After a conversation with Anselm, the king issued an edict announcing a general amnesty for all prisoners of all prisons, the forgiveness of all debts and the forgetting of all insults inflicted on majesty. In addition, the king promised good and divine laws and appointed Anselm as archbishop.
Anselm resisted this appointment, saying that he was already old and could not cope. Then the bishops, losing patience, grabbed him by the arms, dragged him by force to the bed of the king and stretched his right hand forward - for the staff, but Anselm squeezed it so tightly that they could not unbend his fingers, and they symbolically (but very strongly - Anselm screamed in pain) pressed the staff to his fist. All this was on the first Friday of Great Lent, March 6, 1093.
But the full approval as archbishop was preceded by a mass of formalities, which, however, were not always empty formalities: the consent of the Duke of Normandy Robert, the archbishop of Rouen and Bek monks was required. So the matter dragged on. During this time, Wilhelm recovered and, of course, regretted his hasty promises. And immediately he began to violate them one after another, canceled the amnesty, resumed debts, and led all the litigation of the crown, suspended by the Edict of Gloucester, with renewed vigor.
In the summer of the same year, meeting with the king in Rochester, Anselm set a number of conditions on which he agreed to become the head of the English church. All possessions of the Church of Canterbury, seized by the king in four years, must be returned to her, and in religious matters the king is obliged to consult with him. The king, in the presence of witnesses, replied that he would return the lands, but he would do the rest at his own discretion. Wilhelm invited Anselm to Windsor, where the court was then located, and offered him the archbishopric, asking, however, to leave to the crown part of the lands that they had already distributed over the years to their vassals. Anselm rejected the deal. The king was so amazed and irritated by his refusal that the matter dragged on again.
Finally, under public pressure, a compromise was reached, and Anselm was taken to the royal oath in Winchester (the second part of the investiture act, the first - a staff and usually also a ring). On 6 September he arrived at Canterbury and was enthroned, and on 4 December 1093 he was consecrated Archbishop of York in the presence of nearly all the bishops of England.
According to the old custom, a book of the Gospel opened at random was placed on the shoulders of the newly consecrated prelate, thus recognizing the omen (omen) of his forthcoming service. Anselm fell out of Luke: "And when it was time for supper, he sent his servant to tell those who were invited to go, for everything was ready. And everyone, as if by agreement, began to apologize." Soon the relationship between the king and Anselm was upset Rufus made plans against his brother Robert, prepared a campaign in Normandy and was in great need of money. All the vassals gave him large sums. Anselm, after hesitating, also contributed his 500 marks of silver, and the king accepted them at first. But after that, evil tongues whispered to the king that if he refused this offering, he would be able to receive a large amount of money. Anselm did not even think of increasing the contribution, he, on the contrary, was very glad that such an unpleasant sin as a bribe would not hang on his soul, and, thanking God, he distributed the money to the poor.
Shortly thereafter, he again met with William and his noble vassals - in February 1094, in Hastings, where the king was waiting for a fair wind to sail to Normandy, to war with his brother.
Anselm decided to talk to the king about improving church affairs. But when Anselm spoke of vacant abbeys - and this directly concerned property and income - Wilhelm declared that he no longer needed his prayers and blessings. Anselm immediately left. In 1097 the king launched an unsuccessful punitive expedition against Wales. Anselm, like all the king's vassals, sent soldiers and money for the campaign.
After the defeat, he received a reprimand for the poor preparation of the troops sent by him and was summoned to the royal court. But Anselm did not answer this challenge and instead asked the king for permission to go to Rome, to the pope - for absolution and advice.
At parting, Anselm seemed to be touched, and the king was uneasy. Anselm asked William if he would like to accept his farewell blessing. Rufus agreed, Anselm blessed him, and so they parted on October 15, 1097.
Anselm returned to Canterbury, said goodbye to the monks, took the wanderer's staff and bag from the altar, and set off for Dover. Wilhelm the Red, as soon as he left, immediately recaptured the estate of the church and used it until his death.
In November 1097 Anselm began his winter journey to Italy. With him were two of his friends Baldwin of Tournai and Edmer of Canterbury. They stayed in monasteries. Christmas was celebrated in Cluny, where Anselm had a friend, Abbot Hugo, once the head of prior Hildebrand, and then adviser to Pope Gregory VII, and spent the rest of the winter in Lyon, with another Hugo.
In the spring, Anselm and his companions, under the guise of simple monks, ended up in Italy. In Northern Italy, they traveled incognito, because it was still unsafe there, the gangs of antipope Clement prowled, who allegedly even ordered a portrait of Anselm and distributed it to his fellows. Easter was celebrated in the small monastery of St. Michael near Chiuso, and at the right time they reached Rome.
Pope Urban II met them very affectionately, with maximum honors. He settled Anselm in the chambers of his own residence - the Lateran Palace and treated him with the utmost respect and caution, appearing everywhere in his company and invariably praising Anselm's wisdom and virtues.
Summer in Italy is very hot, and it was not safe for the elderly Anselm to be in Rome (he was already 65 years old). It turned out to be very opportunely an invitation from Abbot John, a former Italian student of Bek, to spend the hottest summer months in his monastery in the mountains. The pope approved this idea, and they went to the abbot John (in the monastery of San Salvatore, the Savior in Teles near Benevent). Since Teles itself was also unbearably hot, the abbot advised them to settle in a mountain village - the possession of a monastery called Sclavia, where Anselm spent the summer.
There he completed his main dogmatic work on the incarnation, Why Did God Become Man? Anselm traveled for several days to the military camp of the Norman Duke of Apulia, Roger. He was invited by the duke himself and the pope, who these days was also going to be there. The duke at that time was besieging Capua, whose inhabitants drove out their Norman ruler and wanted to get rid of foreign domination. Anselm won great popularity for his gentle manner and affectionate treatment from the soldiers. Anselm and Pope Urban II stayed there until the end of the siege, and when Capua was taken by the Normans, they went to Aversa. There they were overtaken by news from England about the new atrocities of William the Red, then he again took away the property of the church and let clergy around the world, then for a bribe he allowed his parents to baptize back Jewish youths converted to Christianity.
Anselm again began to ask the pope to release him from the archbishopric. The pope did not agree, persuaded him to endure for the common good and invited him to the cathedral in Bari, scheduled for autumn, and while they parted, the pope went to Rome, and Anselm to Sklavia.
The Council of Bari began on October 1, 1098. It was devoted to questions of "accurate interpretation of faith." The question was, in fact, not about the Trinity, but about where the Holy Spirit comes from. The procession of the Holy Spirit is one of the most important Christian doctrines. This question has become one of the main points of dogmatic divergence between Orthodoxy and Catholicism.
At the end of the 11th century, the thesis about the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son was elementary in Western church dogma. So now at the Council in Bari, the defense of this thesis was rather a matter of eloquence - although in the Middle Ages the criteria for eloquence as a whole shifted somewhat from the ideal of beautiful sonority towards consistency, intelligibility and verifiability.
Anselm gave a speech that has come down to us under the title "On the Procession of the Holy Spirit, a book against the Greeks." Anselm's speech made a great impression on everyone - he was a good lecturer and usually liked his pleasant manners, so that when the cathedral found out about his "litigation" with Wilhelm the Red, everyone was indignant and began to demand the excommunication of the Red, which would inevitably follow, according to Edmer, if not for the intervention of the noble Anselm.
They returned to Rome from Bari for the winter, and immediately assembled in Lyon. But the pope did not want to let Anselm go, because a cathedral in the Lateran was scheduled for Easter. This council (April 1099) renewed all the decrees of the church on the discipline of clerics simony, marriage and investiture were treated with the same severity. The English clergy here could hear with their own ears the decree on the excommunication of all those who issued and accepted investiture. Everyone again expressed their warm sympathy for Anselm, a fighter for the sovereignty of the church, as he was now in the general idea.
Immediately after the end of the cathedral, Anselm and his comrades went to Lyon. In July, while there, they learned of Urban's death. Anselm spent the summer in France. He helped his friend Hugo of Lyons, traveled to monasteries and abbeys, consecrated, communed. The people, of course, expected miracles from him like healings, but Anselm was ashamed to perform miracles and did not let himself be caught.
Early in August, King William of England was shot dead while hunting in the woods. Three days later, his younger brother Henry was crowned at Westminster. Anselm learned of Red's death while visiting the abbey at Auvergne. The news shocked him, he mourned William and, without ceasing to pray for the soul of the deceased, urgently returned to Lyon, where messengers from the new king began to arrive demanding the immediate return of the Archbishop of Canterbury.
On the whole, Anselm's relations with Heinrich were not bad. He rendered the new king another important service. When Robert, returning from Palestine, landed at Portsmouth with a detachment of troops, most of the Norman "Thanes" went over to his side. Henry wanted the people to swear allegiance to him. The "people" made Anselm an arbitrator in this case, who supported Henry and helped win over the Normans to his side.
And yet, under Henry, Anselm also had to go into exile. The new king did not abolish the custom of investiture. Therefore, when, at their first meeting in Salisbury, Henry demanded that Anselm take the oath again, Anselm opposed. He had just returned from the Council of the Lateran, at which it was clearly stated that anyone who dares to accept or present an investiture is excommunicated.
Henry found himself in a difficult position if he refused to investiture - half the kingdom would have sailed away from him, if he insisted and went into conflict with Rome - he could be excommunicated, and in his situation, with the awake Robert and the disgruntled Normans, this was tantamount to a loss crowns. And Henry suggested that the case be referred to Rome. But Paschal did not allow Henry to issue investitures to prelates. Then Henry sent Anselm to Rome.
He landed at Ostend and passed through Boulogne to Chartres. On the way, he stopped by his many friends everywhere. The summer was very hot, and everyone vied with each other to convince Anselm that it was crazy to go to Italy at such a time. And Anselm remained in Beck. But by the end of August he was on his way. The Pope did not give any concessions to Henry at the general audience, but it was clear that the situation was becoming unacceptably aggravated. After long meetings, the pope's entourage advised him to keep the ban on investiture, but to forgive and not excommunicate Henry personally - something like this formula already appeared in one letter from the pope to the king, but then he refused the same - apparently, it was a diplomatic trial ball.
Anselm decided to return to France and wait there for further developments. Anselm was in Lyon for a year and a half while the king negotiated with the pope. In March 1105, he received a letter from Paschalius announcing the excommunication of advisers who had provoked the king to insist on maintaining the custom of secular investiture. The Pope also wrote that he had not yet decided anything about the king himself, because he was waiting for the next embassy from England. Anselm realized that there was nothing to expect from Rome, and went north.
On the way, he stopped at Blois to see Contessa Adele, daughter of the Conqueror, Henry's sister, who was ill. He stayed with her until her recovery and informed her that he was going to pronounce Heinrich's excommunication. The Contessa was agitated. Excommunications were then a common and legal weapon in property disputes. But excommunication is different, and to be excommunicated from Anselm would be a big nuisance for Heinrich, especially now that he was preparing for a decisive fight with Robert. Adela took Anselm with her to Chartres and arranged a meeting between Anselm and the king at the castle "Eagle" on the banks of the Rieli (this happened on July 22, 1105), and reconciliation was reached there. Anselm was restored to the estate of the diocese of Canterbury.
Heinrich was extremely helpful and encouraged Anselm to go to England. But he did not concede on the issue of investiture - it was first necessary to somehow agree with Rome. During the absence of Anselm, the English Church was very poor. He received a lot of complaints from the clergy and calls to return as soon as possible, including from excommunicated bishops.
Finally, in April 1106, fresh instructions came from the pope, exempting from excommunication all those who had previously been subjected to it, and obliging Anselm to return to England. But Anselm had to stay in Normandy because of his illness. In the end, he returned to the island on August 1, 1106 in London, in the royal palace, a meeting of the nobility and clergy, originally scheduled for Trinity, but postponed due to Anselm's illness, took place.
For three days the question of investiture was discussed only by the king and the bishops, without the participation of Anselm. It was decided that no one else in England would receive an episcopate or an abbey by accepting a ring and staff from the hands of a king or other secular person. And Anselm, for his part, will not refuse initiation to anyone, referring to the oath given by the consecrated to the king. After that, the king, on the advice of Anselm, appointed pastors for all the dowager churches of England - and on August 11 they were consecrated at Canterbury.
In September, Henry fought in Normandy and on September 11, 1106 won a decisive victory over Robert, uniting two countries under one crown. In the last years of his life, Anselm wrote the work "On the agreement of providence, predestination and the grace of God with free will."
Edmer writes that two years before his death, he was already very weak and could not stay in the saddle, so he rode in a wagon. A little over a year before his death, he buried a friend - the Rochester Bishop Gundulf, a major architect. Anselm died on Wednesday before the day of the Lord's Supper, April 21, in the year from the incarnation of our Lord 1109, his 16th pontificate, and his 76th life. Before his death, he expressed regret to his relatives that he did not have time to investigate the question of the origin of the soul.
Thomas Becket demanded his canonization, but failed to achieve it. It was ratified by Pope Alexander VI, Rodrigo Borgia. Then this canonization was declared invalid, and in the 19th century he was canonized again, this time correctly.
Anselm of Canterbury worked on rational proofs for the existence of God. In the work "Monologue" he proceeds from the fact that something necessary, absolute and eternal is hidden behind a random, relative and mortal existence. According to Anselm, only God can be such a beginning of being. This is the proof of the existence of God, which, according to Anselm, is based on experience.
His other proof is known as the "ontological proof". It is stated in his work "Proslogion" and is based, according to Anselm, not on experience, but on reason. Anselm argues that even a madman who expresses atheistic judgments relies on the idea of God as absolute perfection. Thus, from the thought of God, Anselm, in fact, deduces the fact of his real existence. Contemporaries gave Anselm a "scientific nickname" - "The Miraculous Doctor", although he himself did not abuse "miracles" at all and considered the "natural restoration of righteousness" a greater miracle than the resurrection from the dead. The nickname referred, most likely, to the properties of his soul. In that age, rude and gloomy, this man must have seemed "wonderful" to his contemporaries.
* * *
You read the biography of a philosopher, which tells about the facts of life, the main ideas of the philosophical doctrine of the thinker. This biographical article can be used as a philosophy report (abstract, essay or synopsis)
If you are interested in biographies and ideas of other thinkers, then carefully read (content on the left) and you will find a biographical article about any famous philosopher (thinker, sage) - from ancient times to the present.
Basically, our site is dedicated to the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche (his thoughts, aphorisms, ideas, works and life), but in philosophy everything is connected, therefore, it is difficult to understand one philosopher without reading all the others.
The origins of philosophical thought should be sought in ancient times...
XIV-XVI centuries in the history of Europe - the beginning of development - humanism. Outstanding thinkers of that time - N. Kuzansky, Giordano Bruno, Erasmus of Rotterdam and others ... At the same time, Machiavelli developed the state version of political anti-moralism ... The philosophy of modern times arose due to a break with scholastic philosophizing. The symbols of this break are Bacon and Descartes. The rulers of the thoughts of the new era - Spinoza, Locke, Berkeley, Hume ...
In the 18th century, an ideological, as well as a philosophical and scientific direction appeared - "Enlightenment". Hobbes, Locke, Montesquieu, Voltaire, Diderot and other prominent enlighteners advocated a social contract between the people and the state in order to ensure the right to security, freedom, prosperity and happiness ... Representatives of the German classics - Kant, Fichte, Schelling, Hegel, Feuerbach - for the first time realize that man does not live in the world of nature, but in the world of culture. The 19th century is the century of philosophers and revolutionaries. Thinkers appeared who not only explained the world, but also wished to change it. For example, Marx. In the same century, European irrationalists appeared - Schopenhauer, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Bergson ... Schopenhauer and Nietzsche are the founders of nihilism, the philosophy of negation, which had many followers and successors. Finally, in the 20th century, among all the currents of world thought, existentialism can be distinguished - Heidegger, Jaspers, Sartre ... The starting point of existentialism is the philosophy of Kierkegaard ...
Russian philosophy, according to Berdyaev, begins with the philosophical letters of Chaadaev. The first representative of Russian philosophy known in the West, Vl. Solovyov. The religious philosopher Lev Shestov was close to existentialism. The most revered Russian philosopher in the West is Nikolai Berdyaev.
Thank you for reading!
......................................
Copyright:
1. Founder of scholastic theology
One of the most famous scholastic philosophers Anselm of Canterbury was born in the Italian (Piedmontese) city of Aosta. Became a monk in Beck in 1060, and in 1093 (at the age of 60) Anselm was even elevated to the rank of Archbishop of Canterbury (he occupied the See of Canterbury in England). He is credited with rationalizing Augustinianism.
Anselm lived a long and eventful life. He was a prominent church figure and thinker, a conductor of the ideas of Gregory VII in England. In 1099, he attempted to unite the churches, and shortly before his death, he witnessed the first stream of crusaders moving into Palestine.
In the system of the outstanding philosopher and theologian Anselm, the philosophical and religious searches of the era found their fullest expression. If John Scotus Eriugena only approached the basic methods and ideas of scholastic theology, then Anselm of Canterbury is often called the father of scholasticism. Recognized as the largest Western theologian in the period between Bl. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas, Anselm of Canterbury had a significant influence on many prominent theologians and philosophers, including modern ones.
Among his works stand out "Monologue" and "Proslogion" (i.e. "Addition"), an addition to the "Monologue". Among the lesser-known works are "On Truth", "On Free Will", "The Fall of the Devil", "On the Trinity", etc.
Anselm of Canterbury was called "the second Augustine" by his contemporaries. Indeed, many of the "Augustinian" formulations actually belong not to Augustine, but to Anselm.
2. Faith and knowledge
The problem of the relationship between faith and reason was solved by Anselm in the spirit of Augustism: faith precedes reason ("I believe in order to understand"). However, according to Anselm, reason, with the help of the art of dialectics, must clarify the truth contained in the provisions of faith. Anselm believed that all "truths of revelation" are available to rational proof. Dialectics turns out to be, so to speak, a kind of instrument of faith: Christian dogma, on the one hand, determines the initial premises of dialectical reasoning, and on the other hand, predetermines its final conclusions.
A.K. on the conceptual basis of philosophical "realism".
For example, "I believe in order to understand"; Augustine does not have such a phrase, it belongs to Anselm. But this saying expresses the meaning of Augustine's philosophy so well that many boldly ascribe it to Blessed. Augustine. “... if [a Christian] is able to penetrate to knowledge, then he finds pleasure in this, and if not, then [let] he simply worship.” “It seems to me negligent if we are firm in faith and do not also try to comprehend what we believe.”
Indeed, as Anselm of Canterbury said, "I do not think in order to believe, but I believe in order to understand." Faith is higher than reason, and reason only helps in strengthening faith. The main instrument of reason is philosophy (at that time it was called dialectics), and its main task is to strengthen faith. And we must believe in order to better understand. Faith, as Anselm pointed out in agreement with Augustine, always precedes reason. In any study, we always believe something first, and in the act of believing, the truth is given to us completely and completely. But this whole truth is not yet fully understood by man, and so that man could better understand it and understand it, God gave him reason. With the help of reason, a person explains the truth that was given to him in the initial act of faith.
Anselm of Canterbury is considered the most prominent theologian of the 11th century. and the "father of scholasticism". He is convinced that faith itself seeks understanding (fides quaerens intellectum). Although it is in any case a starting point, and the content of the dogmas cannot be refuted by any rational argument, nevertheless, true reason necessarily leads to the truths of faith, and therefore the Christian should try to comprehend his faith intellectually. Anselm is trying to show that the meaning of the Christian dogma can be developed even exclusively on the basis of the arguments of reason, without resorting to the help of authorities (the Bible, the Church Fathers).
One of the most famous scholastic philosophers of the 10th century is Anselm of Canterbury. He was born in the Italian city of Aosta in 1033 and died in 1109. From 1093 he occupied the See of Canterbury in England. Among his works stand out "Monologue" and "Proslogion" (i.e. "Addition"), an addition to the "Monologue". Among the lesser-known works are "On Truth", "On Free Will", "The Fall of the Devil", "On the Trinity", etc.
Anselm of Canterbury was called by his contemporaries nothing less than "the second Augustine". Indeed, many of the Augustinian formulations are in fact not Augustine's, but Anselm's. For example, "I believe in order to understand"; Augustine does not have such a phrase, it belongs to Anselm. But this saying expresses the meaning of Augustine's philosophy so well that many boldly attribute it to Bl. Augustine.
As Anselm of Canterbury said, "I do not think in order to believe, but I believe in order to understand." Faith is higher than reason, and reason only helps in strengthening faith. The main instrument of reason is philosophy (at that time it was called dialectics), and its main task is to strengthen faith. And we must believe in order to better understand. Faith, as Anselm pointed out in agreement with Augustine, always precedes reason. In any study, we always believe something first, and in the act of believing, the truth is given to us completely and completely. But this whole truth is not yet fully understood by man, and so that man could better understand it and understand it, God gave him reason. With the help of reason, a person explains the truth that was given to him in the initial act of faith.
Anselm, following Augustine, developed a concept that was called the concept of concept realism. In the Middle Ages, there were many problems that attracted great attention. Among them was the dispute between realism and nominalism. This dispute goes back to Plato and Aristotle: do ideas really exist outside objects or only in objects themselves? The term "idea" was not common in the Middle Ages, so they talked about general concepts, universals. Realists argued that only ideas really exist, and individual objects exist by chance, due to involvement in these ideas. Thus, the realists continue the line that goes from Plato and Augustine. And the nominalists believed that only single things really exist, and concepts are only names (nomen) of these things.
One of the first supporters of realism in the era of scholasticism was Anselm of Canterbury, who argued that only concepts, ideas really exist, and single things exist by virtue of involvement in them. Otherwise, it is impossible to understand the majority of Christian dogmas and sacraments. For example, one cannot understand either the original sin of Adam, or the sacrament of communion, or the expiation of human sins by Jesus Christ, etc. Indeed, how to understand that each individual person bears the stamp of original sin? This is impossible unless we imagine that original sin exists as an idea existing independently and separately in the Divine mind, and that all people participate in this idea. After all, it is absurd that every person is the bearer of that original sin that our forefathers committed, in the sense that this sin was inherited by us.
The dogma of the atonement of our sins by Jesus Christ is also understood: Jesus Christ atoned for the sins of all people who were born and will be born, because the idea exists in the Divine mind, and for the Divine mind there is no concept of time - it is eternity, which applies to all people. And in the sacrament a person joins the idea; it is impossible to imagine that each time in each temple the body of Christ was present as a separate concrete object. Naturally, every time communion is possible, because the bread and wine become involved in the idea of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ.
However, the main position, thanks to which Anselm of Canterbury entered the history of Christian philosophy, is his attempt to prove the existence of God. Anselm lists several such proofs, dividing them into two types: a posteriori (i.e. based on experience) and a priori (independent of experience). Among the a posteriori proofs, Anselm lists those that have been known since the time of Aristotle and Plato, and met with the Church Fathers. Their essence is that, observing nature, the external world, one can come to the conclusion that there is a God whom we do not see, but whose existence our mind tells us about. This is both movement in the world (there must be an immovable Prime Mover), and the existence of degrees of perfection (if we see something less perfect, more perfect and even more perfect in the world, then it is necessary that there be a measure of perfection crowning this pyramid of perfections, i.e. e. an absolutely perfect being, God).
However, all these proofs, according to Anselm, do not satisfy a person, because they speak about God on the basis of nature, i.e. as if they subordinate faith in God to the data of the sense organs. God must be judged directly, not indirectly. Therefore, more important, from Anselm's point of view, is the a priori proof, which later received the name ontological. The meaning of the ontological proof is quite simple: God, "by definition", is the most perfect Being and therefore has all the positive characteristics. Existence is one of the positive characteristics, therefore God has existence. It is impossible to imagine God as non-existent, for this contradicts the very concept of God. If we think of God to ourselves, then we think of Him as All-Perfect, and therefore existing. That is, the concept of the existence of God is derived from the very concept of God. This is the most famous formulation of the ontological proof.
In Anselm of Canterbury it appears in a slightly different context. He analyzes Psalm 13 (52), which says: "The fool has said in his heart: there is no God." Why, asks Anselm, did the psalmist say "fool"? Why can't a normal reasonable person say: there is no God. What is the madness? Answering this question, Anselm says: madness consists in the fact that the one who says this phrase contradicts himself. For in this very phrase there is a contradiction: God is always conceived as existing; the non-existent God is deprived of one of His most important attributes, which is impossible. Therefore, to say "there is no God" means to express a contradiction, and there can be no logical contradictions. Therefore, God exists.
But as early as the time of Anselm of Canterbury, this evidence began to be questioned. In particular, a certain monk Gaunilon objected to Anselm: you can think anything, but this does not mean that it will immediately become existing. Therefore, it cannot be said that from the idea of a certain concept one can immediately conclude that the thing denoted by this concept exists. One can imagine a fictional island existing, but this does not mean that it will actually exist.
Gaunilon's argument seems reasonable, but it misses the mark. Because Anselm himself said that this kind of evidence applies only to one being - to God, who possesses everyone positive features. No island has all the characteristics, so the ontological argument cannot be refuted with this example.
But nevertheless, there is indeed some contradiction in Anselm's reasoning. If a madman says that there is no God, then one can imagine God as non-existent, and this contradicts the fact that by imagining God as non-existent, we deprive God of one of these attributes in our imagination. To this, in the Proslogion, Anselm adds the following consideration as an objection to Gaunilon. First, there are two kinds of thinking: adequate and symbolic. A person very often confuses the fields of application of adequate and symbolic thinking. Symbolic thinking can indeed imagine whatever one pleases, but adequate thinking can analyze symbolic thinking and find contradictions in it. And if there are any, then this means that symbolic thinking turns out to be false. Adequate thinking thus shows us really the fact of the existence or non-existence of the object that was imagined in symbolic thinking.
And yet, Anselm adds to the monk Gaunilon: God is conceived as existing not in the same way that everything else in the world is conceived as existing, for what is conceived as existing is conceived as arising or disappearing, passing from non-existence into being and vice versa; but God always exists, He cannot be conceived as arising, therefore He always exists and cannot be conceived as non-existent.
The ontological proof has roots in ancient philosophy and is not a pure invention of Anselm. Even Parmenides argued that being and thinking are one and the same. Plotinus came from the concept of the Mind and the One to their objective existence. A similar reasoning is found in Augustine, who builds the following chain of reasoning: “I doubt, therefore I am, this is true, - therefore the truth exists, therefore the truth is God” comes through the idea of his own doubt to the idea that God exists. In subsequent philosophy, too, the ontological argument will occur quite often; it will be formulated especially clearly by Descartes, Leibniz, Hegel.
In addition to Anselm of Canterbury, a number of other philosophers, his contemporaries, should be noted. In particular, we should mention Peter of Lombardy, the author of four books of "Sentences". These books are famous because they were taught in universities for three centuries, until the famous “Sums” of Thomas Aquinas were written. Guillaume of Champeau (1068-1121), a representative of extreme realism, should also be singled out. Guillaume argued that only general concepts really exist, only names, ideas, and individual objects exist only due to some random properties. There was also extreme nominalism, the ancestor of which was Roscelinus, who lived from 1050 to 1120. He argued, on the contrary, that only single things exist, and general concepts do not exist at all, these are only “voice sounds”. From this thesis of Roscelin followed extremely heretical conclusions, which were immediately condemned by the Catholic Church. In particular, since there are no general concepts, there is no One God, One Divine nature, i.e. an idea that would unite in itself three Hypostases, and there are only three specific individual gods. At the Council of Poissons in 1092, this idea of Roscelinus was condemned as tritheism.
Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109).) was a representative of realism and one of the founders of scholasticism, was a prominent thinker of his time. In 1494 he was canonized. The mention of it is present in the "Divine Comedy" by D. Alighieri (section "Paradise"). Anselm of Canterbury's proof of God. In addition, he created three fundamental works in which he outlined his thoughts and theories.
Anselm of Canterbury: biography
The future great thinker was born at the B. St. Bernard Pass. The father came from Lombardy, and the mother was a native of Aosta. She was related to the House of Savoy. Anselm (one of his mother's relatives) was a bishop. In 1032, after the death of King Rudolf III, Aosta became a vassal territory of Humbert the First Beloruky. The family was not rich enough that the children could count on a solid inheritance or any guaranteed property status. As is known from sources, Anselm had a sister, Richeza. There is evidence that her husband subsequently participated in the Crusade. Even in his youth (at the age of 15) the future thinker Anselm of Canterbury decided to take monastic orders. However, my father was categorically against it. After a while, Anselm crossed the Alps and lived in Burgundy for several years. Here he did not have any specific goal. Rather, it was "search for yourself." He wandered from one monastery to another, studied at various church schools in France. In 1060 Anselm of Canterbury moves to Normandy. Here he stayed in one of the monasteries, where Lanfranc, famous at that time, became his prior. In the same 1060, Anselm enters the Benedictine order. After some time, he becomes prior, and in 1078 he is elected abbot.
Bek Monastery
The first works were written here, thanks to which the world knew who Anselm of Canterbury was. The era of the Middle Ages was generally rich in different thinkers. However, not all of them went down in history. In Beck, Anselm of Canterbury created his first works. They became Monologion and Proslogion. They not only brought him fame, but a high reputation in Europe. Bek Monastery itself, largely due to the influence of Lanfranc, became one of the most influential religious communities of the Anglo-Norman monarchy, which had vast holdings in England. As an abbot, Anselm visited Britain many times. Over time, he came to be seen as a perfectly natural successor to Lanfranc. Meanwhile, when he died in 1089, William II was in no hurry to fill the vacant post. The fact is that in the absence of the archbishop, all income from the lands belonged to the king. Only 4 years later, having become seriously ill and near death, Wilhelm, perhaps under the weight of his sins, agreed to the election of Anselm. The latter, in turn, tried to resign. However, despite his protests, he was still elected archbishop.
Relations with authorities
Despite the fact that by the time of his appointment to the post of Archbishop Anselm of Canterbury already had sufficient authority, he was a well-known religious figure, in matters of state administration he lagged far behind his predecessor. He failed to establish cooperation between church and secular authorities. He failed to adequately protect the financial interests of religious organizations in England from the encroachments of William. Anselm was of a gentle nature. But in matters of canon law and religion, he took an uncompromising position. He did not want to make concessions to the authorities, who were experiencing a significant shortage of funds. The situation was aggravated by the fact that the king was his direct opposite. Wilhelm II was cruel, cynical. He did not understand the means, seeking to strengthen his power.
Conflict with the king
Some time after Wilhelm's recovery, an argument broke out between him and Anselm. The latter demanded the return of the lands that were taken away after the death of Lanfranc, the final decision in the affairs of the church, and the recognition of Urban II as pope. The king satisfied the first requirement. But Wilhelm could not agree to the monarch's refusal of the sole approval of the pope in England. The king himself and the public were inclined to recognize Clement III. But Anselm of Canterbury supported Urban while still an abbot and remained faithful to him. Over time, the dispute between the archbishop and the monarch only intensified. Moreover, new contradictions arose. In particular, the parties clashed over the contribution of the church to the financing of the military campaigns carried out by Wilhelm, over the mores that reigned at the court of the monarch, who had homosexual inclinations. Soon the relationship between the king and the archbishop was finally severed. At the same time, the English clergy sided with William. Moreover, the Bishop of Durham demanded the removal of Anselm and his expulsion from the country.
Recognition of Urban II
Wilhelm II, meanwhile, took a number of measures. First of all, he turned to Urban with a proposal to announce his recognition in England. However, at the same time, the king demanded to deprive Anselm of the archbishop's rank. In 1095, in May, Walter of Albany, a cardinal, papal legate, arrived in England. He, in the name of Urban, granted the monarch an exclusive privilege. In accordance with it, without the consent of the king, not a single priest with legate powers could be sent to England. In response, Wilhelm officially recognized Urban II as pope. But having achieved the goal, the cardinal did not discuss the issue of Anselm's removal, handing over the pallium (an element of vestment) to the archbishop. This situation did not help reduce tensions between church and secular authorities. The monarch continued not only to ignore, but also to humiliate Anselm. The latter, in turn, did not receive the necessary support from the pope in the struggle for morality at court. In 1097, Anselm left the country without the consent of the monarch, heading for Rome. This meant that the income of the archbishopric was seized in favor of the royal treasury.
Stay in Rome
The Pope accepted Anselm as an equal. For some time he settled in Telese in the monastery of San Salvatore. Here he completed his fundamental work "Cur Deus Homo". In 1098, in October, Anselm of Canterbury took part in a church council held in Bari, and a year later - in Rome. They approved decrees against secular investiture (the introduction of vassals into the possession of fiefs), simony (purchase and sale of religious positions, ranks, rites and sacraments), as well as marriages of church ministers. Despite the reverence that was shown to Anselm by the highest clergy of Italy, he was unable to win the support of the pope in a conflict with the English monarch. Urban refused to excommunicate the king. Anselm went to Lyon. There he remained with Archbishop Hugh (his friend) until the death of Wilhelm II.
The fight against secular investiture
In 1100, Henry I came to the throne in England. The new king invited Anselm to return to his archbishop's post. On September 23, the clergyman arrived in England. By that time, Anselm was in favor of the Cluniac reform, so the archbishop refused to accept secular investiture on the lands of the church. A new conflict broke out. Henry I, recognizing the talents of the clergyman and even having deep respect for him, did not want to give up the established right of kings. It was not possible to reach a compromise because of the position taken by Pope Paschal II. He was categorically against any interference of the authorities in the process of appointing bishops. Anselm traveled to Rome in 1101 to speak with the pope in person. But, having failed, he decided not to return to England and again remained in Lyon.
Reaching an agreement
In 1105 the situation became more complicated. Bishops who received an investiture from Henry were excommunicated by the pope. Anselm threatened the king himself with the same outcome. In this situation, Henry was forced to make an agreement. In 1105, on July 22, the archbishop and the king met at Lagle. Henry agreed to return all income from the lands in exchange for the recognition of the bishops who received the investiture. Despite the fact that the pope opposed such an outcome, negotiations continued. A special role in the reconciliation of the parties was played by Adela of Normandy, the sister of the king. She was close to one of the most respected religious figures in Europe, Ivo of Chartres. He advocated the admission of power to the process of appointing bishops. In 1107 an agreement was finally reached. It later formed the basis of the Concordat of Worms, which ended the struggle for investiture in Germany.
Last years
After settling the issue with the investiture, Anselm returned to England. It happened in 1107. There he confirmed the bishops chosen by the monarch. Anselm spent the remaining 2 years in Canterbury. Here he was engaged in current church affairs. On April 21, 1109, Anselm died. In 1494, Pope Alexander VI canonized the archbishop. In 1720, Clement XI proclaimed him a Doctor of the Church.
Anselm of Canterbury: Key Ideas
The archbishop believed that faith is the basis of rational knowledge. Widely known ontological proof of the existence of God by Anselm of Canterbury. He drew arguments from the very concept of the Almighty. His theory consisted of the following provisions:
- Everything strives for the Good. But God is the Absolute Good itself.
- Everything has a limit - an upper limit. This is God himself.
- For some reason, being is whole. This is God himself.
- God is perfect.
The Almighty surpasses everything conceivable in its magnitude. This means that it exists outside the world and outside of man. The motto of Anselm of Canterbury is "I believe that I may understand".
Atonement Theory
Anselm of Canterbury is considered to be the first thinker to present the content of Christian teaching in legal terms. The philosophy of the archbishop is set forth in the treatise Cur Deus homo. The paper makes the following arguments:
This theory aroused the interest of many Russian church leaders in connection with disputes about the correspondence of the provision on the Atonement to Orthodoxy, widespread in the Synodal period. Meanwhile, the doctrine that prevailed at that time was not limited solely to the concept that Anselm of Canterbury proposed. The philosophy of the Synodal period included the theory of healing from sin by grace. Some church leaders believed that "jurisprudence" does not reflect the essence of the Atonement, but expresses only the feudal customs of satisfaction, which, in turn, have a pagan basis.
To the section "Introduction. What is philosophy?What do I know about philosophy, philosophers and what do I think about them?
This task is proposed for written student work at the first seminary class in philosophy. No more than 20 minutes are allotted for writing the paper.
A variant with oral answers without preparation in the express survey mode is possible.
The famous English physicist Kelvin told the supporters of a narrow specialization of students: "Because of the ignorance of logic, more ships have died than because of the ignorance of navigation." - What did he mean? How do you think? Try to give examples to clarify his statement.
How do you explain such a disagreement among philosophers: some (rationalists) affirm the supremacy of reason, thinking in human life, while others (irrationalists) reject this supremacy. The indisputable authority of reason seems obvious and, on the contrary, it is strange why people, philosophers again and again attack reason, reject its claims to the supremacy, etc., etc. Rationalists love Cartesian “I think, therefore I am”. Irrationalists are closer to Shakespeare's words: "There are many, friend Horace, in the world such that our wise men never dreamed of." The former emphasize the power of the mind, while the latter emphasize its impotence. Which of them is right? - Give a detailed answer.
How to teach philosophy?
Give a detailed answer.
To the section "History of Philosophy"
What does the words of Socrates mean: “I know that I know nothing”? - Comment.
In 1508, Pope Julius II invited Raphael to paint a room in the Vatican. Raphael painted four frescoes. Among them is the "School of Athens", in the center of which the artist placed Plato and Aristotle with characteristic gestures: Plato points his finger up, and Aristotle points to the ground, as if gesturing around the world around him. What do you think is the meaning of the gestures of ancient thinkers?*
Give a detailed answer.
Conduct a comparative analysis of the thoughts of Anselm of Canterbury “I believe in order to understand” and the thoughts of Pierre Abelard “I understand in order to believe.”?
Descartes said: I think, therefore I am. This statement has at least two different meanings. What are they?
Kant stated: "We cannot think of any object except by means of categories."
What did he mean? Give a detailed answer.
Hegel said: "Only that which is absolutized is false." - What did he mean? Comment.
Some hold F. Nietzsche responsible for the atrocities of fascism in the 20th century. Others argue that this philosopher is not responsible for the atrocities of fascism. Who is right? Justify your answer.
Z. Freud said: “Every person is a psychopath. The only difference between people in this regard is that some people know they are psychopaths, while others are unaware of it.”
A very imprudent statement. First, it is internally contradictory. Secondly, it characterizes rather than people, but the author himself.
Give your assessment of Z. Freud's statement and explain the comment to it.
To the section "Philosophical picture of the world"
Comment on the words of M. V. Lomonosov:
“It’s easy for these smart people to be philosophers, learning by heart three words: God created this, and giving this in response instead of all reasons.”
A. Smart sees the immeasurable realm of the possible (D. Diderot).
B. An uneducated person tends to operate with empty possibilities (Hegel).
Does the world exist by itself, from eternity, or is it created and ruled by God?
Which answer do you choose and why?
Was the world created by God? Yes or no? - Which answer do you prefer and why?
What is more in the world: order or disorder?
Give a detailed answer.
How do you evaluate these two mutually exclusive statements:
Hegel: “... everything spiritual is better than any product of nature” (Hegel, Works, Vol. XII, p. 31).
R. Mayer (biologist): “Nature in its simple truth is greater and more beautiful than any creation of human hands, than all the illusions of the created spirit” (Quoted from: Kuznetsov B.G. A. Einstein. M., 1963. S. 117).
Is our thinking possible (can we think) without the use of fundamental categories (matter and motion, quality, quantity, measure, space and time, possibility and reality, necessity and chance, cause and effect, etc.)
e.)? - Explain your answer with examples.A very common mistake is when the effect is taken as the cause, and the cause is taken as the effect.
Give examples of this error.
Imagine the legendary ship Theseus, which is decrepit and which has to be updated all the time, gradually changing one board after another. Finally, there comes a moment when not a single old board is left. The question is, in front of us is the same ship or another?
Give a detailed answer.
Give an assessment of the fact of the collapse of the Soviet Union in terms of the categories of necessity and chance.
Is the shape of a particular tree necessary or random?
To the section "Philosophy of man"
A. Man is the measure of all things (Protagoras).
B. No need to measure the temperature of society by placing a thermometer under your armpits (modern political scientist).
Comment.
Does everything in life depend on us? If not, to what extent does our life depend on us?
Give a detailed answer.
Judge:
A. Pestalozzi I.G., the famous teacher, the founder of the theory of primary education, argued: "A person is formed by circumstances." Marcus Aurelius advised: "If you cannot change the circumstances, change your attitude towards them."
B. Balashov L.E .: "A person only achieves something when he is stronger than circumstances."
Give a detailed answer.
Who do you think is right and why?
A. How many things in the world that I do not need (Socrates).
B. If a thing is not suitable for one purpose, it can be used for another (Lao Tzu).
Comment.
What did Biant, one of the seven Greek sages, want to say with this phrase: “Life must be measured in such a way that you have little and much left to live”?
Try to reconstruct the course of his thought.
Does life expectancy increase or decrease with age? - Give a detailed answer.
What (what) do you expect from life? - Give a detailed answer.
How should we live in order to be better? - Give a detailed answer.
There are two polar opinions about death.
A. Plato, through the mouth of Socrates, stated: "Those who are truly devoted to philosophy are actually occupied with only one thing - dying and death." (Phaedo, 63e-64a). A. Schopenhauer in the book "The World as Will and Representation" (T. 2, ch. XLI) begins the chapter on death as follows: “Death is truly an inspiring genius, or musaget of philosophy; that is why Socrates defined the latter as ????? ?????? (preparation for death [Greek])”.
B. B. Spinoza: “A free man thinks of nothing less than death, and his wisdom consists in thinking not about death, but about life.” (B. Spinoza. Ethics. - See: Spinoza B. Selected works. T. 1, M., 1957. S. 576).
Which of them is right? Give a detailed answer.
Who do you think is right and why?
M. Montaigne: “The end point of our life path is death, the limit of our aspirations, and if it instills horror in us, is it possible to take at least one single step without trembling like a fever? The medicine used by ignorant people is not to think about it at all. But what animal stupidity is needed in order to possess such blindness! This is the only way to bridle the donkey from the tail ... and it is not surprising that such people often fall into a trap. (Experiments, Ch. XX).
B. Spinoza: "A free man thinks of nothing less than death, and his wisdom consists in thinking not about death, but about life." (Ethics)
Give a detailed answer.
A.S. Pushkin said in the poem “I erected a monument to myself”:
No, all of me won't die
The soul in the cherished lyre will survive my ashes
And decay will flee
How are these words to be understood? We know that Pushkin died long ago, in 1837. But what did not die in him, what was left of him? Is the poet Pushkin alive now?
Is man mortal or immortal? Or is he somehow mortal and somehow immortal?
How do you feel about the idea of abolishing the death penalty? Justify your answer.
Humanity is not a herd of horses to be fed, but a club to join (Chesterton, English writer).
P.Ya.Chaadaev: “Love for the fatherland is a wonderful thing. But even higher is the love of truth.”
Merab Mamardashvili: "I love freedom more than my homeland."
Rate these statements, comment.
Comment: To a wise man the whole earth is open. For a good soul's fatherland is the whole world. (Democritus, 5th century BC)
What is the difference between patriotism and nationalism? Give examples of both.
Is F.I. Tyutchev right when he says:
Russia cannot be understood with the mind
Do not measure with a common yardstick
She has a special
One can only believe in Russia
Russia: East or West? Or something different?
Do you agree with the statement “We are not Europe and not Asia. We are Russians” (TV program “Russian House”, 3rd channel TV 31.08.03). Comment.
Explain why the golden rule of behavior is called the golden rule?
Which of the following statements can be described as a special case of the golden rule of behavior? Explain.
A person must ... be content with such a degree of freedom in relation to other people, which he would allow other people to have in relation to himself (T. Hobbes).
Freedom consists in the right to do whatever does not harm others (Claudius).
Freedom must be judged by the degree of freedom of the lowest (J. Nehru).
Do what you want, but so as not to lose this opportunity in the future (from a collection of prison aphorisms).
Reference. Negative and positive formulations of the golden rule: “do not do to others what you would not want them to do to you”; “Do unto others as you would like them to do unto you.”
“Without violating other people's rights, you protect your own” (from the film by Jacques Yves Cousteau, 1984).
Reference. Negative and positive formulations of the golden rule: “do not do to others what you would not want them to do to you”; “Do unto others as you would like them to do unto you.”
What did Shakespeare want to say through Katarina, the heroine of his play?
"The strength of a woman is in her weakness."
How would you rate the statement:
“If there is no God, then everything is allowed” (from “The Brothers Karamazov” by F. M. Dostoevsky). - Give a detailed answer.
Are people getting better, is there moral progress? - Give a detailed answer.
Why is there evil in the world? Is it possible to fight evil, and if so, is it possible to eliminate evil altogether?
Give a detailed answer.
What do you think: is a person by nature good, evil or not good and not evil? - Give a detailed answer, justify.
How do you understand happiness? - Give a detailed answer.
What does it take to be happy?
Give a detailed answer.
Some people consciously strive for self-improvement. How do you feel about this idea (self-improvement)? Does a person need to improve? And if so, in what direction(s)?
Give a detailed answer.
Why is it good to be kind and bad to be evil?
Do you think kindness is rare or common?
Explain your answer and give examples to support your point of view.
What is evil in the moral sense?
Give a detailed answer, give examples.
Judge:
A) For Socrates, good coincides with knowledge, and the absence of knowledge is the only source of any moral imperfection;
B) Kant argued the opposite: “To be honest and kind, and even wise and virtuous, we do not need any science and philosophy.”
Give a detailed answer.
How do you evaluate the thesis “the end justifies the means”. - Justify your answer.
On the one hand, there is a popular belief that “the end justifies the means” (option: “all means are good to achieve the end”). On the other hand, many are convinced that "an end that requires wrong means is not a right end." Judge. Where is the truth? Justify your answer.
Answer the question: is it possible to be angry and happy at the same time? or: can an evil man be happy?
Justify your answer.
According to F. Nietzsche, love is "an expression of egoism". V. S. Solovyov, on the contrary, argued that true love is the transfer of the center of the “I” to another, overcoming selfishness. What do you think? Justify your answer.
Fichte argued: there should be no marriage without love and love without marriage. And what do you think?
Give a detailed answer.
What does the phrase "money doesn't smell" mean? In Latin, it sounds like this: "Non olet peccunia." These are the words spoken by the Roman emperor Vespasian to his son, who expressed displeasure at the taxation of public latrines.
Give a detailed answer.
Explain your answer, give examples.
What is the connection between Jean-Jacques Rousseau's call "Back to nature!" and the slogan of the French Revolution “Peace to the huts; war on palaces!
Give a detailed answer.
Rousseau called the distant past a golden age.; he criticized civilization and progress. "Back to nature!" is his call.
To this, Voltaire sarcastically remarked: “When I listen to Rousseau, I want to get on all fours and run into the forest.”
T. Hobbes argued: “as long as people live without a common power that keeps them all in fear, they are in that state called war, namely, in a state of war of all against all” (Hobbes T. Selected prod. T. 2. M., 1964. S. 152.)
All power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. (Unknown author).
In general, power does not spoil people. When fools are in power, they spoil the power. (B. Shaw).
Give a detailed answer.
Where is humanity heading? To death, to the better, or to something else?
To the section "Philosophy of activity"
L.N. Tolstoy loved Buffon's saying "Genius is patience." On the other hand, V.G. Belinsky wrote: "Genius is not, as Buffon said, patience in the highest degree, because patience is a virtue of mediocrity."
Which of them is right? Or is there another answer?
One mind is good, but two is better.B. One bad general is better than two good ones.
Judge:
A. People stop thinking when they stop reading. (D. Diderot)
Give a detailed answer.
What is stupidity? Give examples of stupidity in words and deeds.
One famous person (Socrates) claimed: "I know that I know nothing." Another no less famous person (D. I. Mendeleev) objected to him: “The ancient Greek sage said: I know that I don’t know anything. Yes, he didn’t know, but we know ...” (“Fundamentals of Chemistry”)
How do you explain the apparent contradiction between the two statements:
A. The truth is good, but happiness is better.
B. Plato is my friend, but the truth is dearer.
There are five states of knowing and not knowing:
when we know what we know
when we know we don't know
when we don't know what we know
when we don't know we don't know
when we don't know, but think we know (when ignorance is passed off as knowledge).
Give examples of each of these states.
Try to explain: what are the similarities and differences between truth and truth?
Try to explain: what is the difference between knowledge and belief? (By faith is meant faith in general, not religious faith.)
What is truth? - Try to give an answer without looking into textbooks, dictionaries and encyclopedias.
How do you explain the apparent contradiction between the two statements:
A. Everything is known in comparison.
B. Comparison is always lame. (Janusz Korczak, a well-known teacher, said even more sharply: "Let's discard comparisons, they are misleading").
How would you explain the apparent contradiction between the two statements:
A. “... in much wisdom there is much sorrow; and whoever increases knowledge, increases sorrow” (biblical preacher Ecclesiastes).
B. “Knowledge is power” (F. Bacon) (compare similar: “to know more today means to be stronger tomorrow” - E. Teller).
Some consider intuition the highest form of knowledge, others - atavism inherited from animals.
And what do you think? Give a detailed answer.
Comment on the following statement coming from Hegel:
There is no abstract truth, truth is always concrete.
Give a detailed answer, give examples.
What is the essence of the dilemma "scientism - antiscientism", is it possible to solve it? *
Give a detailed answer.
A. Einstein argued: "Only theory decides what we manage to observe!". I. P. Pavlov spoke about the same thing: “If you don’t have ideas in your head, then you won’t see the facts.”
What did they mean? Give a detailed answer.
Who do you think is right? Comment
A .: “... works of art should not be created for study and not for guild scientists, but they ... should be understandable and serve as an object of enjoyment directly in themselves. For art exists not for a small vicious circle, not for a few very educated people, but in general for the whole people.” (Hegel. Work. T. XII. P. 280) [Compare: “Art belongs to the people” (V.I. Lenin)]
B.: “The principle “art for all” is deeply false. It reveals a false democratization. “Art for all” does not at all imply the necessary clarity and simplicity, that would be fine - no, it contains the disastrous demand for cutting down the growth of the master to the level of contemporary ignorance and bad taste, the demand for “general accessibility”, alphabetic and usefulness. Art never speaks to the crowd, to the masses, it speaks to the individual, in the deep and hidden recesses of his soul.
Art should be “for everyone”, but by no means for everyone. Only then will it preserve the relation of individuality to individuality, which is the meaning of art, in contrast to other crafts that serve the tastes and needs of the multitude.” (M. Voloshin. Notes of 1917)
Ancient philosophers put forward the motto "Question everything." What did they mean? How can this motto be interpreted?
Do you believe in fate? What is fate?
What is, according to you, a parable? Two examples:
A. (The Parable of the Samaritan) "And behold, a certain lawyer stood up and, tempting Him, said: Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
And he said to him, What is written in the law? how do you read? He answered and said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind, and thy neighbor as thyself.
Jesus said to him: You answered correctly; do so and you will live.
But he, wanting to justify himself, said to Jesus: And who is my neighbor?
Jesus said to this: a certain man was going from Jerusalem to Jericho and was caught by robbers, who took off his clothes, wounded him and left, leaving him barely alive. By chance, a priest was walking along that road and, seeing him, passed by. Likewise, the Levite, being at that place, approached, looked, and passed by. But a certain Samaritan, passing by, found him, and, seeing him, had compassion. And he came up and bandaged his wounds, pouring oil and wine; and putting him on his donkey, he brought him to an inn and took care of him (...) Which of these three, do you think, was a neighbor to the one who was caught by the robbers?
He said: Who showed him mercy. Then Jesus said to him: Go, and you do the same" (Gospel of Luke 10; 25-37).
B. (The parable “Buridan's donkey”) A certain philosopher, whose name was Buridan, leaving, left his donkey two identical armfuls of hay. The donkey could not decide which armful to start with and starved to death.
Comment
“When a war begins, the truth must be considered the first victim” (R. Kipling)
Comment on the following statement:
“Everything needs a measure, even in keeping it.”
Which of the two opinions suits you better? Why?
A. “Truth is not in strength, but strength is in truth.”
B. “He who is stronger is right” (option: “The strong one is always right”).
What is wrong with the following statement:
“With them it is humane to be cruel, cruel to be human” (this is what Catherine de Medici, the mother of the French king Charles IX, said in justification of the massacre of the Huguenots on Bartholomew's night).
What is the inconsistency, logical incorrectness of the following reasoning:
"Pleasure is the opposite of love, and not because it cannot accompany love, but because their essence is different (for example, the object of love can grow old, love does not, it is timeless)" (quote from the book).
Is Bismarck right when he says: "It is only fools who learn from their own experience. I prefer to learn from the experience of others." - Rate and comment.
How would you explain the apparent contradiction between the two statements:
A. "... nothing great in the world has been accomplished without passion" (Hegel. Works. T. VIII. S. 23-24)
B. "Strong passions - weak nerves" (from the movie). Or: “Under strong passions, only a weak will often hides” (V. O. Klyuchevsky).
Give a detailed answer.
Comment on the correct use of the words "materialist" and "idealist" in the following joke:
An elderly couple gets divorced in court.
The judge asks her husband about the reasons for the divorce.
The husband replies that the reasons are purely philosophical and explains that he is a materialist, and the wife is an idealist.
The wife enters into the conversation: “I gave him all my romantic sublime soul, and he says that he needs a young body.”
How would you explain the apparent contradiction between the two statements:
A. Not what you think, nature,
Not a cast, not a soulless face -
It has a soul, it has freedom,
It has love, it has language. (F. I. Tyutchev)
B. There is no beauty in the desert. Beauty in the soul of an Arab.
(A. M. Gorky)
Is the statement correct:
“We do not notice the beautiful until we lose it” (from the movie).
Give a detailed answer.
What does the expression "golden mean" mean? Give examples explaining this expression.
