Ancient philosophy: the pre-Socratic period. Pre-Socratics. Socratic philosophy. Sophists Ancient philosophy of pre-Socratics briefly

History of ancient philosophy

The emergence of ancient philosophy

Greek philosophy as a special spiritual phenomenon appears in the 7th-6th centuries BC. e. in the Greek colonial cities on the coast of Asia Minor, now the western coast of Turkey. These are the cities of Miletus, Ephesus, Klazomene. These cities were crossroads of maritime trade routes and points where different cultures of the period came into contact.

Let us highlight the factors that influenced the emergence of philosophy in Ancient Greece:

· Increase in material wealth and, as a consequence, the opportunity to engage in art, science and philosophy.

· the ability to compare worldviews, traditions and customs, religious beliefs of different cultures. All this led to the question with which philosophy begins: what is truth?

· a special attitude or a special type of attitude towards knowledge. In Babylon, China, and Egypt, knowledge pursued practical goals. And in Greece they began to learn for the sake of knowledge itself. According to Aristotle, a Greek philosopher of the 4th century BC. e., they began to strive for knowledge for the sake of understanding, and not for the sake of any goal. Philosophy arises not from need, but from wonder. All other sciences are more necessary than philosophy, but none is better.

· The competitive nature of ancient Greek culture, manifested not only in the Olympic Games, but also in the People's Assembly, the court, where one had to defend one's position, using, among other things, logical arguments.

So, a distinctive feature of Greek culture until the 4th century BC. e. there was knowledge as an end in itself. During this period, the classical philosophical systems of Heraclitus, Parmenides, the Pythagoreans, Democritus, then Plato, Aristotle, were created, full of original ideas. These ideas still underlie modern European philosophy and science.

But already in the 4th century the situation changed. Instead of small democratic city-states (polises), powerful empires appear. First, the empire of Alexander the Great arose, which broke up into smaller, but still quite large states, then the Roman Republic arose, and then the Roman Empire. These states appear as gigantic all-encompassing social machines, in the face of which the individual becomes nothing and no one.

Under these conditions, they begin to look at philosophy as a guide in practical life, and begin to expect from it instructions for correct behavior. How, being a cog on which nothing depends in a huge state soulless mechanism, nevertheless live with dignity and preserve oneself as an individual?

But as soon as they began to look at philosophy from the point of view of practical use, it stopped in its ascent. Original philosophical teachings ceased to arise. Many philosophical schools were founded, but they were fed mainly by previous ideas developed in the classical period. These ideas were combined and processed in various ways, adjusted to social needs. Or they were endlessly refined and refined. But the previous ascent was no longer there.

Periodization:

1. Pre-philosophical stage – IX – VII centuries. BC. During this period, the first systematization (and therefore the first rationalization) of Greek myth took place in the poems of Homer and Hesiod. The practical “wisdom” of the so-called “Seven Sages” (Thales, Pittacus, Bias, Cleobulus, Solon, etc.), who in their short aphorisms comprehended the relationships between people, behavior, and man, is also becoming widespread.

2. Pre-Socratics – VI – IV centuries. This stage includes philosophers who dealt with natural philosophical issues and lived before Socrates (although Democritus outlived Socrates by 20 years).

3. Classical period – V – IV centuries. The time of departure from natural philosophical problems (Socrates) and the flourishing of the classical philosophical systems of Plato and Aristotle.

4. Hellenistic period – IV century. BC. – VI AD At this time, examples of Greek culture, including philosophy, spread throughout the Mediterranean, absorbing the characteristics of local cultures. Particularly well known are such philosophical movements as skepticism, Epicureanism, Stoicism, Neopythagoreanism, Neoplatonism, etc.

Pre-Socratic philosophy

Milesian school. Greek philosophy originated in the trading city of Miletus, on the western coast of Asia Minor. A philosopher appears in this city Thales, then Anaximander And Anaximenes. These three philosophers are usually grouped under the general name of the Milesian School.

So, we can say that Greek philosophy begins with Thales. He was not only the first philosopher, but also the first scientist. He was the first to prove geometric propositions as theorems, logically deducing them from initial assumptions. Many geometric provisions were already known, but they were perceived more as rules for solving problems in measuring areas. They were not proven or justified speculatively. Thales began to logically prove them for the first time. They write about him that he predicted a solar eclipse, based on the knowledge that he apparently received from the Babylonian priests. He was the first to accurately determine time using a sundial. There is a story that Thales measured the Egyptian pyramids by their shadow, determining the moment when our shadow is equal to our height. He once said that death is no different from life. Why, they asked him, are you not dying? He answered: precisely because there is no difference.

He was reproached for being too detached from earthly life, carried away by celestial calculations. And he decided to prove that his celestial calculations allowed him to perfectly predict what was happening on earth: foreseeing a large harvest of olives, he rented oil presses and became rich as a result.

Now about the philosophy of Thales. The search for the fundamental principle of everything that exists begins with Thales. This first principle was called arche in Greek.

Why search for arche? The highest goal is knowledge of the world around us. But you can only know something permanent and unchanging. It is impossible to know something that is constantly changing and becoming different. But the world around us is something that is constantly becoming different. Everything changes in time and space, the same object is perceived differently by different people, even the same person perceives the same object in different ways at different times. How is it possible to know anything at all?

He comes to the conclusion that, of course, the world is constantly changing and becoming different, but at its core it remains the same. And as the continuing fundamental principle of the world he named water. The sources indicate the position of Thales: “Everything is water.”

If we take this position literally, it seems absurd or clearly false. Because obviously not everything is water. In addition to water, there are mountains, forests, people and other objects and phenomena. But philosophical positions cannot be taken literally. It is necessary to take into account the question to which this philosophical position is the answer. And the question is: what is the fundamental principle of everything that exists? That is, what underlies everything?

And it turns out that the answer “everything is water” completely answers this question. After all, many things contain water, even a person, it turns out, consists of 60-70% water, thus representing an aqueous solution. A lot of things dissolve in water without a trace. Without water there is no life, etc. Water can take any shape depending on the shape of the vessel; it can be either liquid or solid. Can turn into gas. That is, water can turn into anything and at the same time remain itself. This is precisely the constant that remains in all changes. Thales believed that water is not only the carrier of life, but also the carrier of animation. Water spiritualizes everything, being the soul of everything that exists.

Thales's position on water as the first principle expresses three most important ideas. Firstly, it emphasizes the material basis of all things. Secondly, it is an attempt to rationally resolve the question of the fundamental principle of everything without reference to myths and mystical ideas. Third, it means the ability to understand the world on the basis of one basic principle.

Nevertheless, Thales’s position “everything is water” is still too specific to explain all, without exception, phenomena of the surrounding world. Obviously, absolutely everything cannot be explained from the properties of water. The next step was the philosophy of Thales’s student, Anaximander.

Anaximander introduces as arche apeiron. Apeiron is literally translated as indefinite, boundless, infinite, i.e. denial of everything definite. This pure uncertainty and, therefore, the absence of any specific properties cannot be perceived by the senses - seen, heard, felt, it can only be thought. Apeiron is not a sensory, but an intelligible reality. From this intelligible reality all concrete sensory things and phenomena arise.

From the works of Anaximander the phrase has been preserved: “From whatever principles things are born, at the same time their destruction is accomplished according to a fatal debt, for they pay each other compensation for damage at the appointed time.”

Two thoughts can be distinguished in this fragment. The first is that all things are generated from the same beginning, to which they then pass back. Secondly, the death of things is a punishment for the damage they caused by their birth. What is interesting here is the combination of the natural and the moral: the emergence of things from the beginning entails punishment through their destruction. Birth is the cause of death.

Anaximander's apeiron, in turn, seemed too abstract to understand to his contemporaries. The next step is taken by Anaximander’s student, Anaximenes. As a starting point, he puts forward air. Air, on the one hand, is something invisible and almost imperceptible; it has no boundaries or shapes, in this respect it is close to apeiron. At the same time, air is still something concrete, it can be perceived by the senses in the form of wind, air can be hot or cold, etc.

According to Anaximenes, everything comes from the air through its rarefaction or condensation, i.e. through quantitative changes.

At first glance, the philosophy of the Milesians provided a satisfactory explanation of the phenomena of the surrounding world through a change in arche - water, or apeiron, or air. But soon contradictions were discovered in it.

Arche, or origin, is something unchangeable and permanent. And at the same time it turns into various things, therefore it changes. How, then, does it differ from ordinary things and phenomena? So, that’s not what it started out like.

On the other hand, what makes the arche generate from itself the things of the surrounding world? And why do these particular things arise and not others? Therefore, there must be another principle that acts on the arche and causes it to change. But this means that there are actually two first principles. However, what are these first principles when there is more than one of them?

To eliminate these contradictions, it was necessary either to admit that there is nothing permanent and unchanging in the world, but only a fluid, ever-changing world. The permanent arche is a creation of the human mind. Or recognize the constant and unchanging arche as true reality, and declare the variability of the world an illusion generated by human senses. The first path was taken by a philosopher from the city of Ephesus - Heraclitus; the second path was taken by the so-called Eleans, philosophers from the Greek colony city of Elea in southern Italy, among them we will consider the ideas of Parmenides and Zeno. But first let us turn to Heraclitus.

Heraclitus of Ephesus. Heraclitus was from a royal family and could rule Ephesus, but he transferred his rights to his brother, and he himself lived poorly and alone in a hut. He spoke very little about the intelligence of his fellow citizens, preferring to play with children than communicate with fellow citizens. He wrote his essays in a deliberately very complex and vague language. After reading his works, another philosopher, Socrates, said: “What I understood is wonderful, I think that what I did not understand is also so.”

They said that Heraclitus, going out into the street, cried, seeing what pitiful and absurd trifles people were doing. People live without knowing the truth. They are present without being absent.

Heraclitus put forward as arche fire, which exists only in change. Everything eventually turns into fire, and everything arises from fire, just as gold is exchanged for all goods, and all goods for gold. He put forward the famous proposition: “Everything flows,” and argued that you cannot enter the same river twice. We step into the same river and don’t step into it. The same thing is the opposite of itself. Thus, sea water is simultaneously a condition of life for fish, and death and poison for people. Struggle is the father and king over everything. Everything is born through struggle and out of necessity. Much knowledge does not teach intelligence. That is, you can know a lot, but not be smart.

So, the world is changeable, fire is at its core, as something fluid and impermanent. At the same time, Heraclitus also speaks of constancy. The world is a fire that flares up and goes out, but in these outbreaks of world fire there is measure and rhythm, there is a law, and this law is the constant that rules the world. Heraclitus calls this rhythm, measure, law Logos.

People go about their business thinking that something depends on them; they do not understand that the world is ruled by the Logos, which does not depend on anyone’s will - neither human nor divine.

Let's try to give analogies to explain how the unchanging Logos appears through the variability of the world. Let's imagine a fountain in the form of a large pulsating flower. Not a single drop in these streams of water is at rest, and the fountain itself is constantly changing its shape, periodically increasing and decreasing. But this rhythm of change is constant and unchanging. Also, the human body is constantly changing, it is a set of processes - chemical, electrical, informational, etc. But on the whole, the body maintains its proportions precisely thanks to all its changes, and in these changes it lives as this particular body.

So the world as a whole, the world fire, flares up and goes out in measures according to the objective law - Logos. And the purpose of the philosopher is to comprehend the Logos and through this to know the truth.

An analogy can be drawn from the field of history. A particular society is constantly changing, revolutions and reforms occur that make society different. But if we consider the life of a given society not at the level of decades, but at the level of centuries or millennia, we will discover a pattern that emerges through all the changes and revolutions, which actually determines everything that happens in a given society: a certain pre-defined circle, for which bring out society no revolution and reform. However, this pattern, this forest behind the trees visible only against the backdrop of centuries, cannot be seen by an individual person whose life lasts only a few decades.

It is important to emphasize that in Heraclitus the very understanding of what remains the same despite all changes changes. We are no longer talking about this or that material substance - water, air, etc., but about measure, pattern, rhythm, i.e. quantitative ratio. Here you can see a roll call with the Pythagoreans, who saw the basis of the world in numerical patterns.

He was a contemporary of Heraclitus Parmenides from the city of Elea in southern Italy. He puts forward the position that only being exists, and there is no non-existence: “Being exists and cannot but exist; there is no non-existence and there cannot be.” In fact, we are talking about a tautology, if by being we mean existence: only the existing exists, and the non-existent does not exist. But non-existence means the absence of something, i.e. nothingness, or emptiness. Therefore, it is necessary to accept that the existence of emptiness is impossible. There is only one continuous, motionless being. Solid because there is no emptiness. And motionless, because to move something, emptiness is again necessary, because you can only move to where the place is not occupied, but, as has been proven, there is no emptiness. There is and cannot be, therefore, any differences, including between a thought and what this thought is about. Parmenides writes: “Thinking and what the thought is about are one and the same thing.” Being has no past, because the past is something that no longer exists; being has no future, because it does not yet exist; being is an eternal present without beginning or end.

All this means that we cannot talk about the world as a variety of phenomena and things that differ from each other in space and time. The world is a single, continuous, motionless, well-rounded whole, and the varied variety of the moving world that is in front of us is an illusion generated by our senses.

This iron logic of Parmenides' reasoning later delighted Plato. But it plunged Parmenides’ contemporaries into bewilderment, since it called into question their own existence as specific, distinct people living in time in a specific place. They could not agree to be an illusion of their own senses. In their refutation of the theory of Parmenides, they also started from the undoubted reality of the world of moving sensory things and phenomena. There is movement, it is obvious and undeniable, it can always be demonstrated, for example, you can take it and walk around in front of Parmenides himself.

However, this method of refutation is based on a misunderstanding. After all, we are talking about what exists In fact, and such a proof must be based on logic, since our feelings can deceive us. You never know what we see clearly. For example, we obviously see that the sun moves across the sky around the earth, but in fact the earth moves around the sun, and this contradicts what we clearly see.

Student of Parmenides Zeno built a whole system of logical proofs that movement cannot be thought of as something real. He argued that the assumption of the reality of movement leads to contradictions, and contradiction is a sign of error. In logic, this line of thought is called refutation through reduction to absurdity. Zeno puts forward the so-called aporia, i.e. the difficulties we get into when we assume that there is movement.

Let us present three aporia of Zeno: “arrow”, “Achilles and the tortoise” and “dichotomy”.

Aporia “ arrow" Let us assume that an arrow flies from one place to another. Flight time can be divided into periods of time, which again can be divided into even smaller periods of time, and so on. Thus, we come to intervals of time that are less than any specific interval, and it is clear that during this period of time the arrow does not have time to advance, therefore, it is at rest. But the entire flight time of the arrow consists of these periods of time, therefore, it is at rest all this time. It is impossible to find the period of time in which she moves. Thus, by allowing the arrow to move, we have arrived at the absurd. And this says that the very assumption that the arrow moves is absurd. So, it is impossible to assert without contradiction that there is movement.

Aporia “ Achilles and the tortoise" Let's say that Achilles and the tortoise are separated by a distance, and they begin to move in the same direction, and Achilles runs at a higher speed than the tortoise. Having reached the place where the turtle was at the beginning of the movement, Achilles will find that the turtle has moved some distance. Having reached this place, he will find that the turtle has moved forward again, albeit to a shorter distance. This situation will be repeated endlessly: some, even smaller, distance will constantly separate both participants in the run. And again we get the absurd conclusion that Achilles, moving faster than the tortoise, cannot catch up with it. Therefore, the very initial assumption that there is movement is absurd.

Aporia “ dichotomy" This word literally means dividing in half. Let's say that we decide to reach a certain point, but for this we first need to reach the middle of the path, and for this we need to reach the middle of half the path, etc. Ultimately, as a result of this thought experiment, we end up with a distance gap that is smaller than any specific value that must first be overcome. Consequently, we are not able to even begin to move.

Zeno believed that with his aporia he proved the inconceivability of movement and, therefore, its impossibility. In fact, he discovered the contradictory nature of any movement that includes its own opposite, i.e. peace. Zeno's discoveries are confirmed by modern quantum mechanics, which is forced to attribute to elementary particles - electron, proton, neutron, etc. - mutually exclusive corpuscular and wave properties.

In modern literature, the opinion is expressed that the ideas of the Eleans about existence, for which there is no past, no future, or any spatial differences, these ideas allow us to approach the understanding of phenomena that cannot be understood by science, which describes everything through the categories of space and time , - such as telepathy, clairvoyance, predicting the future, etc.

But it is clear that Greek thought could not stop at affirming the illusory nature of the concrete, sensory world. It was necessary to return reality to the world and at the same time to reconcile the reality of the sensory world with the Elean ideas about being. This problem was solved by Democritus with the doctrine of atoms and emptiness.

So, Democritus. Democritus is characterized by devotion to scientific knowledge. He has a phrase that he would give the Persian throne for the knowledge of one causal relationship. His father left his three sons a significant fortune, from which Democritus chose the smallest share of the money and went on a journey through the scientific centers of the time. He returned a poor man, and for the waste of his father's property, according to the law, he could not be honored with burial in his own country. But Democritus, as a justification speech, read out his treatise “The Great World Construction”. This treatise delighted his fellow citizens, and the philosopher was acquitted. There is a legend that in his old age Democritus ordered himself to be blinded so that his vision would not distract from the intelligible essence of things.

Democritus was called the laughing philosopher, since, as they say, he could not leave the house without laughing, seeing what trifles people were doing in all seriousness.

In his philosophy we will consider the doctrine of atoms and emptiness, the doctrine of necessity and the theory of knowledge.

The doctrine of atoms and emptiness. Democritus agrees with Parmenides that the world is a single and continuous being. But at the same time, he recognizes the existence of non-existence in the form of emptiness. He refers to facts. For example, if you pour a bucket of water into a bucket of ash, the total volume will not increase. This means that between the ash particles there are voids that have been occupied by water particles.

But if emptiness exists, then it must, as it were, split a single continuous being into parts. Therefore, there are many single, continuous, unchanging small beings, further indivisible, i.e. atoms. Atom in Greek means 'indivisible'.

Atoms differ in shape, position and size, they move like a vortex in the void and combine into things and worlds, just as letters form into words.

Thus, Zeno's aporia is immediately resolved. Movement is possible because emptiness exists. Achilles catches up with the turtle, since there are finite, then indivisible parts of space. Achilles and the tortoise will ultimately be separated by a minimal, but quite definite piece of space, over which Achilles will overtake the tortoise. You can move from a place by covering the smallest part of space. Time is also divided into finite intervals within which the arrow moves, etc.

As a result of the introduction of emptiness and atoms, Democritus returned reality to the world of sensory things: they turn out to be as real as the atoms of which they are composed.

But Democritus has other contradictions. He is forced to assume that the atoms do not touch each other. Otherwise, the point of contact would be different from other points on the surface of the atom, which would mean that the atom consists of parts, i.e. we divide, but it should not be divisible. But if atoms do not touch each other, then how do atoms form things and worlds? What keeps them close to each other? However, the same problem is present in the modern theory of gravity. All bodies are attracted to each other, acting on each other through a distance, i.e. emptiness. How does this happen? It's also unclear.

To prove that atoms exist, Democritus again refers to facts. Coins and stone steps wear out over the years, and the wet spot dries out gradually. This suggests that they consist of tiny particles.

Doctrine of Necessity. According to Democritus, atoms, moving in a vortex, form worlds, and at this stage chance operates. But after the world has arisen, the laws of necessity and causal connections begin to operate in it. Therefore, the initial state of the world, the initial combination of atoms determines all other development. Then there is no more chance, but everything happens as if programmed, due to strict necessity.

We believe that something happened by chance only because we do not know the reasons for the event. Therefore, randomness is actually something apparent. For example, this lecture is not accidental, it has reasons, which have their own reasons, etc. Therefore, ultimately, this lecture was already embedded in the original combination of atoms.

Example of Democritus. A man left his house in the morning, a turtle fell on his head from the sky and killed him. At first glance, a completely random event occurred that could not have happened. But in fact, everything happened as a result of a necessary chain of causes and effects. The man was thirsty in the morning because in the evening he had a symposium, which translated from Greek means ‘men’s feast’, in honor of winning a poetry competition. So he went to the well in the morning. Eagles have a habit of lifting turtles into the sky and throwing them onto rocks to break the shell and get the meat. The eagle mistook the man's naked skull for a stone and threw a turtle on his head.

However, the recognition that there is only necessity, and chance is only apparent, leads to difficulties. If all the same necessary, then events that are obviously unequally significant and necessary are equated in importance. For example, it turns out that it is equally necessary that an eclipse of the sun happened this year and that now a fly landed on this, and not on the other, edge of the table. But it is clear that these events are not equally necessary. This means that in fact every event is a unity of necessity and chance, but the measure of both is different. There is less chance in an eclipse of the sun, but there is more in the fact that a fly landed here, and vice versa, there is less necessity in the behavior of a fly, but there is more need in the eclipse of the sun.

Philosophy will come to the understanding that every event is a unity of necessity and chance and that chance is as objective as necessity only in the 19th century, i.e. more than two millennia after Democritus.

Theory of knowledge. Democritus distinguishes two types of knowledge: knowledge-opinion and knowledge-truth. Knowledge-opinion is knowledge about the world that we receive on the basis of the senses: sight, hearing, smell, touch, etc. This knowledge depends not only on the properties of things, but also on the structure of our sense organs. If, for example, our eyes were structured differently, then the picture of the world would be different. Therefore, feelings do not give us true knowledge about the world, they only give us knowledge-opinion.

Knowledge-truth is knowledge about the world that we receive on the basis of the mind, logic, and reasoning. This is intelligible knowledge about the world. All people have the same mind, and it gives knowledge of what really exists, i.e. the truth. For example, the laws of logic are the same for everyone. And logic tells us that the world is atoms and emptiness.

Democritus’ phrase: “Colors, sounds, sweets, etc. exist only in opinion, but in truth only atoms and emptiness exist.”

Democritus lays the foundations of scientific knowledge of the world, which reduces all the qualities of the world to the properties of atoms, to what can be measured, expressed through quantity and geometric shape. For example, the guilty smile of a woman greeting her husband from a business trip exists only in opinion. Because this is just an interpretation of a certain movement of the facial muscles. And the interpretation depends on our mood, on what we expect to see, on visual acuity, etc. In fact, there is only a contraction of the facial muscles, chemical reactions in these muscles, the speed of muscle movement, and this can be recorded objectively. Everything else is just an opinion.

As a result, the world becomes discolored and becomes less human. But this is precisely what distinguishes the scientific description of the world, which reduces the rainbow to the refraction of light in invisible tiny drops of water suspended in the atmosphere, and the visible movement of the sun across the sky to the imperceptible rotation of the earth around its axis.

Pre-Socratics- the conventional name of the ancient Greek philosophers of the early period (VI-V centuries BC), as well as their successors of the IV century. BC e., who worked outside the mainstream of the Attic Socratic and Sophistic traditions. It can also be used only in chronological meaning.

The term "Pre-Socratics" was coined in 1903, when the German philologist Hermann Diels collected in his book "Fragments of the Pre-Socratics" (" Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker") texts by philosophers who lived before Socrates. The ancient authors themselves, who wondered about the historical beginning of philosophy, pointed to the figures of the seven sages as its ancestors. One of them, Thales of Miletus, has been considered the first philosopher of Greece since the time of Aristotle. He is a representative of the Milesian school, to which Anaximander, Anaximenes, Pherecydes of Syros, Diogenes of Apollonia and others also belonged.

It is followed by the school of the Eleatics, who were engaged in the philosophy of existence (c. 580-430 BC). Xenophanes, Parmenides, Zeno of Elea, and Melissus belonged to it. Simultaneously with this school, there was the school of Pythagoras, which was engaged in the study of harmony, measure, number, to which, along with others, belonged Philolaus (late 5th century BC), the physician Alcmaeon (c. 520 BC), music theorist, philosopher and mathematician Archytas of Tarentum (c. 400-365 BC). The sculptor Polykleitos the Elder (late 5th century BC) was also a follower of it.

The great loners are Heraclitus, Empedocles and Anaxagoras. Democritus, with his encyclopedic all-encompassing thinking, together with his semi-legendary predecessor Leucippus and the Democritus school, is the completion of pre-Socratic cosmology. The early sophists (Protagoras, Gorgias, Hippias, Prodicus) can also be attributed to this period.

At the same time, the conventionality of the above-mentioned association of thinkers of pre-Socratic times, which has become traditional, is noted; the more artificial is the attempt to highlight the common elements of their teaching.

The main subject of philosophizing among the Pre-Socratics was space. It seemed to them to consist of ordinary sensory elements: earth, water, air, fire and ether, mutually transforming into each other as a result of condensation and rarefaction. Man and the social sphere, as a rule, were not isolated by the Pre-Socratics from general cosmic life. Man, society and the cosmos among the Pre-Socratics were subject to the same laws. A persistent pre-Socratic concept is dualism.

Pre-Socratics are traditionally divided into representatives of Ionian philosophy (Miletus school, Heraclitus, Diogenes of Apollonia), Italic philosophy (Pythagoreans, Eleatics) and atomists. Sometimes the Sophists are mistakenly classified as Pre-Socratics, but this is not entirely correct, since most of the Sophists were contemporaries of Socrates and he actively argued with them. In addition, the teaching of the Sophists is very different from the teaching of the Pre-Socratics.

Sophists and Socrates

Sophist- (Greek) expert, master, sage. For them, what was important was not the search for truth, but the development of a theory of eloquence and argument. Plato wrote that in courts one does not seek truth, only persuasiveness is needed.

The Sophists did not represent a single group either in socio-political orientation (for example, Protagoras gravitated toward slave-owning democracy, and Critias was an enemy of democracy), or in relation to previous ancient Greek philosophy (Protagoras relied on the ideas of Heraclitus, Gorgias and Antiphon - on the ideas of the Eleatic school etc.), nor according to their own philosophical ideas. Some common features of S.'s philosophy can be identified - the movement of philosophical interests from the sphere of natural philosophy to the field of ethics, politics, and theory of knowledge.

Protagoras (c. 480 - 410 BC). He owns: “Man is the measure of all things: those that exist, that they exist, and those that do not exist, that they do not exist.” He spoke about the relativity of all knowledge, proving that for every statement there is a statement that contradicts it

Gorgias (c. 483-375 BC) in his work “On Nature” proves three points: that nothing exists, and if something exists, then it is inexpressible and inexplicable. As a result, he came to the conclusion that nothing could be said with certainty

Aristotle wrote: “Gorgias correctly said that the seriousness of opponents should be killed with a joke, and a joke with seriousness.”

Prodicus (b. 470 BC) showed an exceptional interest in language from the point of view of identifying words that have the same meaning and the correct use of words. He compiled etymological clusters of words related in meaning. He paid much attention to the rules of dispute, approaching the analysis of the problem of refutation techniques.

Philosophy of Socrates.

The invaluable merit of Socrates is that in his practice dialogue became the main method of finding truth. His anti-dogmatism was expressed in his rejection of claims to possessing reliable knowledge. Socrates also denied that chaotic subjectivity of the sophists, which turned a person into something random, isolated, unnecessary even for himself. He approached everything with irony. Socrates used the so-called midwifery art called maieutics - the art of defining concepts through induction. With the help of skillfully asked questions, he identified false definitions and found correct ones. Socrates first began to use inductive evidence and give general definitions of concepts. Socrates became famous as one of the founders of dialectics in the sense of finding truth through conversations and debates. Socrates' method of dialectical debate is to discover contradictions in the interlocutor's reasoning and bring him to the truth through questions and answers. The core of his philosophy is man, his essence, the internal contradictions of his soul. Thanks to this, knowledge moves from the philosophical doubt “I know that I know nothing” to the birth of truth through self-knowledge. Socrates based his philosophical principle on the saying of the Delphic oracle “Know thyself!”, because. I saw that the man was “not empty.” The Sophists neglected the truth, and Socrates made it his beloved.

Considering the phenomenon of the soul, Socrates proceeded from the recognition of its immortality, which was linked to his faith in God.

Pre-Socratic philosophy

Pre-Socratics- the conventional name of the ancient Greek philosophers of the early period (VI-V centuries BC), as well as their successors of the 4th century. BC, who worked outside the mainstream of the Attic Socratic and Sophistic traditions.

The main subject of philosophizing among the Pre-Socratics was space. It seemed to them to consist of ordinary sensory elements: earth, water, air, fire and ether, mutually transforming into each other as a result of condensation and rarefaction. Man and the social sphere, as a rule, were not isolated by the Pre-Socratics from general cosmic life. The individual, society, and cosmos among the Pre-Socratics were subject to the same laws.

Sophists and Socrates (theory of knowledge and ethics)

One of the main contradictions between Socrates and the Sophists was the existence of truth. The latter argued that there could be no objective truth, and that everyone has their own truth. Moreover, every person has every right to consider as truth what he considers necessary, based on his views and preferences. Socrates attached great importance to truth and considered it the basis on which the development of personality and rational human activity are built. Figuratively speaking, it stands in the center, the same for everyone, surrounded by human opinions that cannot influence its immutability. Moreover, the way to know it, oddly enough, is human self-knowledge. According to Socrates, there should be no hypocrisy and lies. The desire for truth should overshadow a person’s desire to gain benefit, so he should not allow any tricks or omissions. Moreover, according to Socrates, each individual person must make efforts to know objective truth. If we agree with the sophists and admit the possibility of the existence of many truths, people will not be able to interact with each other quite successfully, Socrates believed.

Socrates agreed with the Sophists that discussion and argument (in the form of questions and answers to them) are necessary. Socrates and the Sophists had different views on their goals. According to Socrates, the goal of any philosophical discussion is the search for the truth that will be born in it. Its participants make joint efforts along this path, maintaining mutual respect. To do this, your relationship with your interlocutor must have harmony and the ability to forgive mistakes. From the point of view of the sophists, a dispute is conducted only in order to achieve victory in it, looking right in the eyes of others and the opponent. Since objective truth does not exist, the one who can prove his rightness to others is right. The goal of the discussant is to suppress the interlocutor and assert himself. If it is achieved, the winner will be able to get what he wants.

Socrates and the Sophists differed in their views on the idea. From the point of view of the sophists, the same thought in the perception of different people has significant differences, therefore achieving a common understanding between people is impossible, especially if they are in different living conditions. Socrates believed that, despite the differences in the way of life and thinking of people, any concept can be perceived by them in exactly the same way. In this way, achieving complete mutual understanding is possible. For example, people may have the same perception of what virtue is and strive to achieve it.

Socrates, like the Sophists, took an active part in the political and social life of his contemporaries. But, unlike them, he had more lofty motives for this. He truly wanted to help society with his knowledge and was not looking for any personal gain. Despite this, he believed that noble people do not need the help of philosophers to govern the state.

The Sophists and Socrates were united by the fact that they also attached importance to man’s attempts to know himself, to strive to reveal his own nature. In general, both the first and the second considered the object of study of philosophy to be man, and not abstract concepts.

From the standpoint of the knowledge we have already achieved, it will not be difficult for us to evaluate the achievements and shortcomings of ancient philosophy (VI century BC - 529, the year the Emperor Justinian closed Plato’s Academy). If we began the book with ancient philosophy, we would have to wander in the darkness of an era that had barely begun to harness the potential of science and philosophy. But something else is also obvious: Western philosophy began precisely in Antiquity, and it was at this time that many problematizations were developed that stimulate the creative search of modern philosophers. In the interests of what follows, we will highlight the main stages of ancient philosophy.

Table 4.2.

A. Pre-Socratics (VI-V centuries BC)

Philosophy (literally: the love of wisdom) arose within the framework of ancient Greek culture, which was dominated by mythological and religious (theological) theories. They resolved the existence of the root causes as mythical heroes and gods. This very existence was taken for granted and therefore was not questioned. Philosophers were guided by the principle that the existence of root causes must be justified. Their position was initially critical. If someone asserts something, then he must prove the truth of his judgment. But on one thing they agreed with the adherents of myths and religious legends: it is necessary to find the reason or basis for many things. In this regard, the problem of finding the one as the basis of the many comes to the fore.

Trying to understand the innovations of the ancient Greeks, let us pay attention to the modern understanding of the whole. In science, the unified appears in the form of principles, concepts and laws. It is clear that in the views of the Pre-Socratics all this cannot be found in a developed form. But their theories are of a certain interest, because scientific thought was awakened in them.

Table 4.3.

Thales, Anaximenes, Anaximander (all three from Miletus) and Heraclitus from Ephesus as monists (from the Greek monos - one) consider one natural substance to be the fundamental basis of everything that exists. Substance is something that is the basis of existing things, but does not itself need it. Within the framework of monist concepts, it is extremely difficult to comprehend the variability of things and development processes. In this regard, it was precisely in this regard that the views of naturalists - pluralists Empedocles and Anaxagoras appeared. They introduce gradations of the unity, which in Anaxagoras act as seeds, homeomeries, elements of qualities, of which there are as many as there are qualities. Empedocles and Anaxagoras are able to explain the emergence of new things by the union and separation of elements or seeds. This way of reasoning is very close to modern physicists and chemists.

Pythagoras, as the founder of an entire school, considered numbers to be the substance of the world, establishing various kinds of relationships. Thus, it was found that if the lengths of the strings of a monochord relate to each other as 1: 2; 2:3; 3:4, then the resulting musical intervals will correspond to the octave, fifth and fourth. Pythagoras understood the numbers themselves not as abstractions, but as the essences of things. We can therefore say that he is more of a physicist than a mathematician. Pythagoras' innovation lies in the search for laws.

The Eleatics Parmenides and his student Zeno became famous for their formulation of the question of being. The One is being. It exists, and non-existence, therefore, does not exist. “There is nothing outside of being,” including thoughts. All thinkers before Parmenides argued that the One is the basis of the world, but the world is not exhausted by the One. Parmenides argued that the whole world is reduced to being. Movement and multiplicity are equated with non-existence, therefore they do not exist. Zeno shows that their recognition leads to unacceptable logical contradictions.

Achilles cannot catch up with the turtle, because by the time he reaches the place where she was a moment ago, the turtle will move forward. It is, in principle, impossible to move from one place, because before you can travel a certain distance, you need to overcome half of it, but that is also preceded by half of it. And so on to the starting point of the supposedly moving object. One has only to admit that one body consists of others, and a contradiction immediately arises. Between two bodies you can always place an infinite number of others, because the space between them can be divided ad infinitum. It turns out that the body supposedly consists of a finite and infinite number of things. There is an obvious contradiction.

The aporia of the Eleatics led to a crisis. Philosophers understood that reference to experimental data was not a way out of the paradoxical situation, since in this case they would have to abandon the idea of ​​a single thing - the main concept of early ancient Greek philosophy.

The atomists Leucippus and Democritus introduced the concept of atoms of matter, space and time. The meaning of this action was the rejection of the Eleatic idea of ​​​​the endless division of matter, space and time. In this case, the arguments of the Eleatics really lose their force. It is unacceptable to assume, for example, that an infinite number of other things can be placed between two bodies.

As for modern science, it describes the multiplicity of phenomena and their variability consistently, but it uses a complex mathematical apparatus, which, of course, was not known to the Eleatics and atomists. The discovery of the aporitic nature of theories is desirable insofar as overcoming them contributes to the improvement of these theories.

The Sophists (Protagoras, Gorgias, Prodicus) were the first to realize that naturalists mainly dealt with nature, with physis. The subject of their analysis is a person, his moral, political and legal problems. The famous statement of Protagoras says: “man is the measure of all things in that they exist and in that they do not exist.” He denies the absoluteness of truth, because the useful always appears as relative. Protagoras is considered the founder of relativism - the doctrine of the relativity of truth. Socrates criticized the sophists because they failed to reveal the essence of man. In other words, they failed to discover a single thing in relation to man.

Pre-Socratic philosophy is a fundamental stage in the history of the development and formation of classical philosophy. Much of the information about this period has been lost and historians' knowledge of ancient philosophy is mainly based on later sources. But even the minimum of surviving handwritten documents allows us to say that the philosophy of the Pre-Socratics made a significant contribution to the development of society.

The main features of the philosophy of the Pre-Socratics

Briefly, the differences between the teachings of the Pre-Socratics and other periods can be determined by three characteristics:

1. Mythologization. This direction is characterized by endowing the elements with the qualities of a living being. In addition to water, fire, earth and air, the list of elements included ether - a celestial substance, a special rarefied air that the gods breathe.
2. Chaotic. The development of Pre-Socratic philosophy occurred without clear structuring. Often its followers contradicted each other, and they were united only by belonging to the same historical period.
3. Dualism. Ancient philosophers considered man as a concentration of two opposing principles: body and consciousness. This is one of the main paradoxes of philosophy: in man these principles are united and interact, although in essence they are opposite and should not touch.

Philosophers who lived at the same time as, but did not share his views, are often considered pre-Socratics. This contradicts the very definition of the pre-Socratic period, which developed before the emergence of the Socratic school, created in the 4th century BC. e. But since Socrates’ contemporary, Democritus, and his followers supported and developed the traditions of ancient philosophers, they can also be classified as Pre-Socratics.

History of development

Despite the fact that the philosophy of the Pre-Socratics dates back to the period of antiquity, the first attempts to generalize disparate movements into a single teaching were made by European historians only in the 17th century. The term “pre-Socratics” belongs to the German scientist Hermann Diels. His work “Fragments of the Pre-Socratics” includes all the famous names of philosophers (more than 400 people) who lived from the 7th to the 5th century BC. e.

The ancient philosophers themselves considered the beginning of the development of pre-Socratic thought to be the teachings of the “seven wise men” - the most famous and revered political figures and philosophers. Various sources mention different names, but they all include Thales of Miletus, the first philosopher of Ancient Greece after Aristotle. According to rough estimates, Thales was born in 640 BC. e. He founded the Milesian School, the first ancient Greek scientific and philosophical school of the Pre-Socratics.

The next ancient Greek philosophical school existed in 580-430 BC. e. Its representatives - the Eleatics - continued to develop the teachings of Thales of Miletus and developed a new philosophical concept -. During this historical period, there was another school - the Pythagorean Union. This is a religious order consisting of followers of Pythagoras. They made the first attempt to transition from materialism to idealism.

The school of Heraclitus, which existed in the 4th and 5th centuries BC, studied space. According to Heraclitus, it is infinite and ordered. The cosmos exists on its own; it has no creator. All cosmic processes are reproduced automatically and life in space will never be interrupted. Heraclitus is considered the founder of naive materialism.

An important stage in the development of pre-Socratic philosophy was the teaching of Democritus - atomism. His approximate years of life are the period from 460 to 370 BC. e. Democritus gave the definition of an atom - a homogeneous particle of which any matter consists. His teaching is full-fledged ancient materialism.

The essence of the teachings of the Pre-Socratics

The main subject of philosophical reflection of the Pre-Socratics was space. Their ideas about the world around them were based on Aristotle’s idea of ​​God as the absolute beginning. Everything that happens in the world is an integral and continuous process, and God is its cause, the main and only driving force. According to Aristotle, God and the cosmos are identical concepts. They cannot exist separately, and represent each other.

The pre-Socratic philosophy is characterized by:

• practical approach to learning - ;
• focus on the structure of society, not the individual;
• identification of God, man and the cosmos.

The goal of pre-Socratic philosophy is the search for the true source of the universe and knowledge of its basic laws. The teaching is based on two main theses: like is known by like and from nothing, it is impossible to get something. Man was considered as a part of society and as a part of general cosmic life. The pre-Socratic concept was supposed to make it possible to determine the true purpose of man.

Schools and their representatives

Among the many trends that emerged thanks to the work of individual philosophers, the main schools of pre-Socratic philosophy gradually emerged.

Milesian school

Thales of Miletus was the greatest scientist of his time. In addition to philosophy, he studied astronomy, hydraulic engineering, and physics. Thales traveled a lot and was familiar with the main discoveries of scientists not only in Greece, but also in Egypt, Phenicia and other countries. Constantly increasing knowledge and conducting his own experiments allowed him to eventually arrive at his concept of the world. He believed that the Earth and everything that exists on it arose from water. The planet is surrounded by the oceans on all sides, but it cannot sink, but floats on the surface, like a wooden disk floats on the surface of a reservoir. According to Thales, all objects and substances are to some extent alive - they are endowed with a soul, just like people and gods living in outer space.

The continuators of the traditions of the Milesian school were Anaximander and Anaximenes. Anaximander believed that the source of all life is not water, but a certain primal substance - apeiron. It is material, but infinite; it cannot be isolated and studied. The earth is motionless and stands at the center of the world. All living beings came to land, rising from the seabed, and must go into it. Anaximenes developed Anaximander's idea of ​​air as the source of life. In his view, air is divine breath, pneuma. It supports the planet and the moon and stars floating in space

School of the Eleatics

The most prominent representatives of the consistent study of philosophy before Socrates are the Eleatics. Among the ascetics of the Eleatic school are Parmenides, Zeno of Elea and Melissa of Samos. The Eleatics were strict rationalists - they considered human reason to be the basis of knowledge. Their main object of study was existence.

Parmenides first defined the concept of “being” in his poem “On Nature.” According to him, being is what is. It is one and motionless. Existence is not divided into parts and does not change. The opposite of being is non-existence. It is identical to emptiness - absence. Since non-existence, being nothing, cannot exist, then emptiness does not exist.

Thanks to the Eleatics, the separation of thought and feeling appeared. With the help of thought, one can cognize existing things, while feelings are a more subtle matter that acquaints a person with hidden phenomena. From the teachings of the Eleatics arose idealistic dialectics - a direction in philosophy for which the spirit is primary and matter is secondary.

Pythagoreanism

Very little is known about the Pythagoreans, since none of their works have survived. Presumably, the Pythagorean alliance was founded in the 6th century BC. e. Pythagorean teaching is based on the principle of justice. Pythagoras was the first to introduce into the scientific community the concept of “cosmos” - beautiful order. In his view, the world is beautiful and harmonious, subject to the law of consistency.

The Pythagoreans were interested in numbers - in numbers they saw an expression of absolute harmony: unity in plurality and plurality in unity. All natural and celestial phenomena are cyclical and repeat after a precise amount of time. Also, the Pythagoreans looked for harmony in geometric structures, music, and cosmology. Their philosophy is based on the principle of opposites: the limit and the infinite.

Through the infinite, divine principle, the limit is determined, and without the definition of the limit, limitless existence is impossible.

The Pythagoreans were divided into two groups: acousmatics and mathematicians. The former studied religious trends and veins in isolation, while the latter were engaged in the development of science and actively taught scientific disciplines to those interested. Acousmaticians condemned mathematicians who made secret knowledge accessible to a wide range of students, but did not try to interfere with their teaching activities.

Atomism

The atomic doctrine was founded by two philosophers: Leucippus and his student Democritus. According to their ideas, the world consists of emptiness and atoms - the smallest particles invisible to the eye. Atoms are homogeneous and impenetrable, they have a certain shape. They cannot be counted, and emptiness cannot be measured. Everything in nature is made of atoms. The properties of a particular object or substance are determined by the shape of the atoms from which it is created.

The reason for the existence of life, according to Democritus, is the continuous movement of atoms and their constant contact. Atomism seeks to explain movement and change, which was denied by the Eleatics, who adhered to the doctrine of the immobility of being. The follower of the doctrine of the atom is Plato. He believed that the shape of the atom was a regular polyhedron made up of polygons.

Pre-Socratic philosophy made it possible to thoroughly study nature. Ancient Greek philosophers created a knowledge base on the basis of which the solar system was subsequently studied and reliable astronomical atlases were created. Also, the Pre-Socratics were the first scientists who tried to define matter, motion, knowledge and being. This set the direction for philosophizing for subsequent periods of development of science and society.