Lesson ¹ 1 (seminar – 6 hours)
Òhemes:
1. The Philosophy, its main categories and
problems.
2. The philosophy of the Ancient East.
3. The philosophy of the Antique Greece.
Aim: – to explain peculiar features
of philosophy origin in terms of history, characteristic features of
philosophical thinking, structure of outlook and the main functions of
philosophy.
Professional
orientation of students: to enlarge outlook of future
medical workers with knowledge about unique ability of human consciousness and
thinking.
PHILOSOPHY, THE CIRCLE OF ITS QUESTIONS AND DESTINATION
Plan
1. The main problems of philosophy. Specific
character of philosophical knowledge.
2. Outlook, its essence, structure and significance for
human life.
3. Historical types of outlook: mythology, religion, and
philosophy.
4. Social functions of philosophy.
1.
The main problems of
philosophy. Specific character of philosophical knowledge
Philosophy it is:
·
Love and pursuit of wisdom by
intellectual means and moral self-discipline.
·
Investigation of the nature, causes,
or principles of reality, knowledge, or values, based on logical reasoning
rather than empirical methods.
·
A system of thought based on or
involving such inquiry: the philosophy of Hume.
·
The critical analysis of fundamental
assumptions or beliefs.
·
The disciplines presented in
university curriculums of science and the liberal arts, except medicine, law,
and theology.
·
The discipline comprising logic,
ethics, aesthetics, metaphysics, and epistemology.
·
A set of ideas or beliefs relating to
a particular field or activity; an underlying theory: an original philosophy
of advertising.
·
A system of values by which one
lives: has an unusual philosophy of life.
Philosophy starts from an assumption, first announced by the founder of moral philosophy, Socrates (470 – 399 BC), that the unexamined life is not
worth living and that while hard thinking
about important issues disturbs, it also consoles. Philosophy is the love of wisdom
(etymologically from the Greek philos, meaning
"lover", and sophia, meaning
"wisdom"). It is the contemplation or study of the most important
questions in existence with the end of promoting illumination and understanding,
a vision of the whole. It uses reason, sense perception, the imagination
and intuition in its activities of clarifying concepts and analyzing and
constructing arguments and theories as possible
answers to these perennial questions. Here we have to distinguish two kinds of
reason: practical reason from theoretical reason:
– Practical reason
has to do with acting in order to realize a goal.
For example, you desire to be healthy and so carry a regiment of exercise, good
nutrition and general moderation. You have a goal, you ask what are
the necessary or best means of reaching that goal, and then, if you are rational in the practical sense, you act on your judgment.
– Theoretical reason,
on the other hand, has to do with beliefs. It asks, what is the evidence for such and such a proposition or belief? What is it
rational to believe about the best way to stay healthy or the existence of God or life after
death?
Practical reason is the general human capacity
for resolving, through reflection, the question of what one is to do.
Deliberation of this kind is practical in at least two senses. First, it is
practical in its subject matter, insofar as it is concerned with action. But it
is also practical in its consequences or its issue, insofar as reflection about
action itself directly moves people to act. Our capacity for deliberative
self-determination raises two sets of philosophical problems. First, there are
questions about how deliberation can succeed in being practical in its issue.
What do we need to assume—both about agents and about the processes of
reasoning they engage in—to make sense of the fact that deliberative reflection
can directly give rise to action? Can we do justice to this dimension of
practical reason while preserving the idea that practical deliberation is
genuinely a form of reasoning? Second, there are large issues concerning the
content of the standards that are brought to bear in practical reasoning. Which
norms for the assessment of action are binding on us as agents? Do these norms
provide resources for critical reflection about our ends, or are they exclusively
instrumental? Under what conditions do moral norms yield valid standards for
reasoning about action? The first set of issues is addressed in sections 1-3 of
the present article, while sections 4-5 cover the second set of issues.
Practical
reason defines a distinctive standpoint of reflection. When agents deliberate
about action, they think about themselves and their situation in characteristic
ways. What are some of the salient features of the practical point of view?
A
natural way to interpret this point of view is to contrast it with the
standpoint of theoretical reason. The latter standpoint is occupied when we
engage in reasoning that is directed at the resolution of questions that are in
some sense theoretical rather than practical; but how are we to understand this
opposition between the theoretical and the practical? One possibility is to
understand theoretical reflection as reasoning about questions of explanation
and prediction. Looking backward to events that have already taken place, it asks
why they have occurred; looking forward, it attempts to determine what is going
to happen in the future. In these ways, theoretical reflection is concerned
with matters of fact and their explanation. Furthermore it treats these issues
in impersonal terms that are accessible (in principle) to anyone. Theoretical
reasoning, understood along these lines, finds paradigmatic expression in the
natural and social sciences.
Practical
reason, by contrast, takes a distinctively normative question as its starting
point. It typically asks, of a set of alternatives for action none of which has
yet been performed, what one ought to do, or what it would be best to do. It is
thus concerned not with matters of fact and their explanation, but with matters
of value, of what it would be desirable to do. In practical reasoning agents
attempt to assess and weigh their reasons for action, the considerations that
speak for and against alternative courses of action that are open to them.
Moreover they do this from a distinctively first-personal point of view, one
that is defined in terms of a practical predicament in which they find
ourselves (either individually or collectively—people sometimes reason jointly
about what they should do together).
There
is, however, a different way of understanding the contrast between practical
and theoretical reason, stressing the parallels rather than the differences
between the two forms of reflection. According to this interpretation,
theoretical reflection too is concerned with a normative rather than a factual
question, namely with the question of what one ought to believe. It attempts to
answer this normative question by assessing and weighing reasons for belief,
the considerations that speak for and against the particular conclusions one
might draw about the way the world is. Furthermore, it does this from a
standpoint of first-personal reflection: the stance of theoretical reasoning in
this sense is the committed stance of the believer, not the stance of detached
contemplation of one's beliefs themselves (Moran 2001). Seen in this way, the
contrast between practical and theoretical reason is essentially a contrast
between two different systems of norms: those for the regulation of action on
the one hand, and those for the regulation of belief on the other.
Theoretical
reason, interpreted along these lines, addresses the considerations that
recommend accepting particular claims as to what is or is not the case. That
is, it involves reflection with an eye to the truth of propositions, and the
reasons for belief in which it deals are considerations that speak in favor of
such propositions' being true, or worthy of acceptance. Practical reason, by
contrast, is concerned not with the truth of propositions but with the
desirability or value of actions. The reasons in which it deals are
considerations that speak in favor of particular actions being good, or worthy
of performance in some way. This difference in subject matter corresponds to a
further difference between the two forms of reason, in respect of their
consequences. Theoretical reflection about what one ought to believe produces
changes in one's overall set of beliefs, whereas practical reason gives rise to
action; as noted above, it is practical not only in its subject matter, but
also in its issue.
Two
observations should be made about this way of understanding practical reason.
First, the contrast just drawn might suggest that there is a categorial difference in the consequences of theoretical
and practical reason, insofar as the former produces changes in our mental
states, whereas the latter gives rise to bodily movements. But it would be
misleading to contrast the two kinds of rational capacity in these terms.
Practical reasoning gives rise not to bodily movements per se, but to
intentional actions, and these are intelligible as such only to the extent they
reflect our mental states. It would thus be more accurate to characterize the
issue of both theoretical and practical reason as attitudes; the
difference is that theoretical reasoning leads to modifications of our beliefs,
whereas practical reasoning leads to modifications of our intentions (Harman
1986, Bratman 1987).
Second,
it is important to be clear that in neither case do the characteristic
modifications of attitude occur infallibly. There is room for irrationality
both in the theoretical and the practical domain, which in its strongest form
involves a failure to form the attitudes that one acknowledges to be called for
by the considerations one has reflected on. Thus a person might end up reading
a mystery novel for another hour, while at the same time judging that it would
be better on the whole to go back to work on their paper for the upcoming
conference. Practical irrationality of this latter kind is known as akrasia, incontinence, or weakness of will, and its
nature and even possibility are traditional subjects of philosophical
speculation in their own right. If we assume that this strong kind of practical
irrationality is possible, however, then we must grant that practical reason is
not automatically practical in its issue. A more accurate way to represent the
consequences of practical reason would be to say that deliberation about action
generates appropriate intentions insofar as an agent is rational (Korsgaard 1996a).
The circle of philosophical problems that are
mentioned above greatly determined the structure of the philosophical knowledge, which includes
the following major areas:
- Gnosiology (epistemology) – a
theory of knowledge, study of the essence, forms and principles of cognition and
thinking. Gnosiology
refer to the philosophy of knowledge and the human facilities for learning. It
is the scientific or philosophical study of intellectual understanding and the
state of appreciating truth or information.
- Metaphysics – it is concerned with such issues as the nature
of the ultimate reality, philosophy of religion, philosophy of mind,
personal identity, freedom of will and immortality.
In
Western philosophy, metaphysics has become the study of the fundamental nature
of all reality — what is it, why is it, and how are we can understand it. Some
treat metaphysics as the study of “higher” reality or the “invisible” nature
behind everything, but that isn’t true. It is, instead, the study of all of
reality, visible and invisible; and what constitutes reality, natural and
supernatural. Because most of the debates between atheists and theists involve
disagreements over the nature of reality and the existence of anything
supernatural, the debates are often disagreements over metaphysics.
Where does the Term
Metaphysics Come From?:
The term metaphysics is derived from the Greek Ta Meta ta
Physkia which means “the books after the books on
nature.” When a librarian was cataloging Aristotle’s works, he did not have a
title for the material he wanted to shelve after the material called “nature” (Physkia) — so he called it “after nature.”
Originally, this wasn’t even a subject at all — it was a collection of notes on
different topics, but specifically topics removed from normal sense perception
and empirical observation.
Metaphysics and the Supernatural:
In popular parlance, metaphysics has become the label for the study of things
which transcend the natural world — that is, things which supposedly exist
separately from nature and which have a more intrinsic reality than our natural
existence. This assigns a sense to the Greek prefix meta
which it did not originally have, but words do change over time. As a result,
the popular sense of metaphysics has been the study of any question about
reality which cannot be answered by scientific observation and experimentation.
For atheists, this sense of metaphysics is usually regarded as literally empty.
What is a Metaphysician?:
A metaphysician is someone seeking to understand the substance of reality: why
things exist at all and what it means to exist in the first place. Much of
philosophy is an exercise in some form of metaphysics and we all have a
metaphysical perspective because we all have some opinion about the nature of
reality. Because everything in metaphysics is more controversial than other
topics, there isn’t agreement among metaphysicians about what it is they are
doing and what they are investigating.
Why Should Atheists Care About Metaphysics?:
Because atheists typically dismiss the existence of the supernatural, they may
dismiss metaphysics as the pointless study of nothing. Because metaphysics is
technically the study of all reality, and thus whether
there is any supernatural element to it at all, in truth metaphysics is probably
the most fundamental subject which irreligious
atheists should focus on. Our ability to understand what reality is, what it is composed of, what "existence"
means, etc., is fundamental to most of the disagreements between irreligious
atheists and religious theists.
Is Metaphysics Pointless?:
Some irreligious atheists, like logical positivists, have argued that the
agenda of metaphysics is largely pointless and can’t accomplish anything.
According to them, metaphysical statements cannot be either true or false — as
a result, they don’t really carry any meaning and shouldn’t be given any
serious consideration. There is some justification to this position, but it is
unlikely to convince or impress religious theists for whom metaphysical claims
constitute some of the most important parts of their lives. Thus the ability to
address and critique such claims can be important.
What is an Atheist Metaphysics?:
The only thing all atheists have in common is disbelief in gods, so the only
thing all atheist metaphysics will have in common is that reality doesn't
include any gods and isn't divinely created. Despite that, most atheists in the
West tend to adopt a materialistic
perspective on reality. This means that they regard the nature of our reality
and the universe as consisting of matter and energy. Everything is natural;
nothing is supernatural. There are no supernatural beings, realms, or planes of
existence. All cause and effect proceeds via natural laws.
Questions Asked in Metaphysics:
What is out there?
What is reality?
Does Free Will exist?
Is there such a process as cause and effect?
Do abstract concepts (like numbers) really exist?
Important Texts on Metaphysics:
Metaphysics,
by Aristotle.
Ethics, by Baruch Spinoza.
Branches of Metaphysics:
Aristotle’s book on metaphysics was divided into three sections: ontology, theology,
and universal science. Because of this, those are the three traditional
branches of metaphysical inquiry.
Ontology
is the branch of
philosophy which deals with the study of the
nature of reality: what is it, how many “realities” are there, what are its
properties, etc. The word is derived from the Greek terms on, which
means “reality” and logos, which means “study of.” Atheists generally
believe that there is a single reality which is material and natural in nature.
Theology,
of course, is the study of gods — does a god exist, what a god is, what a god
wants, etc. Every religion has its own theology because its study of gods, if
it includes any gods, will proceed from specific doctrines and traditions which
vary from one religion to the next. Since atheists don't accept the existence
of any gods, they don't accept that theology is the study of anything real. At
most, it might be the study of what people think is real and atheist
involvement in theology proceeds more from the perspective of a critical
outsider rather than an involved member.
The
branch of “universal science” is a bit harder to understand, but it
involves the search for “first principles” — things like the origin of the
universe, fundamental laws of logic and reasoning, etc. For theists, the answer
to this is almost always "god" and, moreover, they tend to argue that
there can be no other possible answer. Some even go far as to argue that the
existence of things like logic and the universe constitute evidence of the
existence of their god.
-
Ontology
– the study of being.
Ontology
is the branch of philosophy which deals with the study of the nature of
reality: what is it, how many "realities" are there, what are its
properties, etc. The word is derived from the Greek terms on, which
means "reality" and logos, which means "study of."
-
Dialectics
– the study of sources, essence and laws of development.
Dialectic
(also dialectics and the dialectical method) is a method of
argument for resolving disagreement
that has been central to European and Indian philosophy since antiquity. The
word dialectic originated in ancient Greece, and was made popular by Plato
in the Socratic dialogues. The dialectical method is discourse
between two or more people holding different points of view
about a subject, who wish to establish the truth
of the matter guided by reasoned arguments.
The
term dialectics is not synonymous with the term debate.
While in theory debaters are not necessarily emotionally invested in their
point of view, in practice debaters frequently display an emotional commitment
that may cloud rational judgement. Debates are won
through a combination of persuading the opponent; proving one's argument
correct; or proving the opponent's argument incorrect. Debates do not necessarily
require promptly identifying a clear winner or loser; however clear winners are
frequently determined by either a judge, jury,
or by group consensus. The term
dialectics is also not synonymous with the term rhetoric,
a method or art of discourse that seeks to persuade, inform, or motivate an
audience. Concepts, like "logos"
or rational appeal, "pathos"
or emotional appeal, and "ethos"
or ethical appeal, are intentionally used by rhetoricians to persuade an
audience.
The
Sophists
taught aretē
(Greek: ἀρετή, quality,
excellence) as the highest value, and the determinant of one's actions
in life. The Sophists taught artistic quality in oratory (motivation via
speech) as a manner of demonstrating one's aretē.
Oratory was taught as an art form, used to please and to influence other people
via excellent speech; nonetheless, the Sophists taught the pupil to seek aretē in all endeavours,
not solely in oratory.
Socrates favoured truth as the highest value, proposing that
it could be discovered through reason and logic in discussion: ergo, dialectic.
Socrates valued rationality
(appealing to logic, not emotion) as the proper means for persuasion, the
discovery of truth, and the determinant for one's actions. To Socrates, truth,
not aretē, was the greater good, and each
person should, above all else, seek truth to guide one's life. Therefore,
Socrates opposed the Sophists and their teaching of rhetoric as art and as
emotional oratory requiring neither logic nor proof. Different forms of
dialectical reasoning have emerged throughout history from South Asia
and the West (
-
Axiology
– the study of values, including Aesthetics,
Ethics and political philosophy.
Aesthetics (also spelled æsthetics) is a branch
of philosophy
dealing with the nature of art, beauty,
and taste, with the creation and appreciation
of beauty. It is more scientifically defined as the study of sensory
or sensori-emotional values, sometimes called judgments
of sentiment
and taste. More broadly, scholars in the field define aesthetics as
"critical reflection on art, culture and nature."
More
specific aesthetic theory, often with practical implications, relating to a
particular branch of the arts is divided into areas of aesthetics such as art
theory, literary theory, film theory
and music theory.
An example from art theory is aesthetic theory as a set of principles
underlying the work of a particular artist or artistic movement: such as the Cubist
aesthetic.
Ethics,
also known as moral philosophy, is a branch of philosophy
that involves systematizing, defending and recommending concepts of right and
wrong conduct. The term
comes from the Greek word ethos,
which means "character". Ethics is a complement to Aesthetics
in the philosophy field of Axiology.
In philosophy, ethics studies the moral behavior in humans and how one should
act. Ethics may be divided into four major areas of study:
·
Meta-ethics, about the theoretical meaning and
reference of moral propositions and how their truth values
(if any) may be determined;
·
Normative ethics, about the practical means of
determining a moral course of action;
·
Applied ethics, about how moral outcomes can be
achieved in specific situations;
·
Descriptive ethics, also known as comparative
ethics, is the study of people's beliefs about morality;
Ethics
seeks to resolve questions dealing with human morality—concepts such as good and evil, right and wrong, virtue
and vice, justice
and crime.
Meta-ethics
is a field within philosophy that seeks to understand the nature of normative ethics.
The focus of meta-ethics is on how we understand, know about, and what we mean
when we talk about what is right and what is wrong.
Meta-ethics
has always accompanied philosophical ethics, but in this explicit sense it came
to the fore with G.E. Moore's Principia Ethica from
Studies
of how we know in ethics divide into cognitivism
and non-cognitivism; this is
similar to the contrast between descriptivists and
non-descriptivists. Non-cognitivism
is the claim that when we judge something as right or wrong, this is neither
true nor false. We may for example be only expressing our emotional feelings
about these things. Cognitivism can then be seen as
the claim that when we talk about right and wrong, we are talking about matters
of fact.
The
ontology
of ethics is about value-bearing things or properties, i.e. the kind of things
or stuff referred to by ethical propositions. Non-descriptivists
and non-cognitivists believe that ethics does not
need a specific ontology, since ethical propositions do not refer. This is
known as an anti-realist position. Realists on the other hand must explain what
kind of entities, properties or states are relevant for ethics, how they have
value, and why they guide and motivate our actions.
Normative ethics
is the study of ethical action. It is the branch of philosophical
ethics that investigates the set of questions that arise when considering how
one ought to act, morally speaking. Normative ethics is distinct from meta-ethics
because it examines standards for the rightness and wrongness of actions, while
meta-ethics studies the meaning of moral language and the metaphysics of moral
facts. Normative ethics is also distinct from descriptive ethics, as the latter is an
empirical investigation of people's moral beliefs. To put it another way,
descriptive ethics would be concerned with determining what proportion of
people believe that killing is always wrong, while normative ethics is
concerned with whether it is correct to hold such a belief. Hence, normative
ethics is sometimes called prescriptive, rather than descriptive. However, on
certain versions of the meta-ethical view called moral realism,
moral facts are both descriptive and prescriptive at the same time.
Axiology
(from Greek ἀξίᾱ, axiā, "value, worth"; and -λόγος, -logos)
is the philosophical
study of value.
It is either the collective term for ethics
and aesthetics—philosophical
fields that depend crucially on notions of value—or the foundation for these
fields, and thus similar to value theory and meta-ethics.
The term was first used by Paul Lapie, in 1902, and Eduard von Hartmann, in 1908.
Axiology
studies mainly two kinds of values: ethics
and aesthetics.
Ethics investigates the concepts of "right" and "good" in
individual and social conduct. Aesthetics studies the concepts of
"beauty" and "harmony." Formal axiology, the attempt
to lay out principles regarding value with mathematical rigor, is exemplified by Robert S. Hartman's
Science of Value.
Studies of both kinds are found in Cultura: International Journal of
Philosophy of Culture and Axiology.
- Philosophical anthropology – the study of man.
Philosophical anthropology, sometimes called anthropological
philosophy, is a discipline dealing with questions of metaphysics and phenomenology of the human person, and interpersonal
relationships.
-
Logic
– the study of the laws of thought and forms of argument.
Logic
(from the Greek λογική,
logos) has two meanings: first, it describes the use of
valid reasoning in some activity; second, it names the normative study of
reasoning or a branch thereof. In the latter sense, it features most
prominently in the subjects of philosophy, mathematics,
and computer science.
Logic
was studied in several ancient civilizations, including India, China, Persia
and Greece.
In the West, logic was established as a formal discipline by Aristotle,
who gave it a fundamental place in philosophy. The study of logic was part of
the classical trivium,
which also included grammar and rhetoric. Logic was further extended by Al-Farabi
who categorized it into two separates groups (idea and proof). Later, Avicenna
revived the study of logic and developed relationship between temporalis and the implication. In the East, logic was
developed by Buddhists
and Jains.
Logic
is often divided into three parts, inductive reasoning, abductive reasoning,
and deductive reasoning.
There are also
secondary areas of philosophy, which work on conceptional
and theoretical problems arising within first-order non-philosophical
disciplines. Examples of these are philosophy of science, social philosophy,
philosophy ofpsychology, philosophy of mathematics, philosophy of
language and philosophy of law. History plays a dialectical role with regard to
philosophy, for not only do philosophers
do philosophy while teaching the history of philosophy, but they alsoinvolve themselves in the critical examination of the
principles that underlie historical investigation itself, creating a philosophy
of history.
Although a clearer understanding of the
nature of philosophy will only emerge while working through the arguments on the
various issues that are to be studies, a set of guidelines for philosophical inquiry, "Ten Rules of Philosophy" will considerably aid you in your own pilgrimage as you build your own philosophy of life.
They embody the classical philosophical perspective.
1. Allow
the spirit of wonder to flourish in your breast.
Philosophy begins with deep wonder
about the universe and about who we are and where we came from and where we are going. What is this life all
about?
2. Doubt
everything until the evidence convinces you of its truth.
Be reasonably cautious, a
moderate skeptic, suspicious of those who claim to have the truth. Doubt is the soul's laxative. Do not fear intellectual
inquiry. As Johann Goethe (1749 – 1832) said, "The masses fear the intellectual, but it isstupidity that they should fear, if they only realized how dangerous it really
is".
3. Love
the truth.
"Philosophy is the eternal
search for truth, a search which inevitably fails and yet is never defeated; which continually eludes us, but which always guides
us. This free, intellectual
life of the mind is the noblest inheritance of the Western World; it is also the
hope of our future" (W. T. Jones).
4. Divide
and conquer.
Divide each problem and theory
into its smallest essential components in order to analyze each unit carefully. This is the analytic method.
5. Collect
and construct.
Build a coherent argument or
theory from component parts. One should move from the simple, secure foundations to the complex and
comprehensive. The aim of philosophical argument is to move from simple
propositions so obvious that no onewould think of doubting
them via method of valid argument to conclusions so preposterous that no one could help but doubt them. The important thing
is to have a coherent, well-founded, tightly reasoned set of beliefs that can
withstand theopposition.
6. Conjecture
and refute.
Make a complete survey of
possible objections to your position, looking for counterexamples
and subtle mistakes. Seek bold hypotheses and seek disconfinnations of
your favorite position. In this way, by a process of elimination, you
will negatively and indirectly and gradually approach the Truth.
7. Revise
and rebuild.
Be willing to revise, reject and
modify your beliefs and the degree with which you hold any belief. Acknowledge that you probably
have many false beliefs and be grateful
to those who correct you. This is the
principle of fallibilism, the thesis thatwe
are very likely incorrect in many of our beliefs and have a tendency toward
self -deception when considering objections to our position.
8. Seek
simplicity.
Prefer the simpler explanation to the more complex,
all things being equal. This is the
principle of parsimony, sometimes
known as Occam's Razor.
9. Live
the Truth.
Appropriate your ideas in a
personal way, so that even as the objective truth is a correspondence of the thought to the world, this lived-truth will be a correspondence of
the life to the thought. As Kierkegaard said, "Here is a definition of
(subjective) truth: holding fast to an objective uncertainty in an
appropriation process of
the most passionate inwardness is the truth, the highest available for an existing
individual".
10. Live the good.
Let the practical conclusions of a
philosophical reflection on the moral life inspire and motivate you to action. Let moral Truth transform your life,
so that you shine like a jewel glowing in its own light amidst the darkness of
ignorance.
2.
Outlook, its essence,
structure and significance for human life
Outlook and science are
principally different ways of the spiritual mastering of the world. For science, scientific knowledge is uninterested,
emotionally uncolored, objective, deprived of human values and estimations of the reality reflections.Science tries
to cognize the world as it is, no matter what man would like it to be. Outlook
has a different "system of coordinates". It is a vision of the world
from the only center-position of man. Any piece of knowledge
turns into a constituentelement of outlook in case it is directed at the human
being and participates in formation of his or her life position. No wonder,
that such knowledge is valuably colored and filled with the subjective
significance.
Outlook is a complex spiritual
phenomenon. Its structure includes the following constituent elements:
1. Basic components of outlook (cognitive, value and motivating-active);
2. Basic levels of outlook (vital-practical and theoretical);
3. Forms and
historical types of outlook (mythological,
religious and philosophical);
3. Historical types
of outlook: mythology, religion, and philosophy
In modern world all
the forms of outlook coexist and to this or that extent are represented in the
spiritual life of society and individual. But in terms of history they had
been formed consecutively. Some forms of outlook dominated in definite historicperiods, so that it enables us to determine historical
types of outlook.
Mythology is the most ancient type of outlook, which was typical for a man of the tribal system. That's why among other characteristic features of the
mythological outlook we can point out its collective (tribal)
character. Mythology is the self-consciousness of a tribe, where
development of the individual self-consciousness is not
observed yet. The features of the mythological outlook are:
Syncretism, that
is perception of the world where reality and illusion, natural and supernatural, objective and subjective are fused, is one of the
essential features of the mythological outlook.
Besides, we should
point out such a feature as anthroposociomorphism. At that time ideas about the world were formed according to the pattern of man
existence. In the process of cognition the unknown is always comprehended through the
known. For the man of the mythological epoch his very existence and existence
of his tribe were
the most known sphere of his life, so that the whole world was perceived as a big tribal community, where everything is interconnected by means of the
tribal ties.
In this
illustration by Milo Winter of the Aesop's fable, The North Wind and the Sun, an anthropomorphic North Wind
tries to strip a traveler of his cloak.
Animism that originates from the primeval anthroposociomorphism
is also considered to be one of the specific features of the mythological
outlook. The man of the tribal system sensed and comprehended natural life as existence of
an aliveorganism, which was spiritual and inhabited with gods and demons. Mythological gods were a
constituent element of nature. At that time there was no division of the world
into natural (visible) and supernatural (invisible) one. All the mythologicalcreatures lived together with man. Nowadays, mythological
consciousness is transformed into forms of the social and political myths that
can be practically efficient in the process of consolidation and
organization of the masses.
Animism
(from Latin anima
"soul, life")
has two main definitions. On one hand, "animism" can simply refer to
the belief in souls. However, the term is often used to refer to the belief
that non-human entities have souls. This article discusses animism in the
second sense.
Animism
encompasses philosophical, religious, and/or spiritual beliefs that souls
or spirits
exist not only in humans
but also in all other animals, plants, rocks,
natural phenomena such as thunder, geographic
features such as mountains
or rivers,
or other entities of the natural environment.Animism
may further attribute souls to abstract concepts such as words, true names
or metaphors in mythology.
Animism is particularly widely found in the religions of
indigenous peoples, although it is also found in Shinto,
and some forms of Hinduism, Sikhism, Buddhism, Pantheism,
and Neopaganism.
Throughout
European history, philosophers such as Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas,
among others, contemplated the possibility that souls exist in animals, plants
and people, however the currently accepted definition of animism was only
developed in the 19th century by Sir Edward Tylor,
who created it as "one of anthropology's earliest concepts, if not the
first".
Whilst
having similarities to totemism,
animism differs in that it, according to the anthropologist Tim Ingold, focuses on individual spirit
beings which help to perpetuate life, whilst totemism
more typically holds that there is a primary source, such as the land itself,
or the ancestors, who provide the basis to life. Certain indigenous religious
groups, such as that of the Australian Aborigines
are more typically totemic, whilst others, like the Inuit
are more typically animistic in their worldview.
Religious outlook appeared in the period of decay of the tribal system society. As
a historical phenomenon it passed several steps of its development that are associated with transition from paganism, religious-mythological ideas
and ethnical(national) religions to formation
of the world religions (Buddhism, Islam, Christianity). The specific feature of the religious outlook is fixed in
the very etymology
of the word "religion" that in Latin means "object to
worship" or the service and worship of God or the supernatural. Thus, presence of an
object to worship is an inseparable feature of the religious outlook. However,
worshiping of gods, demons and spirits is a feature of mythology as well. But
the word "religion" has also a different meaning, which is "renewing of
connection". This meaning enables us to understand the essence of religion.
4. Social functions of
philosophy
Taking into consideration specific
features of philosophy, its correlation with such phenomena of culture as science and outlook, it
is possible to determine the role of philosophy in the life of society and individual. The role of philosophy can bedisclosed through the functions it performs.
First of all we should
distinguish cognitive
function, as far as
philosophy is the cognitive-theoretical activity. It is directed at comprehension of
integrity of the world,
at cognition of the background and preconditions of interconnection betweenman and the world, at systemic-theoretical,
logical-consequent and argumentative solution of the outlook problems. Philosophy is a
generalized theoretical reflection of the spiritual culture. In terms of
content, methodological
function stands close to thefirst one. Philosophical cognition is not only directed
at search of truth, but also at exploration of means and ways of its achievement,
at the analysis of the very possibility of human cognition. The main
methodological task of philosophy is to ground and prove truth in the scientific
cognition. The problem field of philosophy is raised but not solved by science. It includes
ideals of science, norms and principles of the scientific activity, specific features and
laws of the scientific revolutions, structure and language of science,
functions of the scientific research, etc.
Besides, we can point out critical function. Philosophy is destined to be
in opposition to the empirical reality, to the every day world, to see
imperfection of society, to destroy habitual stereotypes and superstitions, to search
for possibilities to make the world more human. The origin of philosophy is connected with criticism, ruining
of traditional religious-mythological ideas in transition to class society.
Not to accept anything through belief and to doubt everything by reasoning are the main principles of philosophical cognition.
Outlook,
vital-practical function proves philosophy to be able to influence the fonnation both of mass outlook
and outlook position of an individual. Philosophy serves as the
spiritual means of human self-determination and self-realization.Philosophy is a sphere of spiritual freedom of man. Philosophizing means to be
responsible for one's thoughts, feelings and actions.
References
1.
http://www.answers.com/topic/philosophy#ixzz2ggPxbwQP
2.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki
3.
Hartman, Robert S. (1967). The Structure of Value. USI Press. 384 pages.
4.
Findlay, J. N. (1970). Axiological Ethics. New York:
Macmillan. ISBN 0-333-00269-5. 100 pages.
5.
Rescher, Nicholas (2005). Value Matters: Studies in Axiology. Frankfurt: Ontos
Verlag. ISBN 3-937202-67-6. 140 pages.
6.
Anicius
Manlius Severinus Boethius, The Consolation
of Philosophy, Chicago: The Great Books foundation 1959.
7.
Copleston F. Ñ. History of Philosophy, 8 vol.
8.
Edwards,
Paul, Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 8 vol.
9.
Jones,
W. T. A History of Western Philosophy, 5 vol.
10.
Pojman L. P. Philosophical Traditions. - London: WPC, 1998.
PHILOSOPHY OF THE
ANCIENT EAST
Plan
1. Origin of
philosophical thought. Eastern and western types of cultural development.
2.
Philosophy
of Ancient India (Vedantic philosophy, Buddhism).
3.
Philosophical
conceptions of Ancient China (Confucianism, Taoism).
1.
Origin of
philosophical thought. Eastern and western types of cultural development
Philosophy originated in controversy with religious - mythological ideas
that existed for many centuries before. Mythological
thinking was based on reflection of nature and man
in the light of the tribal relations. On the contrary, philosophy introduces the system of knowledge that is based on reason. It appeals
not to instructing and retelling, but to thinking,
logical reasoning and critical comprehension of the conventional ideas.
Philosophy originated in the following three centers
of the ancient civilization: in ancient
The first aspect to consider discloses specific
features of reference to nature. Development of the
west civilization implies active transformation and mastering of nature by man. Achievements in the realms of techniques, technologies
and science are its typical features. On the contrary, the eastern cultural
tradition emphasized careful and religious
reference to nature and everything alive. It is oriented not at change of the external conditions of the human existence but at
development of the very nature of man – at the
moral-spiritual improvement of a personality, its physical and psychological abilities and at harmony and integrity of its
inner world.
The second distinctive feature reflects peculiarities of
the social life and the system of the social values. On the one hand, the western cultural tradition stands for the idea of historical progress, development of society in the line of
ascent. In this connection, the values of
democracy, legal state, freedom and sovereignty of an individual are its main achievements. On the other hand, it is not
typical for the societies of the eastern cultural
tradition to have an intention of progress. On the contrary, they try
to preserve their culture as it is. What is more, the conservative character of the social relations is connected with
orientation on the values of a community and limitation of the
individual freedom in the name of the interests of society.
The third aspect discloses spiritual-psychological features of man of
this or that type of culture. A man of the western type is characterized by the rational-logical style of thinking, definiteness, consecutiveness, cold mind, sober
pragmatism and practicism. The determining principle of European thinking is
"divide and rule" that originated in the time of the
The eastern philosophical tradition is based on the outlook-oriented
knowledge, on such forms of spiritual
culture as religion, art and morality. The eastern philosophical
texts are represented by parables, aphorisms, and instructions. The humanistic, moral-ethic and religious problems
field dominates.
2. Philosophy of Ancient
Indian philosophy, along with Chinese philosophy, is
considered to be one of the foremost Eastern
traditions of abstract inquiry. Indian philosophy, expressed in the Indo-European language of Sanskrit, comprises many diverse schools of
thought and perspectives and includes a substantial body
of intellectual debate and argumentation among
the various views.
Classical Indian philosophy extends from approximately 100 BC to 1800
AD, which marks the beginning of the modern period.
Ancient Indian philosophy also includes the mystical
treatises known as Upanishads (700 – 100 BC), early Buddhist writings
(300 BC – 500 AD) and the Sanskrit poem Bhagavad-Gita (Song of God, about 200 BC). Classical Indian philosophy is
less concerned with spirituality than ancient
thought; rather, it concentrated on questions of how people can know and communicate about every-day affairs.
Indian
philosophy of the later classical and modern periods (1200 to present) may be distinguished from most Indian religious and
spiritual thought. Among the exceptions
are philosophies represented by famous advocates of ancient Indian spiritual views, such as mystic philosopher Sri
Aurobindo Ghose – a
nationalist revolutionary who opposed
British rule of
Reincarnation, the view that after death human beings live again in
other forms, was held by Plato and is a tenet
in Hinduism and Buddhism. In the Hindu Scripture Bhagavad-Gita (500 BC), the Supreme
God, Lord Krishna, comforts the unenlightened Arjuna, who is engaged
in warfare with his evil cousins, by telling him
that there is no reason to grieve over the death of someone we love, for the "eternal in man cannot die". "We have all been for all
time: I, and thou, and those king of men. And we
shall be for all time, we all for ever and ever". He continues that for the soul there is neither birth nor death at any time. It has not
come into being, does not come into being and will not come into being. A
person's body is different in every reincarnation, but the same mind inhabits
each body: "As a man leaves an old garment
and puts on the one that is new, the Spirit leaves his mortal body and then puts on one that is new". There are two main interpretations
of Gita. They both say that the goal of
existence is to end the cycle of rebirths, but the Advaitian
(monist) interpretation holds that the goal is
to be absorbed into God (or Nirvana), whereas the Vaisnavan (dualist, worshiping Vishnu)
interpretation holds that the person retains his
spiritual or personal identity in a relationship with God. Reincarnation is typically linked with karma,
one more essential constituent element of the Indian philosophy. Buddhism
and Hinduism consider karma to the sum total of the acts done in one stage of person's existence, which deteraiines his destiny in the next
stage. Jainism treats karma as a form of matter, which can contaminate a soul and postpone its attaining Nirvana. In general, it is the doctrine that
whatsoever a man sows, whether in action or
thought, the fruits will eventually be reaped by him – if not in this
life, then in the next. Thus a person who led an evil existence might be reborn
as a lower animal (e.g., a reptile or
insect). Evidence cited for reincarnation includes deja vu experiences that they
couldn't have had in this life.
The idea of the caste
division of society is one of those that are inseparable from the Indian outlook. According to it every man
belongs to one of four castes, which are
the following:
- Brahmin caste – the first or the highest caste, comprising the
priests (fr. Sanskrit Brahman – worship);
-
Kshatriya caste – the second caste, comprising
warriors and rulers (fr. Sanskrit kshatra – rule);
- Vaisya caste – the third caste, comprising farmers and merchants (fr.
Sanskrit – peasant);
-
Sudra caste – the fourth and the lowest caste,
comprising manual workers (fr. Sanskrit sudra);
Among
the main classical schools of Indian thought we can point out the following:
A) The so-called orthodox schools of Hindu
philosophy, which include Exegesis
(Mimamsa), Vedanta and its numerous subschools, Atomism (Vaisesika), Logic (Nyaya),
Analysis (Samkhya) and Yoga;
B) The so-called non-orthodox systems of Buddhism, the
materialist and skeptical philosophies of Carvaka and the religious schools of Jainism.
The eight steps of yoga fall into three main groups:
1) Moral discipline – against killing,
lying, stealing, sexual impurity and possessiveness, and
towards purity, contentment, austerity, study and God – centeredness.
2)
Physical disciplines – control over bodily posture, breathing and excitation of the senses.
3)
Stages of meditation – concentration, contemplation and ecstasy (unity).
It was Buddhism to inherit and transform all the traditions of
the orthodox philosophical schools.
This is a religious and philosophical system springing from the life and teaching of Gautama Buddha (the Sanskrit word Buddha means
awakened), who
in the 6th century BC rejected certain features of his native Hinduism, particularly the caste system, animal
sacrifice and undue asceticism.
He founded an order of
mendicant preachers, including both sexes, and his first sermon to his disciples at
1) Sorrow is the universal experience of mankind.
2)
The cause of sorrow is desire, and the cycle of rebirths is perpetuated
by desire for existence.
3)
The removal of sorrow can only come from the
removal of desire.
4)
The desire can be systematically abandoned by
following the Noble Eightfold Path,
which is the basis of the disciplines of Buddhism
and finds its origin in the corresponding yoga
system.
The
eight steps are not fully consecutive stages, but fall into three main groups:
a)
Right understanding (of
Buddha's basic teaching) and right aspirations (toward benevolence and renunciation).
b)
Right speech (i.e. no lying or abuse), right conduct
(i.e. no killing, no stealing and no
overindulgence) and right means of livelihood (i.e. nothing tending to
the use or encouragement of wrong
speech or conduct).
c) Right
striving (toward the building up of good
and the eradication of evil within oneself), right self-possession (involving
self-knowledge and control of thought), and right contemplation (according to the traditional stages of
meditation).
3. Philosophical conceptions of Ancient
Philosophy of the ancient
The following
schools represent the ancient
Confucianism originated in the
6th century BC. It was founded by Confucius (551 – 479 BC), who was born in the small state of Lu on the
The ethics of Confucius is based on differentiation of two social types
of people and two styles of behavior in society. These are the junzi (literally, "lord's son", "gentleman" or "profound
person") and the xiaoren ("small
person"): "The profound person understands what is moral. The small
person understands what is profitable".
Some
of Confucius' Sayings
"Someone who is a
clever speaker and maintains a 'too-smiley' face is seldom considered a person
of jen."
"Do unto others as you
would have them do unto you".
"Each
day I examine myself in three ways: in doing things for others, have I been
disloyal? In my interactions with friends, have I been untrustworthy? Have not
practiced what I have preached?"
"If you would govern a state of a thousand
chariots (a small-to-middle-size state), you must pay strict attention to
business, be true to your word, be economical in expenditure and love the
people. You should use them according to the seasons."
"A young man should serve his parents at
home and be respectful to elders outside his home. He should be earnest and
truthful, loving all, but become intimate with jen.
After doing this, if he has energy to spare, he can study literature and the
arts."
"If the
"When your father is alive, observe his
will. When your father is dead observe his former actions. If, for three years
you do not change from the ways of your father, you can be called a 'real son (hsiao).'"
"When the
"Ah, now I can begin to discuss the Book
of Odes with Tz'u. I give him a hint and he gets the
whole point."
"If you govern with the power of your
virtue, you will be like the North Star. It just stays in its place while all the
other stars position themselves around it."
"If you govern the people legalistically
and control them by punishment, they will avoid crime, but have no personal
sense of shame. If you govern them by means of virtue and control them with
propriety, they will gain their own sense of shame, and thus correct
themselves."
"At fifteen my heart was set on learning;
at thirty I stood firm; at forty I had no more doubts; at fifty I knew the
mandate of heaven; at sixty my ear was obedient; at seventy I could follow my
heart's desire without transgressing the norm."
"I can talk with Hui
for a whole day without him differing with me in any way--as if he is stupid.
But when he retires and I observe his personal affairs, it is quite clear that
he is not stupid."
Daoism originated
approximately at the same time as Confucianism. It does not name a tradition constituted by a founding
thinker, even though the common belief is that a teacher named Laozi founded the school and wrote its major
work, called the Daodejing (Book
about Dao and De)(3rd c. BC). Besides,
there is one more influential text
that refers to this philosophical tradition – the Zhuangzi
(4th – 3rd c. BC), which is a collection of stories and
imaginary conversations known for its creativity
and skillful use of language. However, this stream of thought existed in an oral fonn, passed along
by the masters who developed and transmitted it before it came to be written in
these texts. The problem field of Daoism is more concerned with natural
philosophy, relations between man and nature rather than with social -ethical and political aspects of human existence.
Dao is the main notion of Daoism
that gives answers to all the questions about origin of the world and the way it exists. It is the initial cause and
the only law of the universe to which nature, society
and man are subordinated. Dao is the process of reality itself, the way things come together, while still transforming.
It reflects the deep-seated Chinese belief that change is the most basic
character of things. A central theme of the Daodejing is that correlatives are the
expressions of the movement of Dao. Correlatives in
Chinese philosophy are not opposites, mutually excluding each other. They represent the ebb and flow of the forces of reality: yin/yang,
male/female; excess/defect; leading/following;
active/passive. As one approaches the fullness of
yin, yang begins to horizon and emerge. The essence of
Dao is non-being, that is why it can neither be cognized by mind nor determined by means of
words. Daoism teaches that humans cannot fathom Dao, because any name we give to it
cannot capture it. It is beyond what we can conceive. Those who wu wei
may become one with it and thus
"obtain Dao." Wu wei
is a difficult notion to translate. Yet, it is generally agreed that
the traditional rendering of it as "nonaction"
or "no action" is incorrect.
Those who wu wei
do act. Daoism is not a philosophy of "doing nothing." Wu wei
means something like "act naturally," "effortless
action," or "nonwillful action." The point is that there is no need
for human tampering with the flow of
reality. Wu wei should
be the way of life, because Dao always benefits, it does not harm. The way of heaven (Dao of tian) is always on the side of good and virtue (de) comes forth from Dao alone. What
causes this natural embedding of good and
benefit in Dao is vague and elusive, not even the sages understand it. But the world is a reality that is filled with spiritual
force, just as a sacred image used in religious
ritual might be. Dao occupies the place in reality that is analogous to the part of a family's house set aside for the altar
for venerating the ancestors and gods. When
we think that life's occurrences seem unfair (a human discrimination), we should remember that heaven's net misses nothing
and it leaves nothing undone. What is
the image of the ideal person in Daoism, the sage? It is obvious that sages wu wei. In this respect, they are like newborn infants, who move naturally,
without planning and reliance on the
structures given to them by others. Sages empty themselves, becoming void of pretense. Sages concentrate their internal
energies and clean their vision. They
manifest plainness and become like uncarved wood.
They live naturally and free from desires given by men. They settle
themselves and know how to be content. They
preserve the female (yin), meaning that they know how to be receptive and are not unbalanced favoring
assertion and action (yang). They shoulder
yin and embrace yang, blend internal energies and thereby attain harmony. Those following Dao do not strive, tamper, or
seek control. They do not endeavor to help life along, or use their heart-mind
to "solve" or "figure out" life's apparent knots and entanglements. Sages do not engage in
disputes and arguing, or try to prove their point. They are pliable and supple, not rigid and resistive. They are
like water, finding their own place,
overcoming the hard and strong by suppleness. Sages act with no expectation of
reward. They put themselves last and yet come first. They never make a display of themselves. They do not
brag or boast and do not linger after their work is done. They leave no
trace. Because they embody Dao in practice, they have longevity. They create
peace. Creatures do not harm them. Soldiers do not kill them. Heaven protects the sage and the sage becomes invincible. The sage
should follow the three aims: to live long, to overcome the state of
enlightenment and to become
immortal.
Indian Philosophy
|
I |
|
INTRODUCTION |
Indian Philosophy, along with Chinese philosophy,
one of the foremost Eastern traditions of abstract inquiry. Indian philosophy,
expressed in the Indo-European language of Sanskrit (see Sanskrit
Language), comprises many diverse schools of thought and perspectives and
includes a substantial body of intellectual debate and argumentation among the
various views.
Among the main classical
schools of Indian thought are (1) the so-called orthodox schools of Hindu
philosophy, which include Exegesis (Mimamsa),
Vedanta and its numerous subschools, Atomism (Vaisheshika), Logic (Nyaya),
Analysis (Samkhya), and Yoga; and (2) the
Buddhist (so-called nonorthodox) schools of Madhyamika, Buddhist Idealism (Yogacara),
and Abhidharma (which includes numerous subschools). Indian philosophy also comprises the materialist
(see Materialism) and skeptical (see Skepticism) philosophies of Carvaka
and the religious schools of Jainism.
Classical Indian philosophy
extends from approximately 100 bc
to ad 1800, which marks the
beginning of the modern period. Ancient Indian thought, which is also
philosophic in a broader sense, originated as early as 1500 bc and appears in scriptures called
Veda. Ancient Indian philosophy also includes the mystical treatises known as
Upanishads (700 bc to 400 bc), early Buddhist writings (300 bc to ad
500), and the Sanskrit poem Bhagavad-Gita (Song of the Lord, 200 BC to
200 AD). Classical Indian philosophy is less concerned with spirituality than
ancient thought; rather, it concentrates on questions of how people can know
and communicate about everyday affairs.
Indian philosophy of the
later classical and modern periods (1200 to present) may be distinguished from
most Indian religious and spiritual thought. Among the exceptions are
philosophies represented by famous advocates of ancient Indian spiritual views,
such as mystic philosopher Sri Aurobindo Ghose—a nationalist revolutionary who opposed British rule
of India in the early 20th century—and Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, who was president of India from 1962 to
1967, within the period immediately following the country's struggle for
independence.
Indian philosophy is extensive,
rich, and complex. Scholars analyze not only its significance and its insights,
but also its classical teachings about knowledge and language. Meanwhile, the
majority of Western students of Indian thought have been drawn to its religious
and mystical teachings.
|
II |
|
RELATIONSHIP WITH WESTERN PHILOSOPHY |
Indian and Western civilizations
have maintained some form of contact for at least 2500 years. In the 4th
century bc, for example, the
Greek emperor Alexander took troops across the
Despite this, it is possible
to discern common interests and intellectual positions between Western and
Indian philosophy, such as positions concerning logic and epistemology (the
study of knowledge). Furthermore, when Indian philosophers
ask the question “What is real?” (the subject
of metaphysics) and respond by directing their attention to everyday experience
and discourse, other interesting parallels to Western traditions become
evident.
On the other hand, contrasts
between Western and Indian thought dominate the arenas of religion and
religious philosophy. For example, there is a certain type of Indian theism
that shares similarities with the monotheism of the West. But the nirvana
(enlightenment) goal of Buddhism, the mystical monism of Advaita
Vedanta (the idea that all reality is a single spiritual being), and the
theorizing that forms the foundation of polytheism (belief in the existence of
multiple deities) in Hinduism are instances of Indian philosophy that have no,
or at best minor and incomplete, parallels in Western philosophy.
Most ethical teachings
in Indian philosophy are found in Indian literature but are influenced by
religious association. Western types of ethical propositions (“one should
behave in a certain manner because of [argument X]”) do occur in Indian
philosophy—for instance, the famous Jaina argument
that since animals are capable of pain, humans have an obligation not to harm
them—but there is little wrestling with the question of the criteria of ethical
norms (standards), unlike in the West. Indian classical philosophers
often think about ethics in connection with Indian views about actions, or
habits (karma), and rebirth (the belief in reincarnation; see Transmigration).
Nevertheless, Indian philosophy is characterized by a highly refined ethical
sensibility (common among Jainism, Buddhism, and Hinduism), along with
standards of character and conduct that are common to many other cultures.
|
III |
|
INFLUENCE OF RELIGION |
In ancient Indian philosophy
(before 100 bc), philosophy and
religion cannot be meaningfully separated, primarily because of the cultural
integration of religious practices and mystical pursuits. For example,
ceremonies celebrating birth, marriage, and death, performed
with recitations of Vedic verses (mantras), were important for
bonding within ancient Indian societies. Later in classical Indian philosophy,
different social practices developed. Thus, the orthodox classical schools of
thought are distinguished from nonorthodox classical
schools by their allegiance to established forms of social practice rather than
to the doctrines of the Veda. Buddhism, for example, constitutes much more of a
break with Vedic practices than with the ideas developed in Vedic traditions of
thought. In fact, the Upanishads, mystical treatises continuous with the Vedas,
foretell many Buddhist teachings. In ancient
Mysticism, the claim that
ultimate truth is only obtainable through spiritual experience, dominates much
ancient Indian philosophy. Such experiences are thought to reveal a supreme and
transmundane (beyond ordinary experience) reality and
to provide the meaning of life. Mysticism shapes much classical and modern
Indian thought as well. Through meditation and the meditative techniques of
yoga, it is believed that one discovers one's true self (atman), or God
(Brahman), or enlightenment (nirvana). The presumed indications of
mystical experiences, such as atman or God, were especially debated in the
ancient period and influenced much subsequent Indian philosophy, including the
reflections of professional philosophers of late
classical times.
In some schools of classical
Indian philosophy, such as Nyaya (Logic), neither
religion nor mysticism is central. Rather, the questions of how human beings
know what they know—and how they can mean what they say—are given priority.
|
IV |
|
HISTORY |
The oldest literature
of Indian thought is the Veda, a collection of poems and hymns composed over
several generations beginning as early as 1500 bc. The Veda was composed in Sanskrit, the intellectual
language of both ancient and classical Indian civilizations. Four collections
were made, so it is said that there are four Vedas. The four as a group came to
be viewed as sacred in Hinduism.
Most of the poems of the
Veda are religious and tend to be about the activities of various gods. Yet
some Vedic hymns and poems address philosophic themes that became important in
later periods, such as the henotheism that is key
to much Hindu theology. Henotheism is the idea that one God takes many
different forms, and that although individuals may worship several different
gods and goddesses, they really revere but one Supreme Being.
Indian philosophy was
more decisively established with the Upanishads (secret doctrines), the first
of which may have been written in the 7th century bc. Early Upanishads, which dominate the late ancient period
(475 bc to 100 bc) of thought, were key
to the emergence of several classical philosophies. In the Upanishads, views
about Brahman (the Absolute, or God) and atman (one's true self) were proposed.
Buddhism, now a major
world religion, also appeared in the ancient period of Indian philosophy. The
Buddha, the founder of Buddhism, lived during the 6th century bc. He preached a goal of a supreme
personal good—enlightenment (nirvana)—that may be compared to the later
mystical so-called Brahman-knowledge of Upanishadic
philosophy. In the reign of the Buddhist emperor Ashoka
(3rd century bc), an enormous
canon of literature, sometimes called the Southern Buddhist Canon, or the Pali Canon, was compiled. Other scriptures, eventually key
to a Northern or Mahayana tradition, were composed later.
Most of the great classical
schools of Indian philosophy, seven or eight in number, were first articulated
in texts dating from as early as 100 bc.
The founders of these schools are largely unknown except by traditional
names—such as Gautama, with the Logic (Nyaya) school,
and Badarayana, with Vedanta. Early classical Indian
philosophy is expressed in aphoristic (sutra) texts complete with
elaborate commentaries. The Sanskrit word sutra means thread and,
by extension, an “aphorism” that captures a philosophic tenet in a succinct
statement. The sutra texts, usually accompanied with commentaries made by a
second great thinker of a tradition, express world views, or philosophies,
organized around reasons and arguments.
The most outstanding individuals
in subsequent classical Indian philosophical writing include Buddhist Idealist Dharmakirti, who lived in the 7th century; Advaita Vedantin Samkara, of the 8th century; and Logic philosopher Gangesa, of the 14th century. The writings of these
thinkers represented a steady advance in persuasiveness over previous
arguments. As a whole, Indian philosophic reasoning and reflection
advanced—both in overall sophistication of argument and in the volume and scope
of new texts—by the gradual effort of numerous authors.
|
V |
|
INDIAN THOUGHT |
|
A |
|
Exegesis |
The Mimamsa-sutra of the Exegesis school appears to be the oldest text (100 bc) of an emergent philosophic sastra (craft or science). Exegesis is primarily concerned with questions of Vedic interpretation. Broadly philosophic questions—such as, “Why is the Veda sacred?”—come to be addressed, and, in general, a realist (see Realism) view of nature (the belief that a world exists independent of the mind) and a common-sense view of knowledge (human beings know things by directly perceiving them or by deducing from other known things) become part of the basis of the philosophic system. Exegesis arguments about dharma (Sanskrit for “duty” or “the right way to live”) have been the focus of philosophic efforts through most of the many centuries of this school. In the later classical period, Exegesis philosophy focuses less on dharma, and more attention is given to technical issues in the philosophy of language. The school continues into the modern period.
|
B |
|
Vedanta |
Vedanta also has a long and distinguished history,
as well as a bewildering number of subschools.
Vedanta models itself after the philosophy of the Upanishads. For purposes of
study, Vedantic philosophy may be said to fall into
two subschools: (1) Advaita
(monistic or nondual) Vedanta, and (2) theistic
Vedanta. The main point of contention between the two schools is the reality of
God, along with the reality of the world that God presumably has created, or
emanated. Advaita Vedanta holds that Ultimate Reality
(Brahman), which is identical with one's true self (atman), transcends all
forms. Thus, God and the world are illusions. Theistic Vedantins
disagree, holding that God and the world exist separately from one's self. The
early 8th-century Advaitin philosopher Samkara is the most famous classical Vedantin.
Vedanta extends through all periods of Indian philosophy and remains important
among present-day philosophers in
Vedanta
|
I |
|
INTRODUCTION |
Vedanta (Sanskrit veda,”knowledge”; anta,”end”),
one of the six orthodox philosophies of Hinduism, chiefly concerned with
knowledge of Brahman, the universal supreme pure being. Vedanta is based on the speculative portion of late Vedic literature,
primarily the treatises known as Aranyakas and
Upanishads.
Differing Indian traditions
ascribe the first truly Vedantic manuals, the Vedanta
sutras (also called Brahma sutras), to two semilegendary
figures: the philosopher Badarayana (circa 4th
century bc), and a vaguely
identifiable sage named Vyasa. To the latter these
same traditions also ascribe definitive compilations of the Vedas, as well as a
compilation of the later epic poem Mahabharata. Most modern scholars,
without totally rejecting the traditions, state that the Sanskrit name Vyasa (“arranger” or “collector,”) has been applied to many ancient Hindu authors and
compilers.
Whoever first formulated
the Vedanta set down its teachings in aphorisms so pithy that they are
virtually unintelligible without the aid of interpretation.
Different interpretations have given rise to numerous schools of Indian
philosophy, the most important being Advaita, or nondualism, founded by the Hindu philosopher and theologian
Shankara.
|
II |
|
SHANKARA |
The central problem in
Shankara's system of interpretation is the nature of
the relation between Brahman and atman, the individual self, breath, or
soul. According to Shankara, the two are identical.
The individual self, however, is prevented by avidya,
or ignorance, from understanding the nondual
universal nature of pure being (Brahman). Thus it perceives only separate
selves and things (that is, the whole world of material, temporal existence),
and never realizes that all separate existences are essentially unreal (these
being phenomena produced by maya, the
power of illusion mysteriously inherent in and projected from Brahman). As long
as the individual self remains without real knowledge, it will blindly look for
its true self in the phenomenal world. It remains enmeshed in that world, again
and again experiencing samsara, or the
series of existences, deaths, and rebirths each unenlightened soul undergoes as
a consequence of its karma (its good and evil actions in past existences, which
determine the form of future existences). Through the proper knowledge of Vedanta,
however, the individual soul recognizes the limitless reality forever existing
behind the cosmic veil of maya, realizes that its own
true nature is identical with Brahman, and through this self-realization
achieves moksha (release from samsara and karma) and Nirvana.
|
III |
|
LATER INTERPRETERS |
Later modifications of
this philosophy were introduced by the philosophers Ramanuja
and Madhva. In modern times, Vedanta has received
attention outside
|
C |
|
Buddhism |
Like much Vedanta philosophy, Buddhism is concerned with
mystical experience. Buddhist thinkers commonly compare enlightenment (nirvana)
experience to awakening from a dream. (The Sanskrit word buddha means awakened.) Buddhists have
contributed significant ideas in epistemology and metaphysics to Indian
philosophy, and have exerted a complex influence on its overall history.
Buddhist philosophies were prominent in the earlier classical period (100 bc to ad
1000). The 2nd-century Buddhist Nagarjuna and the
7th-century Buddhist Dharmakirti are two of the
greatest thinkers in classical Indian philosophy. Nagarjuna
was an advocate of skepticism and mysticism, and his
arguments continue to influence a majority of Indian philosophic schools. Dharmakirti was an astute logician (see Logic) and
pragmatist (see Pragmatism) who worked largely on idealist premises,
such as the idea that appearances are dependent on the mind, or consciousness. Dharmakirti taught that everything is, or is directly
dependent upon, Buddha Mind or Buddha Body (awakened mind or awakened body).
Buddhism
|
I |
|
INTRODUCTION |
Buddhism, a major world religion,
founded in northeastern
Originating as a monastic
movement within the dominant Brahman tradition of the day, Buddhism quickly
developed in a distinctive direction. The Buddha not only rejected significant
aspects of Hindu philosophy, but also challenged the authority of the
priesthood, denied the validity of the Vedic scriptures, and rejected the
sacrificial cult based on them. Moreover, he opened his movement to members of
all castes, denying that a person’s spiritual worth is a matter of birth. See
Hinduism.
Buddhism today is divided
into two major branches known to their respective followers as Theravada, the
Way of the Elders, and Mahayana, the Great Vehicle. Followers of Mahayana refer
to Theravada using the derogatory term Hinayana, the
Lesser Vehicle.
Buddhism has been significant
not only in India but also in Sri Lanka, Thailand, Cambodia, Myanmar (formerly
known as Burma), and Laos, where Theravada has been dominant; Mahayana has had
its greatest impact in China, Japan, Taiwan, Tibet, Nepal, Mongolia, Korea, and
Vietnam, as well as in India. The number of Buddhists worldwide has been
estimated at between 150 and 300 million. The reasons for such a range are
twofold: Throughout much of Asia religious affiliation has tended to be
nonexclusive; and it is especially difficult to estimate the continuing
influence of Buddhism in Communist countries such as
|
II |
|
ORIGINS |
As did most major faiths,
Buddhism developed over many years.
|
A |
|
Buddha’s Life |
No complete biography
of the Buddha was compiled until centuries after his death; only fragmentary
accounts of his life are found in the earliest sources. Western scholars,
however, generally agree on 563 bc
as the year of his birth.
Siddhartha Gautama, the
Buddha, was born in Lumbini near the present
Indian-Nepal border, the son of the ruler of a petty kingdom. According to
legend, at his birth sages recognized in him the marks of a great man with the
potential to become either a sage or the ruler of an empire. The young prince
was raised in sheltered luxury, until at the age of 29 he realized how empty
his life to this point had been. Renouncing earthly attachments, he embarked on
a quest for peace and enlightenment, seeking release from the cycle of
rebirths. For the next few years he practiced Yoga and adopted a life of
radical asceticism.
Eventually he gave up
this approach as fruitless and instead adopted a middle path between the life
of indulgence and that of self-denial. Sitting under a bo
tree, he meditated, rising through a series of higher states of consciousness
until he attained the enlightenment for which he had been searching. Once
having known this ultimate religious truth, the Buddha underwent a period of
intense inner struggle. He began to preach, wandering from place to place, gathering
a body of disciples, and organizing them into a monastic community known as the
sangha. In this way he spent the rest
of his life.
|
B |
|
Buddha’s Teachings |
The Buddha was an oral teacher; he left no written body of thought. His beliefs were codified by later followers.
|
B1 |
|
The Four Noble Truths |
At the core of the Buddha’s
enlightenment was the realization of the Four Noble Truths: (1) Life is
suffering. This is more than a mere recognition of the presence of suffering in
existence. It is a statement that, in its very nature, human existence is
essentially painful from the moment of birth to the moment of death. Even death
brings no relief, for the Buddha accepted the Hindu idea of life as cyclical,
with death leading to further rebirth. (2) All suffering is caused by ignorance
of the nature of reality and the craving, attachment, and grasping that result
from such ignorance. (3) Suffering can be ended by overcoming ignorance and
attachment. (4) The path to the suppression of suffering is the Noble Eightfold
Path, which consists of right views, right intention, right speech, right
action, right livelihood, right effort, right-mindedness, and right
contemplation. These eight are usually divided into three categories that form
the cornerstone of Buddhist faith: morality, wisdom, and samadhi,
or concentration.
|
B2 |
|
Anatman |
Buddhism analyzes human
existence as made up of five aggregates or “bundles” (skandhas):
the material body, feelings, perceptions, predispositions or karmic tendencies,
and consciousness. A person is only a temporary combination of these
aggregates, which are subject to continual change. No one remains the same for
any two consecutive moments. Buddhists deny that the aggregates individually or
in combination may be considered a permanent, independently existing self or
soul (atman). Indeed, they regard it as a mistake to conceive of any
lasting unity behind the elements that constitute an individual. The Buddha
held that belief in such a self results in egoism, craving, and hence in
suffering. Thus he taught the doctrine of anatman,
or the denial of a permanent soul. He felt that all existence is characterized
by the three marks of anatman (no soul), anitya (impermanence), and dukkha
(suffering). The doctrine of anatman made it
necessary for the Buddha to reinterpret the Indian idea of repeated rebirth in
the cycle of phenomenal existence known as samsara.
To this end he taught the doctrine of pratityasamutpada,
or dependent origination. This 12-linked chain of causation shows how ignorance
in a previous life creates the tendency for a combination of aggregates to
develop. These in turn cause the mind and senses to operate. Sensations result,
which lead to craving and a clinging to existence. This condition triggers the
process of becoming once again, producing a renewed cycle of birth, old age,
and death. Through this causal chain a connection is made between one life and
the next. What is posited is a stream of renewed existences, rather than a
permanent being that moves from life to life—in effect a belief in rebirth
without transmigration.
|
B3 |
|
Karma |
Closely related to this
belief is the doctrine of karma. Karma consists of a person’s acts and their
ethical consequences. Human actions lead to rebirth, wherein good deeds are
inevitably rewarded and evil deeds punished. Thus, neither undeserved pleasure
nor unwarranted suffering exists in the world, but rather a universal justice.
The karmic process operates through a kind of natural moral law rather than
through a system of divine judgment. One’s karma determines such matters as
one’s species, beauty, intelligence, longevity, wealth, and social status.
According to the Buddha, karma of varying types can lead to rebirth as a human,
an animal, a hungry ghost, a denizen of hell, or even one of the Hindu gods.
Although never actually denying the existence of the gods, Buddhism denies them any special role. Their lives in heaven are long and pleasurable, but they are in the same predicament as other creatures, being subject eventually to death and further rebirth in lower states of existence. They are not creators of the universe or in control of human destiny, and Buddhism denies the value of prayer and sacrifice to them. Of the possible modes of rebirth, human existence is preferable, because the deities are so engrossed in their own pleasures that they lose sight of the need for salvation. Enlightenment is possible only for humans.
|
B4 |
|
Nirvana |
The ultimate goal of the
Buddhist path is release from the round of phenomenal existence with its
inherent suffering. To achieve this goal is to attain nirvana, an enlightened
state in which the fires of greed, hatred, and ignorance have been quenched.
Not to be confused with total annihilation, nirvana is a state of consciousness
beyond definition. After attaining nirvana, the enlightened individual may
continue to live, burning off any remaining karma until a state of final
nirvana (parinirvana) is attained at the
moment of death.
In theory, the goal of
nirvana is attainable by anyone, although it is a realistic goal only for
members of the monastic community. In Theravada Buddhism an individual who has
achieved enlightenment by following the Eightfold Path is known as an arhat, or worthy one, a type of solitary
saint.
For those unable to pursue
the ultimate goal, the proximate goal of better rebirth through improved karma
is an option. This lesser goal is generally pursued by lay Buddhists in the
hope that it will eventually lead to a life in which they are capable of
pursuing final enlightenment as members of the sangha.
The ethic that leads to
nirvana is detached and inner-oriented. It involves cultivating four virtuous
attitudes, known as the Palaces of Brahma: loving-kindness, compassion,
sympathetic joy, and equanimity. The ethic that leads to better rebirth,
however, is centered on fulfilling one’s duties to
society. It involves acts of charity, especially support of the sangha, as well as observance of the five
precepts that constitute the basic moral code of Buddhism. The precepts
prohibit killing, stealing, harmful language, sexual misbehavior,
and the use of intoxicants. By observing these precepts, the three roots of
evil—lust, hatred, and delusion—may be overcome.
|
III |
|
EARLY DEVELOPMENT |
Shortly before his death,
the Buddha refused his disciples’ request to appoint a successor, telling his
followers to work out their own salvation with diligence. At that time Buddhist
teachings existed only in oral traditions, and it soon became apparent that a
new basis for maintaining the community’s unity and purity was needed. Thus,
the monastic order met periodically to reach agreement on matters of doctrine
and practice. Four such meetings have been focused on in the traditions as
major councils.
|
A |
|
Major Councils |
The first council was
held at Rajagrha (present-day Rajgir)
immediately after the Buddha’s death. Presided over by a monk named Mahakasyapa, its purpose was to recite and agree on the
Buddha’s actual teachings and on proper monastic discipline.
About a century later,
a second great council is said to have met at Vaishāli.
Its purpose was to deal with ten questionable monastic practices—the use of
money, the drinking of palm wine, and other irregularities—of monks from the Vajjian Confederacy; the council declared these practices
unlawful. Some scholars trace the origins of the first major split in Buddhism
to this event, holding that the accounts of the council refer to the schism
between the Mahasanghikas, or Great Assembly, and the
stricter Sthaviras, or Elders. More likely, however,
the split between these two groups became formalized at another meeting held
some 37 years later as a result of the continued growth of tensions within the sangha over disciplinary issues, the role of the
laity, and the nature of the arhat.
In time, further subdivisions
within these groups resulted in 18 schools that differed on philosophical
matters, religious questions, and points of discipline. Of these 18 traditional
sects, only Theravada survives.
The third council at Pātaliputra (present-day
A fourth council, under
the patronage of King Kanishka, was held about ad 100 at Jālandhar
or in
|
B |
|
Formation of Buddhist Literature |
For several centuries
after the death of the Buddha, the scriptural traditions recited at the
councils were transmitted orally. These were finally committed to writing about
the 1st century bc. Some early
schools used Sanskrit for their scriptural language. Although individual texts
are extant, no complete canon has survived in Sanskrit. In contrast, the full
canon of the Theravadins survives in Pali, which was apparently a popular dialect derived from
Sanskrit.
The Buddhist canon is
known in Pali as the Tipitaka
(Tripitaka in Sanskrit), meaning "Three Baskets,"
because it consists of three collections of writings: the Sutta
Pitaka (Sutra Pitaka in
Sanskrit), a collection of discourses; the Vinaya Pitaka, the code of monastic discipline; and the Abhidharma Pitaka, which contains
philosophical, psychological, and doctrinal discussions and classifications.
The Sutta Pitaka is primarily
composed of dialogues between the Buddha and other people. It consists of five
groups of texts: Digha Nikaya
(Collection of Long Discourses), Majjhima Nikaya (Collection of Medium-Length Discourses), Samyutta Nikaya (Collection of
Grouped Discourses), Anguttara Nikaya
(Collection of Discourses on Numbered Topics), and Khuddaka
Nikaya (Collection of Miscellaneous Texts). In the
fifth group, the Jatakas, comprising stories of former
lives of the Buddha, and the Dhammapada (Religious
Sentences), a summary of the Buddha’s teachings on mental discipline and
morality, are especially popular.
The Vinaya Pitaka consists
of more than 225 rules governing the conduct of Buddhist monks and nuns. Each
is accompanied by a story explaining the original reason for the rule. The
rules are arranged according to the seriousness of the offense resulting from
their violation.
The Abhidharma Pitaka consists
of seven separate works. They include detailed classifications of psychological
phenomena, metaphysical analysis, and a thesaurus of technical vocabulary.
Although technically authoritative, the texts in this collection have little
influence on the lay Buddhist. The complete canon, much expanded, also exists
in Tibetan and Chinese versions.
Two noncanonical texts that have great authority within
Theravada Buddhism are the Milindapanha (Questions of
King Milinda) and the Visuddhimagga
(Path of Purification). The Milindapanha dates from
about the 2nd century ad. It is
in the form of a dialogue dealing with a series of fundamental problems in
Buddhist thought. The Visuddhimagga is the
masterpiece of the most famous of Buddhist commentators, Buddhaghosa
(flourished early 5th century ad).
It is a large compendium summarizing Buddhist thought and meditative practice.
Theravada Buddhists have
traditionally considered the Tipitaka to be the
remembered words of Siddhartha Gautama. Mahayana Buddhists have not limited
their scriptures to the teachings of this historical figure, however, nor has
Mahayana ever bound itself to a closed canon of sacred writings. Various
scriptures have thus been authoritative for different branches of Mahayana at
various periods of history. Among the more important Mahayana scriptures are
the following: the Saddharmapundarika Sutra (Lotus of
the Good Law Sutra, popularly known as the Lotus Sutra), the Vimalakirti Sutra, the Avatamsaka
Sutra (Garland Sutra), and the Lankavatara Sutra (The
Buddha’s Descent to Sri Lanka Sutra), as well as a group of writings known as
the Prajnaparamita (Perfection of Wisdom).
|
C |
|
Conflict and New Groupings |
As Buddhism developed
in its early years, conflicting interpretations of the master’s teachings
appeared, resulting in the traditional 18 schools of Buddhist thought. As a
group, these schools eventually came to be considered too conservative and
literal minded in their attachment to the master’s message. Among them,
Theravada was charged with being too individualistic and insufficiently
concerned with the needs of the laity. Such dissatisfaction led a liberal wing
of the sangha to begin to break away from the
rest of the monks at the second council in 383 bc.
While the more conservative
monks continued to honor the Buddha as a perfectly
enlightened human teacher, the liberal Mahasanghikas
developed a new concept. They considered the Buddha an eternal, omnipresent,
transcendental being. They speculated that the human Buddha was but an
apparition of the transcendental Buddha that was created for the benefit of
humankind. In this understanding of the Buddha nature, Mahasanghika
thought is something of a prototype of Mahayana.
|
C1 |
|
Mahayana |
The origins of Mahayana
are particularly obscure. Even the names of its founders are unknown, and
scholars disagree about whether it originated in southern or in northwestern
Speculation about the
eternal Buddha continued well after the beginning of the Christian era and
culminated in the Mahayana doctrine of his threefold nature, or triple “body” (trikaya). These aspects are the body of essence, the
body of communal bliss, and the body of transformation. The body of essence
represents the ultimate nature of the Buddha. Beyond form, it is the unchanging
absolute and is spoken of as consciousness or the void. This essential Buddha
nature manifests itself, taking on heavenly form as the body of communal bliss.
In this form the Buddha sits in godlike splendor,
preaching in the heavens. Lastly, the Buddha nature appears on earth in human
form to convert humankind. Such an appearance is known as a body of
transformation. The Buddha has taken on such an appearance countless times.
Mahayana considers the historical Buddha, Siddhartha Gautama, only one example
of the body of transformation.
The new Mahayana concept
of the Buddha made possible concepts of divine grace and ongoing revelation
that are lacking in Theravada. Belief in the Buddha’s heavenly manifestations
led to the development of a significant devotional strand in Mahayana. Some
scholars have therefore described the early development of Mahayana in terms of
the “Hinduization” of Buddhism.
Another important new
concept in Mahayana is that of the bodhisattva or enlightenment being,
as the ideal toward which the good Buddhist should aspire. A bodhisattva
is an individual who has attained perfect enlightenment but delays entry into
final nirvana in order to make possible the salvation of all other sentient
beings. The bodhisattva transfers merit built up over many lifetimes to
less fortunate creatures. The key attributes of this social saint are
compassion and loving-kindness. For this reason Mahayana considers the bodhisattva
superior to the arhats who represent the ideal
of Theravada. Certain bodhisattvas, such as Maitreya,
who represents the Buddha’s loving-kindness, and Avalokitesvara or Guanyin, who
represents his compassion, have become the focus of popular devotional worship
in Mahayana.
|
C2 |
|
Tantrism |
By the 7th century ad a new form of Buddhism known as Tantrism (see Tantra) had
developed through the blend of Mahayana with popular folk belief and magic in
northern
|
IV |
|
FROM INDIA OUTWARD |
Buddhism spread rapidly
throughout the land of its birth. Missionaries dispatched by King Ashoka introduced the religion to southern
|
A |
|
Asian Expansion |
King Ashoka’s son Mahinda
and daughter Sanghamitta are credited with the
conversion of
According to tradition,
Theravada was carried to
Both Mahayana and Hinduism
had begun to influence
About the beginning of
the Christian era, Buddhism was carried to
From
Buddhism was carried into
Buddhism was first introduced
into
Some seven centuries later
Tibetan Buddhists had adopted the idea that the abbots of its great monasteries
were reincarnations of famous bodhisattvas. Thereafter, the chief of
these abbots became known as the Dalai Lama. The Dalai Lamas ruled
|
B |
|
New Sects |
Several important new
sects of Buddhism developed in
Zen advocated the practice
of meditation as the way to a sudden, intuitive realization of one’s inner
Buddha nature. Founded by the Indian monk Bodhidharma,
who arrived in
Instead of meditation,
A distinctively Japanese
sect of Mahayana is Nichiren Buddhism, which is named
after its 13th-century founder. Nichiren believed
that the Lotus Sutra contains the essence of Buddhist teaching. Its contents
can be epitomized by the formula “Homage to the Lotus Sutra,” and simply by
repeating this formula the devotee may gain enlightenment.
|
V |
|
INSTITUTIONS AND PRACTICES |
Differences occur in the
religious obligations and observances both within and between the sangha and the laity.
|
A |
|
Monastic Life |
From the first, the most
devoted followers of the Buddha were organized into the monastic sangha. Its members were identified by their
shaved heads and robes made of unsewn orange cloth.
The early Buddhist monks, or bhikkus,
wandered from place to place, settling down in communities only during the
rainy season when travel was difficult. Each of the settled communities that
developed later was independent and democratically organized. Monastic life was
governed by the rules of the Vinaya Sutra, one of the
three canonical collections of scripture. Fortnightly, a formal assembly of
monks, the uposatha, was held in each
community. Central to this observance was the formal recitation of the Vinaya rules and the public confession of all violations.
The sangha included an order for nuns as well
as for monks, a unique feature among Indian monastic orders. Theravadan monks and nuns were celibate and obtained their
food in the form of alms on a daily round of the homes of lay devotees. The Zen
school came to disregard the rule that members of the sangha
should live on alms. Part of the discipline of this sect required its members
to work in the fields to earn their own food. In
|
B |
|
Lay Worship |
Lay worship in Buddhism
is primarily individual rather than congregational. Since earliest times a
common expression of faith for laity and members of the sangha
alike has been taking the Three Refuges, that is, reciting the formula “I take
refuge in the Buddha. I take refuge in the dharma. I take refuge in the sangha.” Although technically the Buddha is not
worshiped in Theravada, veneration is shown through the stupa
cult. A stupa is a domelike sacred structure
containing a relic. Devotees walk around the dome in a clockwise direction,
carrying flowers and incense as a sign of reverence. The relic of the Buddha’s
tooth in
In Mahayana countries
ritual is more important than in Theravada. Images of the buddhas and bodhisattvas on temple altars and
in the homes of devotees serve as a focus for worship. Prayer and chanting are
common acts of devotion, as are offerings of fruit, flowers, and incense. One
of the most popular festivals in
|
VI |
|
BUDDHISM TODAY |
One of the lasting strengths
of Buddhism has been its ability to adapt to changing conditions and to a
variety of cultures. It is philosophically opposed to materialism, whether of
the Western or the Marxist-Communist variety. Buddhism does not recognize a
conflict between itself and modern science. On the contrary, it holds that the
Buddha applied the experimental approach to questions of ultimate truth.
In
Under the Communist republics
in
Only in
Growing interest in Asian
culture and spiritual values in the West has led to the development of a number
of societies devoted to the study and practice of Buddhism. Zen has grown in
the
As its influence in the
West slowly grows, Buddhism is once again beginning to undergo a process of
acculturation to its new environment. Although its influence in the
|
D |
|
Analysis and Yoga |
Analysis (Samkhya) and Yoga are relatively minor philosophies,
compared to others discussed in this overview. Both emerged before the 2nd
century bc, but neither spawned a
continuing philosophy comparable to that of the schools already mentioned.
Neither school participated significantly in later classical debates. The
Analysis school subscribes to a metaphysical dualism (the claim that two types
of things ultimately exist) of individual souls and nature. The school is devoted
to the analysis of nature, in order to aid one's knowledge of oneself as
liberated from karma and rebirth, and as pure and blissful, self-conscious, and
aloof from nature. Yoga takes a similar metaphysical stance, though it also
pursues a psychological and yogic-practice dimension that the Analysis school
lacks. Although few modern philosophers find substantial merit in Yoga's
metaphysical claims, many find profound psychological wisdom in Yoga
literature.
|
E |
|
Logic and Atomism |
Logic (Nyaya) and Atomism (Vaisesika)
are schools that specialize in questions of epistemology (nyaya
means critical inquiry) and of what sorts of objects and generalities we
experience every day. Both schools have extensive literatures, and later Logic
(after 1400) is known for its professional techniques of cognitive analysis.
Founded in the early classical period, both schools relied upon early sutra
texts, and their literatures are distinct for almost 1000 years. However, the
traditions became combined with the great 11th-century innovator Udayana, and became known simply as Logic. From the
inception of both schools, reflection about knowledge in Logic was matched,
roughly, by Atomist views about what is known (the objects of knowledge).
|
F |
|
Carvaka |
The Carvaka school, a
classical school of materialism and skepticism, is
known for its attacks on religious practices, and, from a Western perspective,
provides evidence that not all classical Indian philosophy is religiously or
mystically oriented. The Logic school also rejects the influence of religious
beliefs. But Carvaka, unlike Logic, goes beyond
advocating knowledge based on natural experience by ridiculing what it sees as
superstition, including the belief in rebirth widespread among all of the major
Indian schools of thought.
|
VI |
|
PHILOSOPHICAL PERSPECTIVES |
Most of the classical
Indian schools present veritable world views—comprehensive philosophies formed
by interlocking positions of the main branches of philosophy (metaphysics,
epistemology, and ethics). Although systematic philosophies are intended to
stand as whole bodies of thought, it is often desirable to separate and
delineate issues within them, particularly in study and debate. In the case of
Indian philosophy, examining specific classical arguments and general philosophic
views also facilitates comparison with Western philosophy. This section is
devoted to a broad contemporary perspective of classical Indian thought on some
of the great issues of philosophy.
|
A |
|
Metaphysics |
Religious, or spiritual,
metaphysics, a field that currently receives little attention among
philosophers in academia in the West, considers the question of the nature of a
Supreme Being and its relation to the world. Indian Buddhism, Advaita Vedanta, and theistic Vedanta all have contributed
to this debate. Within spiritual metaphysics, an insistence on spiritual monism
(only one spiritual being ultimately exists) is probably the most important
consideration that Indian thought upholds, though with numerous variations:
Much Buddhist philosophy promotes the idea of the interdependence of
everything; theistic Vedanta finds no gap between the world and God (the world
is God's body); and Advaita Vedanta insists that
everyone's true self is nothing other than Brahman, the Absolute.
The field of analytic
metaphysics, which examines everyday experience and language, is currently more
prominent among Western philosophers. The Indian
|
B |
|
Epistemology |
One of the more active
branches of philosophy in the West is epistemology, which attempts to answer
questions involving the nature and limits of knowledge. In epistemology, too,
the Indian Logic school has much to offer for
contemporary analysis, as does the
With a vast wealth of
mystical literature and philosophic defenses of
mysticism, Indian thought has much to offer the epistemology of religious
belief. In particular, several Indian philosophers, of different schools, have
over time advanced the argument that mystical experience has objective
epistemic value in revealing a spiritual reality. These philosophers find a
parallel between this value of mystical experience and the value of sense
experience in revealing physical reality.
|
C |
|
Ethics |
Another major branch of
Western philosophy is ethics, which examines human actions. Classical Indian
thought presents little philosophic ethics in the Western sense (for example,
concern with the fundamental criteria of ethical norms). On the other hand,
Indian interest in ethics—from the ethical teachings of enlightenment, to the
caste system of society, and to Mohandas Gandhi's (see Gandhi, Mohandas Karamchand) political philosophy of noninjury
(ahimsa)—is much more widespread than interest in metaphysics or
epistemology. Noninjury, properly qualified, is a
persuasive candidate for a universal ethical prescription, transcending
boundaries of culture as well as religion.
Indian philosophy also
considers the ethical implications of the Indian classical theories of karma
(action or habit). These theories usually presuppose rebirth—that is,
reincarnation in a human or animal form, in this or in other worlds. Since, on
the presumption of karma, the nature of one's deeds determines one's future
state, the universe includes laws of moral payback. Indian classical
philosophers weave numerous variations on such views into their overall
stances, including Buddhist, Vedantic, Logic, and Carvaka views.
|
VII |
|
CONTEMPORARY DEVELOPMENTS |
There is comparatively
little original philosophy still being written in Sanskrit. Philosophers in
Many philosophers, particularly
in
Some of the great names
of modern Indian spiritual thought are also great names of modern Indian
history. Raja Ram Mohan Roy, sometimes referred to as the father of modern
Academic philosophy in
Chinese Philosophy
|
I |
|
INTRODUCTION |
Chinese Philosophy, collective designation for the various
schools of thought originated by Chinese scholars and sages. Chinese philosophy
has passed through three distinct historical stages: the classical age, a
creative period from the 6th to the 2nd century bc; the medieval age, from the 2nd century bc to the 11th century ad, a period of synthesis and
absorption of foreign thought; and the modern age, from the 11th century to the
present, a period of maturation of earlier philosophical trends and
introduction of new philosophies from the West. Throughout all these periods,
Chinese thought has tended toward humanism rather than spiritualism,
rationalism rather than mysticism, and syncretism rather than sectarianism.
|
II |
|
CLASSICAL AGE |
The classical age of Chinese
philosophy occurred in the late years of the Zhou (Chou) dynasty, which lasted
from about 1045 bc to 256 bc. During this era of political and
social turmoil, feudal states long subordinate to the house of Zhou gained economic
and military strength and moved toward independence. When their power eclipsed
that of Zhou, feudal bonds were broken, and widespread interstate warfare broke
out in the 5th century bc,
developing into political anarchy in the 4th and 3rd centuries. Meanwhile, the
social and economic changes resulting from new currents of trade and commerce
were disrupting the simple agricultural society. In this climate of political
anarchy and social upheaval a new class of scholar-officials emerged,
consisting of men who aspired through their learning and wisdom to reunify the
empire and restore order to society.
|
A |
|
Confucius and Later Disciples |
The most important of
these scholars was Confucius, a minor aristocrat and official of the state of
Lu, in the present
Confucius did not speak
directly on such basic issues of his day as the nature of human beings, the
rights of the people against tyrannical rulers, and the influence of the
supernatural in human affairs. Two of his 4th and 3rd century bc disciples, Mencius and Xunzi (Hsün-tzu), did much
to clarify these issues. Mencius asserted that human nature was basically good
and that it could be developed not only by study, as Confucius had taught, but
also by a process of inner self-cultivation. Like Confucius, Mencius accepted
the hierarchically ordered feudal society in which he lived, but he placed far
greater stress on the responsibilities of the ruler for the welfare of the
people. The Zhou rulers held their position under a doctrine known as the
Mandate of Heaven; Heaven was thought to be the impersonal authority governing
all the operations of the universe. Mencius held that the Mandate of Heaven was
expressed by the acceptance of a ruler by the people. If the people rose up and
overthrew a tyrant, it was proof that Heaven had withdrawn its mandate. In the
name of Heaven Mencius claimed for the Chinese people the right of rebellion. Xunzi took an exactly opposite view of human nature; he asserted
that rebellion was fundamentally evil. Xunzi,
however, was sufficiently optimistic to believe in people's unlimited capacity
for improvement. He taught that through education, the study of the classics,
and the rules of propriety, virtue could be acquired and order could be reestablished in society. Xunzi
thus endowed Confucianism with a philosophy of formal education and a tendency
toward rigid rules for the regulation of human conduct.
|
B |
|
Daoism and Other
Important Schools |
The second great philosophy
of the classical age was Daoism (Taoism). The philosopher Laozi
(Lao-tzu), who probably lived during the 6th century bc, is usually regarded as the founder of this school.
Whereas Confucianism sought the full development of human beings through moral
education and the establishment of an orderly hierarchical society, Daoism
sought to preserve human life by following the Way of Nature (Dao, or Tao) and
by reverting to primitive agrarian communities and a government that did not
control or interfere with life. Daoism attempted to bring the individual into
perfect harmony with nature through a mystical union with the Dao. This
mysticism was carried still further by Zhuangzi
(Chuang-tzu), a Daoist
philosopher of the late 4th century bc,
who taught that through mystical union with the Dao the individual could
transcend nature and even life and death.
Among the other important
schools of this period were Mohism, Naturalism, and
the Dialecticians. Mohism, founded by Mozi (Mo-tzu) during the 5th
century bc, taught strict
utilitarianism and mutual love among all people regardless of family or social
relationships. During the 4th century bc,
naturalism offered an analysis of the workings of the universe based upon
certain cosmic principles. The best known of these were yin and yang, which
represented the interacting dualities of nature, such as female and male,
shadow and light, and winter and summer. Also in the 4th century bc, dialecticians moved toward a system
of logic by analyzing the true meaning of words so as to avoid the logical
pitfalls inherent in language.
|
C |
|
Legalism |
Legalism emerged as the
dominant philosophy in the state of Qin (Ch’in) during the chaotic years of the
4th and 3rd centuries bc. Two
disciples of Xunzi, Han Fei
(Han-fei-tzu) and Li Si (Li Ssu), were respectively, the leading philosopher and the
leading practitioner of Legalism. Basing their ideas on Xunzi’s
teachings that human nature was incorrigibly evil and that strict controls were
needed to regulate human conduct, the Legalists developed a political
philosophy that emphasized strict laws and harsh punishments in the control of
every aspect of human society. All personal freedom was subordinated to their
objective of creating a strong state under a ruler of unlimited authority.
Legalism proved an effective
instrument in creating a powerful and totalitarian military and economic
machine in the state of Qin. By 221 bc,
Qin had succeeded in conquering the other feudal states and establishing the
first imperial dynasty of China, a unified, centrally-administered empire
characterized by strict laws, harsh punishment, rigid thought control (for
example, the burning of all nonlegalist books in 213 bc), government control of the economy,
and enormous public works projects, such as the Great Wall, accomplished with
forced labor and at great cost in human life.
It was not long before
the oppressive rule of the Qin dynasty drove the Chinese people to rebellion.
In 206 bc a rebel leader of
plebeian origin proclaimed the Han dynasty. The Legalist-inspired centralized
administration was retained (it endured in principle until 1912), but
government controls over the economy and ideology were relaxed. Numerous
beliefs that had flourished during the late Zhou dynasty were resurrected and reexamined with a view toward establishing a system of
thought of adequate compass and sophistication to serve as a philosophical
basis for the new and vastly expansive Han empire.
|
D |
|
Han Confucianism |
Basing their ideas largely
on Xunzi’s concept of the universe as a triad of
heaven, earth, and humanity, the Confucian philosophers of the Han welded a
system of thought that incorporated the yin-yang cosmology of the naturalists;
a Daoist concern for perceiving and harmonizing with
the order of nature; Confucian teachings on benevolent government, rule by
virtuous leaders, and respect for learning; and Legalist principles of
administration and economic development. They hoped that this all-encompassing
philosophy would give the ruler and the government the knowledge to understand
the heavenly and earthly sectors of the triad and the means necessary to
regulate the human sector so as to coordinate it with heaven and earth and
establish perfect harmony in the universe. The rationalistic systematization
that prompted this formulation eventually led to farfetched notions and
superstitions to explain the mysterious workings of heaven and earth. Although
Han Confucianism was supported by the government from 136 bc and subsequently became the required
learning for government service, its excessive superstitiousness
produced a camp of opposition during the first several centuries ad, and the school divided over
questions of the authenticity of classical texts.
|
III |
|
MEDIEVAL AGE |
During the 2nd and 3rd
centuries ad, a variety of social
and economic causes brought the downfall of the Han dynasty, leading to
political disunity and foreign invasion. The philosophical void created by the
collapse of Han Confucianism was filled by Daoism and also by Buddhism, a
philosophy then new to
|
A |
|
Buddhism |
Buddhism filtered into
The development of Buddhism
in
|
B |
|
Syncretistic Period |
The reunification of
It was not until the Song
dynasty, after
|
IV |
|
MODERN AGE |
Neo-Confucianism found
expression in three schools. These schools were the
|
A |
|
School of Principle |
The metaphysical speculation
of the 11th century was synthesized in the 12th century by the great
Neo-Confucian Zhu Xi (
|
B |
|
School of Mind |
The Neo-Confucian School
of Mind originated in the 11th and 12th centuries, but it was not until the
late 15th century that it found a formidable spokesperson in the
scholar-statesman Wang Yangming. Following the early
teachings of the school, Wang held that the mind was not a combination of li and qi but pure li, or principle. Because the mind was pure
principle, unencumbered by qi, it had
the essential goodness of human nature. All people therefore possessed innate
good knowledge and need only look within their minds to find it. Wang held,
moreover, that truly good knowledge must have a practical consequence. This led
him to conclude that knowledge and action formed an inseparable unity. He
advocated a philosophy that started with discovery of principle, or knowledge
of the good, in one's mind and carried the promptings of the mind into virtuous
actions beneficial to society. After Wang's death, the
|
C |
|
School of Practical Learning |
During the early Qing,
or Manchu, dynasty, beginning in 1644, Confucian philosophers reexamined the Ming civilization in an attempt to discover
the weaknesses that had led to the downfall of that dynasty. The
|
D |
|
19th- and 20th-Century
Speculation |
The shortcomings of Neo-Confucianism
became abundantly clear in the 19th century. Metaphysical speculation provided
no explanation for the changes that the impact of the West necessitated in
By about 1897 Western
philosophy had appeared in
The Western philosophies
most influential in 20th-century
The best known of the
20th-century Confucian philosophers is Fung Yulan,
who developed and reconstructed the Neo-Confucian School of Principle. Although
his conclusions were similar to those of the Song Neo-Confucianists,
Fung supplied new and logical arguments and clarified the original system. In
the 1960s Fung moved toward historical materialism and revised his work The
History of Chinese Philosophy (1931, 1934; supplement, 1936; translated
1948) according to the ideas of Marxism-Leninism.
References
11.
http://www.answers.com/topic/philosophy#ixzz2ggPxbwQP
12.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki
13.
Copleston F. Ñ. History of Philosophy, 8 vol.
14.
Edwards,
Paul, Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 8 vol.
15.
Jones,
W. T. A History of Western Philosophy, 5 vol.
16.
Pojman L. P. Philosophical Traditions. - London: WPC, 1998.
ANTIQUE PHILOSOPHY
Plan
1.
General
characteristics of antique philosophy.
2.
Pre-Socratic philosophy.
3.
Classical
period in development of antique philosophy (Socrates, Plato, Aristotle).
4.
Philosophy
of Hellenism.
1. General
characteristics of antique philosophy
Philosophy begins
with wonder, and even now is wonder that causes philosophers to philosophize.
Gazing into the heavens, contemplating the altering patterns of the stars,
beholding the Sun and Moon and its effects on the land, the sea, on life
itself, some people wondered how the
universe had come about. They pondered stmcture of the world. How is it constructed, and why does
nature work as it does? Is there one fundamental
substance that underlies all of reality, or are there many substances? What is the really real,
and not just a matter of appearance?
The first philosophers were Greeks who lived on the Ionian coast of the
Aegean Sea, in
Ancient
Greek philosophy originated in the 7th – 6th centuries BC
and existed till the 6th century
AD. This time line is called "antique philosophy" period, which established the background not only for European
philosophy, but also for European culture in general. We distinguish three
stages of development of antique philosophy:
1. Pre-Socrates period (7th – 6th
c. BC) – the questions about the essence and beginning
of the universe, and the origin and construction of space were considered to be of primary importance in this
period.
2.
Classical
period (5th – 4th c. BC) – period of high level of
development of Greek democracy, literature, philosophy, art, etc. The problem field of
that time was
oriented at the problem of man, one's consciousness and thinking.
3.
Hellenistic
period (end of 4th BC – 6th AD) – period was
marked with the crisis phenomena in the slave-owning society, political and
economic decay of the Greek cities-states and, finally, with breakdown of
the
2. Pre-Socratic
philosophy
The first philosophers are called "Presocratics"
which designates that they came before Socrates. They
embraced materialism and naturalism. Thus, they are sometimes called Hylicists (from
the Greek hule, meaning
"matter"), for they rejected spiritual
and religious causes and sought naturalistic explanations of reality. The standard
date for the beginning of philosophy is May 23, 585 BC, when Thales of Miletus (625 – 545 BC)
predicted a solar eclipse that ended a war. Thales used mathematical and astronomic investigation to make his prediction. In
this sense, he may have been the first
scientist. An engineer by training, Thales asked "What is the nature of reality? What is the ultimate explanation of
all that is? " and speculated and experimented to come up with the answer. What was his answer? Water. Water is necessary for the production and sustenance of life. Water is
everywhere. Heat water and it becomes a gas
like air; freeze it and it becomes solid. Thales thus concluded that
the earth was just especially solid water, a hard flat cork that floated in a
sea of liquid of the same substance. After
Thales, his fellow Ionian Anaximander of Miletus (612 – 545 BC) rejected the idea that water was the root substance and
assumed as the first principle an undefined, unlimited substance (Infinite) itself
without qualities, out of which the primary opposites, hot and cold,
moist and dry, became differentiated.
Anaximander rejected Thales' notion of a flat Earth and suggested that Earth was a revolving, cylindrical
body, whose flat top was our home. He
put forth a theory of evolution based on the need of species to adapt to their environment. Anaximander's disciple Anaximenes (585 – 528 BC) took for his principle air, conceiving it as modified,
by thickening and thinning, into fire, wind, clouds, water and earth.
Philosophy was first brought in connection with practical life by Pythagoras of Samos (582 – 504 BC). He
rejected the Hylicists' materialism and opted
for a refined spiritualism, a mathematical mysticism, aiming at the
purification of the whole person, body and
soul. Knowledge and Music would purify the soul and Gymnastics and Medicine the body. All living
things (including plants life) had souls and were related to one another and involved in the transmigration of
souls. The Pythagoreans were vegetarians. At the end of each day they asked
themselves what wrongs they had
committed, what duties had neglected, what good they had done. Nevertheless,
the Pythagoreans were not egalitarians but held to a social order that resembled nature itself. Pythagoras's fundamental
doctrine was that the world is really
not material but made up of numbers. Numbers are things and constitute
the essence of reality.
That country was also home of Eleatic doctrine of the One, called after the
town of
They are simple, indestructive, internally solid, homogeneous particles that
are perpetually in motion in the void of empty space. On the one hand they
maintained the unchangeable nature of
substance; on the other, they supposed a plurality of such substances.
The materialists were hedonists who believed that the only thing that is good is pleasure and the only thing bad is pain.
They did not believe in the gods or in immorality.
Anaxagoras of Klazomenae (500 – 428 BC) also
maintained the existence of an
ordering principle as well as a material substance, and while regarding the
latter as an infinite multitude of imperishable primary elements, qualitatively
distinguished, he conceived divine reason or Mind (Nous) as
ordering them. Mind is the cause of
all motion. Nous is a material (airy) substance, but it is the purest and most rarefied of things, having power over all
else. Mind is godlike, homogeneous, omnipotent
and omniscient and orders all phenomena. This last phrase turned Socrates away from speculations about the physical
world towards the study of human
existence.
To
summarize, we can state the following. The first philosophers were Greeks,
living in the 6th century BC off the coast of
Pre-Socratic
philosophy is Greek
philosophy before Socrates (but
includes schools contemporary with Socrates which were
not influenced by him). In Classical
antiquity, the Presocratic
philosophers were called physiologoi (Greek: φυσιολόγοι;
in English, physical or natural
philosophers). Diogenes
Laërtius divides the physiologoi into two groups, Ionian and Italiote,
led by Anaximander
and Pythagoras,
respectively.
Hermann Diels
popularized the term pre-socratic in Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker
(The Fragments of the Pre-Socratics) in 1903. However, the term pre-Sokratic was in use as early as George Grote's
Plato and the Other Companions of Sokrates in
1865. Major analyses of pre-Socratic thought have been made by Gregory Vlastos, Jonathan Barnes,
and Friedrich
Nietzsche in his Philosophy in the Tragic Age of the Greeks.
It
may sometimes be difficult to determine the actual line of argument some Presocratics used in supporting their particular views.
While most of them produced significant texts, none of the texts has survived
in complete form. All that is available are quotations by later philosophers
(often biased) and historians, and the occasional textual fragment.
The
Presocratic philosophers rejected traditional
mythological explanations of the phenomena
they saw around them in favor of more rational explanations. These philosophers
asked questions about "the essence of things":
·
From where does everything come?
·
From what is everything created?
·
How do we explain the plurality of
things found in nature?
·
How might we describe nature
mathematically?
Others
concentrated on defining problems and paradoxes that became the basis for later
mathematical, scientific and philosophic study.
Later
philosophers rejected many of the answers the early Greek philosophers
provided, but continued to place importance on their questions. Furthermore,
the cosmologies proposed by
them have been updated by later developments in science.
Western
philosophy began in ancient
Milesian
school
The
first Presocratic philosophers were from Miletus on the
western coast of
Pythagoreanism
The
practical side of philosophy was introduced by Pythagoras of Samos
(582-496 BCE). Regarding the world as perfect harmony, dependent on number, he
aimed at inducing humankind likewise to lead a harmonious life. His doctrine
was adopted and extended by a large following of Pythagoreans who gathered at
his school in south Italy
in the town of
Ephesian
school
Heraclitus of Ephesus
on the western coast of Anatolia in modern
Eleatic
school
The
Pluralist
school
Empedocles of Agrigentum
(490-430 BCE) was from the ancient Greek city of
Atomist school
The
first explicitly materialistic system was formed by Leucippus (5th century
BCE) and his pupil Democritus of Abdera
(460-370 BCE) from
Others
The
last of the Presocratic natural philosophers was Diogenes
of Apollonia from
Sophism
The
Sophists held that all thought rests solely on the apprehensions of the senses
and on subjective impression, and that therefore we have no other standards of
action than convention for the individual. Specializing in rhetoric, the
Sophists were more professional educators than philosophers. They flourished as
a result of a special need at that time for Greek education. Prominent Sophists
include Protagoras
(490-420 BCE) from Abdera in
3.
Classical period in development of antique philosophy (Socrates, Plato,
Aristotle)
A new profession arose in the 5th century in
1. The Sophists were secularists-agnostic or atheist on religion, cynical
of religion as a mechanism for social control. The
gods are invented to function as invisible,
all-seeing police force;
2.
The Sophists developed the art of rhetoric, the
process of using language to persuade. Their chief tool was eristics, argument used in
order to win debates, not pursue truth;
aiming at defeat rather than at enlightenment. Aristotle called eristics "dirty
fighting in argument";
3.
The Sophists made education into business. They
were the first teachers to receive pay for
their services, charging fees for teaching "wisdom" and
"virtue";
4.
The Sophists were pragmatists. Truth is what
works for you. They were not speculative,
systematic or concerned with cosmology as the pre Socratic philosophers were. However, they took the joint, mutually exclusive
conclusions of the pre-Socratics to show that
not even the best minds could know the nature of ultimate reality;
5.
The Sophists believed that egoism was both
natural and right – "Might makes right";
6.
The Sophists were relativists, often of a
subjectivist cast, contending that each person
is his own measure of truth, thus abandoning the idea of an independent reality apart from our consciousness. Truth is whatever you take it to
be, and, similarly, morality is whatever
you believe to be good;
The Sophists challenged the traditional values and opinions of Greek
society. They undermined its religion and myths. They asserted
that the state is founded on power, custom
and conventions, not eternal truth. They argued that there was no objective truth or right or wrong, unless it is
the realistic adage that might makes right.
A dramatic turn occurs in philosophical inquiry under the influence of Socrates
(470 – 399 BC). He rejected both the cynicism
and pragmatism of the Sophists and speculations of the Cosmologists. As
1. Care for the soul is all that matters – What good would it do to me to
gain the whole world and lose my own soul? What good is it to
live in a perfect society if I see no value
in life itself or in my life?
2.
Self-knowledge is a prerequisite for the good
life – The unexamined life is not worth living.
3.
Virtue is knowledge – No such thing as weakness of will. Evil is
ignorance. To know the Good is to do the
good.
4.
You cannot harm the good person, but in trying
to harm the other you harm yourself. The Good is
good for you, and the Bad is bad for you.
5. The autonomy of ethics: Is the God good because God chooses it, or
does God choose the Good because it is
good? Socrates answers that God chooses it because it is good.
Socratic ethics lack a transcendental dimension. If there is an
afterlife, well and good, it's icing on the cake,
but it is not necessary for the justification of morality. Goodness has to do with the proper functioning of the soul and can be
discovered through reason alone. There is
no need for revelation, and if there are gods, they too must obey the moral law and keep their souls pure through following
virtuous living. There is not even a hint that
religion helps motivate people to virtuous living. Goodness is the only reward, and it is obvious so to anyone who knows
what virtue is and hoe the soul functions.
Socrates was an enormously
magnetic figure who attracted many followers, but he also made many
enemies. Socrates was executed for corrupting the young of
Plato's study of man is established on the idea about unity of man
(microcosm) and the universe (macrocosm). For
him man consists of physical body and soul, which
in its turn has the following parts: intellect, will and sense. To conclude, we
can say that Plato sought to find the One in
the Many, a unifying idea (the Form) that existed independently of objects in the world of appearances (the world
of space and time) and in which those objects
participated. All beautiful things are beautiful through the Form
of the Beautiful. The Forms are divine, eternal, simple, immutable and self-subsisting. The highest form is the Good.
Plato held that we had innate ideas
of the Forms, and through suitable education (recollections). The way of the philosopher was to make his or her way out of the
world of appearance (the caves) to the
world of reality (the world of sunlight), wherein one participates in the Good.
The most important among Plato's disciples is Aristotle of Stagira (384
– 322 BC), who shares with his master the title of
the greater philosopher of antiquity. But whereas Plato had sought to elucidate
and explain things from the supra-sensual standpoint of the forms, his pupil preferred to start from the facts
given us by experience. Philosophy to him
meant science and its aim was the recognition of the purpose in all things. Hence he established the ultimate grounds of
things inductively – this is to say, by a
posteriori conclusions from a number of facts to a universal. In the series of works collected under the name Organon,
Aristotle sets forth the laws by which the human understanding
effects conclusions from the particular to the knowledge of the universal. Like Plato, he recognized the true being of
things in their concept, but denied
any separate existence of the concepts apart from the particular objects of sense. They are inseparable as matter
and form. In matter and form Aristotle
sees the fundamental principles of being. Matter is the basis of all that exists; it comprises the potentiality of
everything, but of itself is not actually anything. A determinate thing only comes into being when the
potentiality in matter is converted
into actuality. Form and matter are relative terms, and the lower form constitutes
the matter of a higher (e.g. body, soul, reason). This series culminates in pure, immaterial form, the Deity, the origin of all
motion, and therefore of the generation
of actual form out of potential matter.
All motion takes place in space and time; for space is the potentiality;
time is the measure of the motion. Living
beings are those, which have in them a moving principle, or soul. In plants the function of soul is nutrition; in
animals, nutrition and sensation; in humans,
nutrition, sensation and intellectual activity. The perfect form of a human soul is reason separated from all connections with the body,
hence fulfilling its activity without the help of any
corporeal organ and, so imperishable. By reason the apprehensions, which are formed in the soul by external
sense-impression, and may be true or false, are
converted into knowledge. For reason alone can attain to truth either in cognition or action. Impulse towards the
good is a part of human nature, and on this is
founded virtue; for Aristotle does not, with Plato, regard virtue as knowledge pure and simple, but as founded on nature, habit and
reason. The end of human activity, or the highest good, is
happiness, or perfect and reasonable activity
in a perfect life. To this, however, external goods are more or less necessary conditions.
Aristotle was the first to make attempts to systemize all the scientific
achievements of his time. He divided all
sciences into three groups: theoretical – Metaphysics, Physics and Mathematics;
practical – Ethics, Politics, Economics; artistic
– Poetics, Rhetoric, Craft art.
In his study about state Aristotle faced the dilemma "Either the
power of law or the power of people". He
underlined that the power of law is much better that the power of a separate personality. The followers of Aristotle, known as Peripatetics (Theophrastus
of Lesbos, Eudemus of Rhodes, Strato
of Lampsacus, etc),
to a great extent abandoned metaphysical speculation, some in favor of
natural science, others of a more popular
treatment of ethics, introducing many changes into the Aristotelian doctrine in
a naturalistic direction. A return to the views of the founder first
appeared among the later Peripatetics, who did good
service as expositors of Aristotle's works. Both Plato and Aristotle did not
think that
4. Philosophy of
Hellenism
Epoch oh Hellenism is a period of despair out of the surrounding world. Pessimism turns to be a constituent of people's outlook and world
perception, so that it gradually becomes more subjective and
individualistic. The problem of personality or individual
turns to be a dominant one. The main questions of that time are: What is
the essence of happiness? and
How is it possible to be happy? Two philosophical schools – stoicism and Epicureanism tried t find
answers for these questions.
Stoicism was founded by Zeno of Citium (in
Important
stoic writers of the Roman period include Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius. Their doctrine
contained little that was new, seeking rather to give a practical application to the dogmas, which they took ready – made from
previous systems. With them philosophy is
the science of the principles on which the moral life
ought to be founded. The only allowable effort is towards the attainment of knowledge of human and divine things, in order to thereby regulate life.
The method to lead man to true knowledge is
provided by logic; physics embraces the doctrines as to the nature and
organization of the universe; ethics draws from them its conclusions for practical life.
Regarding
Stoic logic, all knowledge according to them originates in the real impressions of things on the senses, which the
soul, being at birth a blank slate, receives
in the form of presentations. These presentations, when confirmed by repeated experience, are syllogistically developed
by the understanding into concepts. The test of their truth is the convincing
or persuasive force with which they impress themselves upon the soul.
In physics the foundation of the
Stoic doctrine was the dogma that all true being is corporeal. Within the corporeal
they recognized two principles, matter and force – that is the material and the Deity (logos, order, fate) permeating and
informing it. Ultimately, however, the two are identical. There is nothing in
the world with any independent existence: all is
bound together by an unalterable chain of causation. The agreement
of human action with the law of nature, of the will with the divine will, or life according to nature, is virtue, the chief
good and highest end of life. All that lies between virtue and vice is neither good nor bad;
at most, it is distinguished as preferable,
undesirable or absolutely indifferent. Virtue is fully possessed only by the wise person, who is no way inferior to Zeus; he is
lord over his own life, and may end it by his own free choice. In general, the
prominent characteristic of Stoic philosophy
is moral heroism, often verging on asceticism.
The
same goal, which was aimed at in Stoicism was also approached from a diametrically opposite position, in the system
founded about the same time by Epicurus
and Gargettus
in
The standards of
knowledge and canons of truth in theoretical matters are the impressions of the senses, which are true and
indisputable, together with the presentation
formed from such impressions, and opinions extending beyond those impressions, in so far as they are supported or
nit contradicted by the evidence of the senses. In practical questions the feelings of pleasure and pain are
the tests. Epicurus' physics, in which
he follows in essentials the materialistic system of Democritus, are intended to refer all phenomena to a natural
cause, in order that a knowledge of nature may set men free from the bondage of
disquieting superstitions.
In ethics he followed within certain limits the Cyrenaic
doctrine, conceiving the highest good to be
happiness, and happiness to be found in pleasure, to which the natural impulses of every being are directed. But the
aim is not with him, as it is with the Cyrenaics, the pleasure of the moment, but the enduring
condition of pleasure, which, in its essence, is freedom from the
greatest of evils, pain. Pleasures and pains are,
however, distinguished not merely in degree, but in kind. The renunciation of a
pleasure or endurance of a pain is
often a means t a greater pleasure; and since pleasures of sense are
subordinated to the pleasures of the mind, the undisturbed peace of the mind is a higher good than the freedom of
the body from pain. Virtue is desirable not for
itself, but for the sake of pleasure of mind, which it secures by freeing people from trouble and fear and moderating their passion and
appetites. The cardinal virtue is prudence, which
is shown by true insight in calculation the consequences of our actions as regards pleasure or pain.
The practical tendency of Stoicism
and Epicureanism, seen in the search for happiness, is also apparent in the
The latest Academics, such as Antiochus of Ascalon (about 80 BC), fused with Platonism certain Peripatetic and many Stoic dogmas, thus making way for
Eclecticism, to
which all later antiquity tended after Greek philosophy had spread itself over the Roman world. Roman philosophy, thus, becomes an
extension of the Greek tradition.
After the Christian era Pythagoreanism, in a resuscitated form, again takes its place among the more important systems.
Pyrrhonian skepticism was also re -introduced by Aenesidemus, and
developed further by Sextus Empiricus. But the preeminence of this period belongs
to Platonism, which is notably represented in the works of Plutarch of
Chaeronea and the physician Galen.
The closing period of Greek philosophy is marked in the third century AD
by the establishment of Neoplatonism
in
At the summit of existence stands the One or the God, as the source of
all things. It emanates from itself, as if
from the reflection of its own being, reason, wherein is contained the infinite
store of ideas. Soul, the copy of the reason, is emanated by and contained in it, as reason is in the One, and, by informing matter in
itself non -existence, constitutes bodies
whose existence is contained in soul. Nature, therefore, is a whole, endowed with life and soul. Soul, being
chained to matter, longs to escape from the
bondage of the body and return to its original source. In virtue and philosophic thought soul had the power to elevate itself above the
reason into a state of ecstasy, where it can behold,
or ascend up to, that one good primary Being whom reason cannot know. To attain this union with the God,
or God, is the true function of humans, to whom the external world should be
absolutely indifferent.
Plotinus' most important disciple, the Syrian Porphyry, contented
himself with popularizing his master's
doctrine. But the
The last home of philosophy was at
The era of Hellenism was the period of exhaustion, decay and breakdown. Aristotle was the last philosopher whose outlook position preserved its optimistic character. After him all the philosophers to this or that extent spread the idea of escape from life. Gradually, alongside with the philosophical ideas of antiquity new philosophy was growing. A new era – era of Christianity originated.
Greek Philosophy
|
I |
|
INTRODUCTION |
Greek
Philosophy, body of philosophical concepts developed by the
Greeks, particularly during the flowering of Greek civilization between 600 and
200 bc. Greek philosophy formed
the basis of all later philosophical speculation in the Western world. The
intuitive hypotheses of the ancient Greeks foreshadowed many theories of modern
science, and many of the moral ideas of pagan Greek philosophers have been
incorporated into Christian moral doctrine. The political ideas set forth by
Greek thinkers influenced political leaders as different as the framers of the
U.S. Constitution and the founders of various 20th-century totalitarian states.
|
II |
|
THE IONIAN SCHOOL |
Greek philosophy may be
divided between those philosophers who sought an explanation of the world in
physical terms and those who stressed the importance of nonmaterial forms or
ideas. The first important
|
III |
|
PYTHAGORAS, THE |
The division between idealism
and materialism became more distinct. Pythagoras stressed the importance of
form rather than matter in explaining material structure. The Pythagorean school also laid great stress on the importance of the soul,
regarding the body only as the soul's “tomb.” According to Parmenides, the
leader of the Eleatic school, the appearance of
movement and the existence of separate objects in the world are mere illusions;
they only seem to exist. The beliefs of Pythagoras and Parmenides formed the
basis of the idealism that was to characterize later Greek philosophy.
A more materialistic interpretation
was made by Empedocles, who accepted the belief that reality is eternal but
declared that it is composed of chance combinations of the four primal
substances: fire, air, earth, and water. Such materialistic explanations
reached their climax in the doctrines of Democritus, who believed that the
various forms of matter are caused by differences in the shape, size, position,
and arrangement of component atoms. Materialism applied to daily life inspired
the philosophy of a group known as the Sophists, who were active in the 5th
century bc. With their stress on
the importance of human perception, such Sophists as Protagoras doubted that
humanity would ever be able to reach objective truth through reason and taught
that material success rather than truth should be the purpose of life.
|
IV |
|
SOCRATES |
In contrast were the ideas
of Socrates, with whom Greek philosophy attained its highest level. His avowed
purpose was “to fulfil the philosopher's mission of searching into myself and
other men.” After a proposition had been stated, the philosopher asked a series
of questions designed to test and refine the proposition by examining its
consequences and discovering whether it was consistent with the known facts.
Socrates described the soul not in terms of mysticism but as “that in virtue of
which we are called wise or foolish, good or bad.” In other words, Socrates
considered the soul a combination of an individual's intelligence and
character.
|
V |
|
PLATO AND ARISTOTLE |
The idealism of Socrates
was organized by Plato into a systematic philosophy. In his theory of Ideas,
Plato regarded the objects of the real world as being merely shadows of eternal
Forms or Ideas. Only these changeless, eternal Forms can be the object of true
knowledge; the perception of their shadows, that is, the real world as heard,
seen, and felt, is merely opinion. The goal of the philosopher, he said, is to
know the eternal Forms and to instruct others in that knowledge.
Plato's theory of knowledge
is implicit in his theory of Ideas. He argued that both the material objects
perceived and the individual perceiving them are constantly changing; but,
since knowledge must be concerned only with unchangeable and universal objects,
knowledge and perception are fundamentally different.
In place of Plato's doctrine
of Ideas with a separate and eternal existence of their own, Aristotle proposed
a group of universals that represent the common properties of any group of real
objects. The universals, unlike Plato's Ideas, have no existence outside of the
objects they represent. Closer to Plato's thought was Aristotle's definition of
form as a distinguishing property of objects, but with an independent
existence apart from the objects in which it is found. Describing the material
universe, Aristotle stated it consists of the four elements, fire, air, earth,
and water, plus a fifth element that exists everywhere and is the sole
constituent of the heavenly bodies “above” the moon.
In the writings of Plato
and Aristotle the dominant strains of idealism and materialism in Greek
philosophy reached, respectively, their highest expression, producing a body of
thought that continues to influence philosophical inquiry. Subsequent Greek
philosophy, reflecting a historical period of civil unrest and individual
insecurity, was less concerned with the nature of the world than with the
problems in the individual. During this period four major schools of largely
materialistic, individualistic philosophy arose: that of the Cynics, and those
espousing Epicureanism, Skepticism, and Stoicism. For
a detailed history of these and earlier schools, see Philosophy.
References
17.
http://www.answers.com/topic/philosophy#ixzz2ggPxbwQP
18.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki
19.
Hartman, Robert S. (1967). The Structure of Value. USI Press. 384 pages.
20.
Findlay, J. N. (1970). Axiological Ethics. New York:
Macmillan. ISBN 0-333-00269-5. 100 pages.
21.
Rescher, Nicholas (2005). Value Matters: Studies in Axiology. Frankfurt: Ontos
Verlag. ISBN 3-937202-67-6. 140 pages.
22.
Anicius
Manlius Severinus Boethius, The
Consolation of Philosophy, Chicago: The Great Books foundation 1959.
23.
Copleston F. Ñ. History of Philosophy, 8 vol.
24.
Edwards,
Paul, Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 8 vol.
25.
Brisson, L. et al. Lire les
Présocratiques. Presses universitaires de France, Paris, 2012.
26.
Burnet, John, Early Greek Philosophy,
Meridian Books,
27.
Colli,
Giorgio, The Greek Wisdom (
28.
De Vogel, Cornelia J., Greek
Philosophy, Volume I, Thales to Plato, E.J.
Brill,
29.
Lloyd,
G. E. R., Early Greek Science: Thales to Aristotle.
30.
Kirk, G.S., Raven, J.E.
& Schofield, M., The Presocratic Philosophers
(Second Edition), Cambridge University Press, 1983
31.
Nahm,
Milton C., Selections from Early Greek Philosophy,
Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1962
32.
Giannis Stamatellos, Introduction to Presocratics:
A Thematic Approach to Early Greek Philosophy with Key