Lit reading grade 3 part 2. Topic: Life is given for good deeds

This book- the result of more than thirty years of work by the author. It is based on a number of previously published works; Some provisions have been clarified, some have been corrected, and much has been written anew. It should be noted that the first edition (1986) was subjected to the usual biased editorial violence of that time, as a result of which a number of essential points of the book were lost, and in some cases the text was written in the spirit of the ideological dogmas of that time. Nevertheless, the appearance of the book caused discontent among some of the bosses of the then philosophy, as evidenced by a negative review that appeared in the press, where the author’s views were contrasted with “the attitudes of the classics of Marxism-Leninism.” Today this can only cause a smile, but in those days the accusation of anti-Marxism smelt of “organizational conclusions.” At the same time, however, a number of positive responses to the book appeared, one of which - by A.F. Losev - is published in the form of an afterword. A special feature of the book is an attempt to consider German classical philosophy as a history of interrelated problems, as a developing whole. Usually the work of each thinker is presented separately from others. This approach has its strengths and weaknesses. It is advantageous to be able to see all the characteristics of an outstanding individual at once. At the same time, however, it becomes difficult to understand the history of thought as a “drama of ideas,” as an integral process that includes the interaction and confrontation of various concepts, mutual influences and disputes. Moreover, for example, it is difficult to understand the late Fichte without knowing the early Schelling, and the late Schelling without familiarizing himself with Hegel. As for Kant, between the “critical” and “pre-critical” periods of his activity there lay a whole era of “Sturm and Drang”, which influenced the philosopher. Therefore, the author tried to choose in each case the method of presentation that is dictated by the material. And the material is surprisingly rich and modern. German classical philosophy is not only the foundation, it is itself majestic building, each of its representatives has self-sufficient value. She is unique, as unique antique plastic, Renaissance painting, Russian literature XIX century. This is world-historical cultural phenomenon. Before our eyes is a kind of “ladder” of thoughts and a “fan” of concepts. General movement forward is often achieved at the cost of losing previously achieved results. Fichte is not an absolute step forward compared to Kant. And Schelling, and Hegel, and Feuerbach, and Schopenhauer, pronouncing a new word, sometimes missed something that had been said before them. We should not forget about the smaller ones philosophical names. Without Lessing and Herder, Goethe and Schiller, without the Humboldt brothers, without the romantics, it is impossible to comprehend the searches and achievements of the luminaries, to trace the transition from one to another. Considered in themselves, the works of the great classics are like the supports of a bridge with unfilled spans; It is impossible to move across such a bridge. Historian German classics has no right to forget about this. Its task is to cover a wide range of problems - not only ontological and epistemological, but also problems of ethics, aesthetics, philosophy of history and history of philosophy, philosophy of religion. Aesthetics, directly related to artistic creativity, are especially important: literature and theater played a significant role in the philosophical biography of the era in question.

In the book of the famous Russian philosopher A.V. Gulyga, German classical philosophy is analyzed as an integral ideological movement, its origins and connections with modernity are traced. The main stages in the development of German classical philosophy are examined through the prism of the creative quests of its outstanding representatives - from I. Herder and I. Kant to A. Schopenhauer and F. Nietzsche.

Gulyga Arseniy
* * * *
German classical philosophy

In memory of Soviet philosophers who gave their lives in the fight against German fascism

Preface

This book is the result of more than thirty years of work by the author. It is based on a number of previously published works; Some provisions have been clarified, some have been corrected, and much has been written anew. It should be noted that the first edition (1986) was subjected to the usual biased editorial violence of that time, as a result of which a number of essential points of the book were lost, and in some cases the text was written in the spirit of the ideological dogmas of that time. Nevertheless, the appearance of the book caused discontent among some bosses of the philosophy of that time, as evidenced by a negative review that appeared in the press, where the author’s views were contrasted with “the attitudes of the classics of Marxism-Leninism.” Today this can only cause a smile, but in those days the accusation of anti-Marxism smelt of “organizational conclusions.” At the same time, however, a number of positive responses to the book appeared, one of which - by A.F. Losev - is published in the form of an afterword. A special feature of the book is an attempt to consider German classical philosophy as a history of interrelated problems, as a developing whole. Usually the work of each thinker is presented separately from others. This approach has its strengths and weaknesses. It is advantageous to be able to see all the characteristics of an outstanding individual at once. At the same time, however, it becomes difficult to understand the history of thought as a “drama of ideas,” as an integral process that includes the interaction and confrontation of various concepts, mutual influences and disputes. Moreover, for example, it is difficult to understand the late Fichte without knowing the early Schelling, and the late Schelling without familiarizing himself with Hegel. As for Kant, between the “critical” and “pre-critical” periods of his activity there was a whole era of “Sturm and Drang”, which influenced the philosopher. Therefore, the author tried to choose in each case the method of presentation that is dictated by the material. And the material is surprisingly rich and modern. German classical philosophy is not only a foundation, it is a majestic building in itself, each of its representatives has self-sufficient value. It is unique, just as ancient plastic arts, Renaissance painting, and Russian literature of the 19th century are unique. This is a world-historical cultural phenomenon. Before our eyes is a kind of “ladder” of thoughts and a “fan” of concepts. General movement forward is often achieved at the cost of losing previously achieved results. Fichte is not an absolute step forward compared to Kant. And Schelling, and Hegel, and Feuerbach, and Schopenhauer, pronouncing a new word, sometimes missed something that had been said before them. We should not forget about smaller philosophical names. Without Lessing and Herder, Goethe and Schiller, without the Humboldt brothers, without the romantics, it is impossible to comprehend the searches and achievements of the luminaries, to trace the transition from one to another. Considered in themselves, the works of the great classics are like the supports of a bridge with unfilled spans; It is impossible to move across such a bridge. A historian of German classics has no right to forget this. Its task is to cover a wide range of problems - not only ontological and epistemological, but also problems of ethics, aesthetics, philosophy of history and history of philosophy, philosophy of religion. Aesthetics, directly related to artistic creativity, are especially important: literature and theater played a significant role in the philosophical biography of the era in question.

Chapter first
The day before

1. First gap

In 1755, two events occurred in Germany significant events, who were destined to open a new era in the spiritual life of the country. The book of the philosophical treatise “General Natural History and Theory of Heaven” appeared, and the premiere of the play “Miss Sarah Sampson” took place.

The book was published anonymously in Königsberg, although Kant, candidate of philosophy, did not make much of a secret of his authorship. He substantiated the hypothesis about the natural origin of the solar system and expressed bold guesses about the development and death of stellar worlds. Before Kant, the dominant view was that nature has no history in time. In this idea, which was fully consistent with the metaphysical way of thinking, Kant made the first hole...

Lessing's play "Miss Sarah Sampson" was performed in the summer of the same year in Frankfurt an der Oder. For the first time, new heroes appeared on the stage of the German theater - simple people. Before this, picture characters borrowed from ancient mythology or world history - the greats of this world. Lessing shocked viewers with the death of a simple girl, the daughter of a burgher, seduced by an aristocrat.

It is noteworthy that both events took place in Prussia. The young kingdom established itself as a military bastion, pushing its borders by force of arms. The Prussian army was the fourth largest in Europe (despite the fact that the country ranked thirteenth in population). However, it would be unfair to see Prussia as only a barracks. This is how the creator of the kingdom, Frederick I, looked at his country, but his grandson Frederick II turned things around differently. The barracks remained, but the Academy of Sciences also flourished.

Lessing and Kant are the most prominent representatives era of Enlightenment. This term denotes a necessary stage in the cultural development of any country breaking away from the feudal way of life. For Germany, the Age of Enlightenment is the 18th century. The slogan of the Enlightenment is culture for the people. Enlighteners waged an irreconcilable struggle against superstition, fanaticism, intolerance, deception and stupidity of the people. They viewed themselves as unique missionaries of the mind, called upon to open people's eyes to their nature and purpose, to direct them to the path of truth. In the Age of Enlightenment, the Renaissance ideal of a free individual acquired the attribute of universality: one must think not only about oneself, but also about others, about one’s place in society. The idea of sociality gains ground under our feet; the focus is on the problem of the best social order.

It can be achieved by spreading knowledge. Knowledge is power, to gain it, to make it public property means to get your hands on the key to the secrets of human existence. Turn the key - and Sesame opened, prosperity was found. The possibility of misuse of knowledge is excluded. The early Enlightenment is rationalistic, an age of rational thinking. Disappointment sets in quite quickly, then they seek salvation in “direct knowledge,” in feelings, in intuition, and somewhere ahead one can see dialectical reason. But as long as any increase in knowledge is accepted as good, the ideals of the Enlightenment remain unshakable.

And finally, the third characteristic feature of the Enlightenment is historical optimism. The idea of progress is the conquest of this era. Previous times did not think about self-justification. Antiquity did not want to know anything about its predecessors; Christianity attributed its appearance to higher destiny; even the Renaissance, which acted as a mediator in the dialogue between two previous cultures, considered its task not to move forward, but to return to the origins. The Enlightenment for the first time recognized itself as a new era. From here it was already a stone's throw to historicism as a type of thinking. And although not all educators rose to historical view on things, its roots lie in this era.

German classical philosophy.
Gulyga A.V.

Gulyga A.V. German classical philosophy. - 2nd ed., rev. and additional - M.: Rolf, 2001. - 416 pp., with illustrations. - (Library of History and Culture).
ISBN 5-7836-0447-X
BBK 87.3

G94
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, any storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the copyright holder.

1. The first gap................................................... ...............................5

2. Lessing and the literary revolution....................................................22

3. "The debate about pantheism." Herder........................................................ ...35
Chapter two. THE COPERNICAN TURN OF IMMANUEL KANT

1. Activity of cognition.................................................... .................41

2. The primacy of practical reason.................................................... ...70

3. Kant's system of philosophy. The meaning of aesthetics...................82

4. “What is a person?”................................................. .....................100
Chapter three. PHILOSOPHY OF ACTIVITY

1. Disputes around Kant. Schiller........................................118

2. German Jacobinism.................................................... ...............129

3. Fichte. Jena period................................................... .........135
Chapter Four. RETURN TO NATURE

1. Goethe. Dispute about artistic method...................................................163

2. The Humboldt Brothers.................................................... ....................173

3. The birth of romanticism.................................................... ...............179

4. Early Schelling.................................................... .......................185
Chapter five. IDEA OF UNITY

1. Schelling. Philosophy of identity...................................................198

2. Fichte. Berlin period................................................... ....220
Chapter six. "CLIFE OF MIND" (HEGEL)

1. At the origins of the concept................................................... ................233

2. System and method................................................... ........................254

3. Forms of the absolute spirit.................................................... ..........278
Chapter seven. IN THE NAME OF HUMAN

1. Criticism of idealism.................................................... ...................301

2. Anthropological principle (Feuerbach)................................313
Chapter eight. EXODUS TO THE EAST (SCHOPENHAUER)

1. Another way................................................... ...................................333

2. Man in the world of will and idea.................................................337

3. The fate of the teaching................................................... ............................354
Conclusion................................................. ...................................364
NOTES

Chapter first................................................ ................................367

Chapter two................................................... ...................................370

Chapter Three................................................... ...................................377

Chapter Four................................................... ............................382

Chapter Five................................................... ...................................388

Chapter six................................................... ................................391

Chapter Seven................................................... ...............................397

Chapter Eight................................................... ........................400
V.F. Losev. INSTEAD OF AN AFTERWORD...................................404

Index of names................................................... ........................409

In memory of Soviet philosophers who gave their lives in the fight against German fascism
PREFACE
This book is the result of more than thirty years of work by the author. It is based on a number of previously published works; Some provisions have been clarified, some have been corrected, and much has been written anew. It should be noted that the first edition (1986) was subjected to the usual biased editorial violence of that time, as a result of which a number of essential points of the book were lost, and in some cases the text was written in the spirit of the ideological dogmas of that time. Nevertheless, the appearance of the book caused discontent among some bosses of the philosophy of that time, as evidenced by a negative review that appeared in the press, where the author’s views were contrasted with “the attitudes of the classics of Marxism-Leninism.” Today this can only cause a smile, but in those days the accusation of anti-Marxism smelt of “organizational conclusions.” At the same time, however, a number of positive responses to the book appeared, one of which - by A.F. Losev - is published in the form of an afterword. A special feature of the book is an attempt to consider German classical philosophy as a history of interrelated problems, as a developing whole. Usually the work of each thinker is presented separately from others. This approach has its strengths and weaknesses. It is advantageous to be able to see all the characteristics of an outstanding individual at once. At the same time, however, it becomes difficult to understand the history of thought as a “drama of ideas,” as an integral process that includes the interaction and confrontation of various concepts, mutual influences and disputes. Moreover, for example, it is difficult to understand the late Fichte without knowing the early Schelling, and the late Schelling without familiarizing himself with Hegel. As for Kant, between “critical” and “subcritical”
3

The periods of his activity spanned the whole era of “Sturm and Drang”, which influenced the philosopher. Therefore, the author tried to choose in each case the method of presentation that is dictated by the material. And the material is surprisingly rich and modern. German classical philosophy is not only a foundation, it is a majestic building in itself, each of its representatives has self-sufficient value. It is unique, just as ancient plastic arts, Renaissance painting, and Russian literature of the 19th century are unique. This is a world-historical cultural phenomenon. Before our eyes is a kind of “ladder” of thoughts and a “fan” of concepts. General movement forward is often achieved at the cost of losing previously achieved results. Fichte is not an absolute step forward compared to Kant. And Schelling, and Hegel, and Feuerbach, and Schopenhauer, pronouncing a new word, sometimes missed something that had been said before them. We should not forget about smaller philosophical names. Without Lessing and Herder, Goethe and Schiller, without the Humboldt brothers, without the romantics, it is impossible to comprehend the searches and achievements of the luminaries, to trace the transition from one to another. Considered in themselves, the works of the great classics are like the supports of a bridge with unfilled spans; It is impossible to move across such a bridge. A historian of German classics has no right to forget this. Its task is to cover a wide range of problems - not only ontological and epistemological, but also problems of ethics, aesthetics, philosophy of history and history of philosophy, philosophy of religion. Aesthetics, directly related to artistic creativity, are especially important: literature and theater played a significant role in the philosophical biography of the era in question.

CHAPTER FIRST

THE EVE

1. FIRST BREACH
In 1755, two significant events took place in Germany, which were destined to open a new era in the spiritual life of the country. A book appeared - a philosophical treatise "General Natural History and Theory of Heaven", and the premiere of the play "Miss Sarah Sampson" took place.
The book was published anonymously in Königsberg, although Kant, candidate of philosophy, did not make much of a secret of his authorship. He substantiated the hypothesis about the natural origin of the solar system and expressed bold guesses about the development and death of stellar worlds. Before Kant, the dominant view was that nature has no history in time. In this idea, which was fully consistent with the metaphysical way of thinking, Kant made the first hole...
Lessing's play "Miss Sarah Sampson" was performed in the summer of the same year in Frankfurt an der Oder. For the first time, new heroes appeared on the stage of the German theater - ordinary people. Before this, picture characters borrowed from ancient mythology or world history—the greats of this world—perished in tragedies. Lessing shocked viewers with the death of a simple girl, the daughter of a burgher, seduced by an aristocrat.
5
It is noteworthy that both events took place in Prussia. The young kingdom established itself as a military bastion, pushing its borders by force of arms. The Prussian army was the fourth largest in Europe (despite the fact that the country ranked thirteenth in population). However, it would be unfair to see Prussia as only a barracks. This is how the creator of the kingdom, Frederick I, looked at his country, but his grandson Frederick II turned things around differently. The barracks remained, but the Academy of Sciences also flourished.
Lessing and Kant are the most prominent representatives of the Enlightenment. This term denotes a necessary stage in the cultural development of any country breaking away from the feudal way of life. For Germany, the Age of Enlightenment is the 18th century. The slogan of the Enlightenment is culture for the people. Enlighteners waged an irreconcilable struggle against superstition, fanaticism, intolerance, deception and stupidity of the people. They viewed themselves as unique missionaries of the mind, called upon to open people's eyes to their nature and purpose, to direct them to the path of truth. In the Age of Enlightenment, the Renaissance ideal of a free individual acquired the attribute of universality: one must think not only about oneself, but also about others, about one’s place in society. The idea of sociality gains ground under our feet; the focus is on the problem of the best social order.
It can be achieved by spreading knowledge. Knowledge is power, to gain it, to make it public property means to get your hands on the key to the secrets of human existence. Turn the key - and Sesame opened, prosperity was found. The possibility of misuse of knowledge is excluded. The early Enlightenment is rationalistic, an age of rational thinking. Disappointment sets in quite quickly, then they seek salvation in “direct knowledge,” in feelings, in intuition, and somewhere ahead one can see dialectical reason. But as long as any increase in knowledge is accepted as good, the ideals of the Enlightenment remain unshakable.
And finally, the third characteristic feature of the Enlightenment is historical optimism. The idea of progress is the conquest of this era. Previous times did not think about self-justification. Antiquity knows nothing
6
wanted about her predecessors; Christianity attributed its appearance to higher destiny; even the Renaissance, which acted as a mediator in the dialogue between two previous cultures, considered its task not to move forward, but to return to the origins. The Enlightenment for the first time recognized itself as a new era. From here it was already a stone's throw to historicism as a type of thinking. And although not all enlighteners rose to a historical view of things, its roots lie in this era.
A characteristic feature of the German Enlightenment is the struggle for national unity. The "Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation" existed only on paper. The rights of the emperor were limited to the granting of titles and honorary privileges. The number of sovereign monarchs in Germany reached 360. To these should be added one and a half thousand imperial knights, who were almost complete masters of their possessions. Some cities also retained their liberties. The largest principalities - Saxony and Mecklenburg in the center of the country, Hesse, Hanover, Brunswick in the west, Württemberg, Bavaria in the south, the kingdom of Prussia and the Habsburg monarchy were strongholds of unlimited absolutism. But even among the small princes, according to Frederick II, there was no one who did not imagine himself like Louis XIV; each built his own Versailles and kept his own army. The population suffered from the tyranny of petty tyrants. One spoiled the coin, another monopolized the trade in salt, beer, firewood, the third prohibited the consumption of coffee, the fourth sold soldiers abroad. Abuse of power, drunken revelry and debauchery became common at the court of the dwarf monarchs. They were imitated by the nobility, who bullied the burghers and mercilessly exploited the peasants. It is not surprising that the voice of the enlighteners sounded ever louder, demanding the creation of a common German state with a unified legal order.
In German philosophy, the beginning of the Enlightenment is associated with the name of Christian Wolf (1679-1754), a systematizer and popularizer of Leibniz's teachings. Wolf was the first in Germany to create a system that covered the main areas of philosophical knowledge. He was the first to create a philosophical
7
school. The Wolfians have done a lot to spread scientific knowledge. Their teaching was called "popular philosophy" because it was intended for the general reading public. The Wolffians were convinced that the spread of education would immediately lead to the solution of all the pressing issues of our time. Their cult of reason was combined with reverence for the Christian faith, which they tried to give a “rational” interpretation. The center of “popular philosophy” was Berlin, the capital of Prussia, whose king, Frederick II, loved to take the pose of a freethinker and educator, “a philosopher on the throne.”
And one more feature of the spiritual life of Germany at that time must be mentioned - pietism. This movement arose at the end XVII century as a protest against the spiritual stagnation and degeneration of the Lutheran Church. Pietists rejected ritualism and shifted the center of gravity of religion to inner conviction, knowledge of the texts of the Holy Scriptures and moral behavior. Later, pietism gave rise to new intolerance and degenerated into fanaticism and exalted asceticism. But in his time he played a refreshing role; many figures of the Enlightenment grew up on the ideological soil of pietism, developing its anti-clerical tendencies.
The son of a saddler, Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) received a Pietist upbringing. While still a student at the University of Königsberg, he wrote his first work, “Thoughts on the True Evaluation of Living Forces,” which was published in 1749. The young author acts here as an arbiter in the dispute between the Cartesians and Leibnizians about measurement kinetic energy. According to Descartes, it is directly proportional to the speed, according to Leibniz, the square of the speed of a moving body. Kant decided to separate the disputants: in some cases, he believed, Descartes' formula was applicable, in others - Leibniz's. Meanwhile, six years earlier, in 1743, D'Alembert gave a solution to the problem, expressing it by the formula F = mv squared/2 Kant, apparently, did not know about this.
Kant's first work is a document of an era that decided to bring all accumulated prejudices to the court of reason.
8
Authority has been abolished, a new time has come. Nowadays, Kant insists, one can safely ignore the authority of Newton and Leibniz if it prevents the discovery of truth, and not be guided by any other considerations other than the dictates of reason. No one is guaranteed against mistakes, and everyone has the right to notice a mistake. A “dwarf” scientist often surpasses in one or another field of knowledge a scientist who is much higher in the total volume of his knowledge. This is clearly about yourself. "The truth that was labored in vain greatest masters human knowledge, was revealed to my mind for the first time." Having written this, the young man realizes: isn’t it too bold? He likes the phrase, he leaves it, adding a clause: “I don’t dare defend this idea, but I wouldn’t want to give it up either.”

The detail is characteristic. In Kant's first work, there is not only an uncompromising desire for truth, but also a clear tendency to make reasonable compromises when faced with two extremes. Now he is trying to “combine” Descartes and Leibniz; in his mature years this attempt will be made in relation to the main philosophical trends. To reveal a contradiction, but to show tolerance, to overcome one-sidedness, to give a fundamentally new solution, while synthesizing the accumulated experience, not to defeat, but to reconcile - this is one of Kant’s aspirations.
9
In June 1754, in two issues of the Königsberg Weekly, a short article by Kant appeared, written on a competitive topic of the Prussian Academy of Sciences: “An investigation into the question of whether the Earth, in its rotation around its axis, due to which the change of day and night occurs, has undergone some changes since its origin." Kant, however, did not dare to take part in the competition; the prize was awarded to a certain priest from Pisa, who answered the question in the negative. Meanwhile, Kant, in contrast to the undeserved laureate, came to the correct conclusion that the Earth in its rotation experiences a slowdown caused by tidal friction of the waters of the World Ocean. Kant's calculations are wrong, but the idea is correct. Its essence is that under the influence of the Moon, sea tides move from east to west, that is, in the direction opposite to the rotation of the Earth, and slow it down. In the summer of 1754, Kant published another article - “The question of whether the Earth is aging from a physical point of view.” Kant has no doubts about the aging process of the Earth. Everything that exists arises, improves, and then goes towards destruction. Earth, of course, is no exception.
Kant's two articles were a kind of prelude to the cosmogonic treatise "General Natural History and Theory of the Heavens, or an Attempt to Interpret the Structure and Mechanical Origin of the Entire Universe Based on Newton's Principles." The treatise was published anonymously in the spring of 1755 with a dedication to King Frederick II. The book was unlucky: its publisher went bankrupt, its warehouse was sealed, and the circulation did not make it in time for the spring fair. But one should not see this (as some authors do) as the reason why Kant’s name as the creator of the cosmogonic hypothesis did not gain European fame. The book eventually sold out, the author's anonymity was revealed, and an approving review appeared in one of the Hamburg periodicals.
10

In 1761, the German scientist I. G. Lambert, in his “Cosmological Letters,” repeated Kant’s ideas about the structure of the universe; in 1796, the French astronomer P. S. Laplace formulated a cosmogonic hypothesis similar to Kant’s. Both Lambert and Laplace knew nothing about their predecessor. Everything is in the spirit of the times: Kant was not familiar with D'Alembert's work on kinetic energy, others had not heard of his work.
In the 17th century Naturalists (including Galileo and Newton) were convinced of the divine origin of the heavenly bodies. Although Kant dissociated himself from the ancient materialists, he actually (following Descartes) extended the principles of natural scientific materialism to cosmogony. “...Give me matter, and I will build a world out of it, that is, give me matter, and I will show you how the world should arise from it” - Kant’s formula sounds like an aphorism. This is the main meaning of the book: Kant really showed how, under the influence of purely mechanical causes, our Solar system could be formed from the initial chaos of material particles.
Early Kant is a deist: while denying God the role of the architect of the Universe, he still saw in him the creator of that chaotic substance from which, according to the laws of mechanics, the modern universe arose. Another problem that Kant did not undertake to solve through natural science was the emergence of organic nature. Is it permissible, he asked, to say: give me matter and I will show you how to make a caterpillar out of it? It’s easy to make a mistake right away, since the variety of object properties is too large and complex. The laws of mechanics are not enough to understand the essence of life. The idea is correct; Having expressed it, young Kant, however, did not look for ways of the natural origin of life. Only in old age, reflecting on the work of the brain, will he emphasize the presence in the body of more complex type interactions.
The treatise on cosmogony preserves the emotionally rich manner in which Kant's work on "living forces" was presented. The beauty of the style does not, however, distract from the main thing. The treatise consists of three parts. The first is introductory. Here Kant expresses ideas about the systemic structure of the universe. The Milky Way should not be viewed as a scattered cluster with no apparent order
11
stars, but as a formation similar to the solar system. The galaxy is oblate, and the Sun is located close to its center. There are many similar star systems; The infinite Universe also has the character of a system, and all its parts are interconnected.
The second part of the treatise is devoted to the problem of the formation of celestial bodies and stellar worlds. For cosmogenesis, according to Kant, the following conditions are necessary: particles of primary matter that differ from each other in density, and the action of two forces - attraction and repulsion. The difference in density causes a thickening of the substance, the emergence of centers of attraction towards which light particles tend. Falling onto the central mass, the particles heat it up, bringing it to a red-hot state. This is how the Sun came into being. The repulsive force that counteracts attraction prevents all the particles from congregating in one place. Some of them, as a result of the struggle of two opposing forces, acquire circular motion, at the same time forming other centers of gravity - planets. The satellites of the planets arose in a similar way. And in other stellar worlds the same forces, the same patterns operate.
The creation of the world is not a matter of a moment, but of eternity. It started once, but it will never stop. Perhaps millions of years and centuries passed before the nature around us reached its inherent degree of perfection. Millions and millions of centuries will pass, during which new worlds will be created and improved, and old ones will die, just as countless living organisms are dying before our eyes. Kant's universe is expanding. Celestial bodies located close to its center are formed earlier than others and die more quickly. And at this time, new worlds are emerging around the edges. Kant predicts the death of our planetary system. The Sun, getting hotter and hotter, will eventually burn the Earth and its other satellites, decompose them into the simplest elements, which will disperse in space, in order to then take part in a new world formation: “...through the entire infinity of times and spaces, we We follow this phoenix of nature, which only then burns itself to be reborn from its ashes..."
12
The third part of the book contains “the experience of comparing the inhabitants of different planets.” Educated people in the 18th century. there was no doubt that the heavenly bodies were inhabited (Newton even considered the Sun inhabited). Kant is confident that intelligent life exists in space, his only reservation is that it is not everywhere: just as there are deserts unsuitable for life on Earth, so there are uninhabited planets in the Universe. The philosopher is occupied with the problem of the extent to which distance from the Sun affects the ability to think in living beings. The inhabitants of Earth and Venus, Kant believes, cannot change their places without dying: they are created from a substance adapted to a certain temperature. The body of the inhabitants of Jupiter must consist of lighter and more fluid substances than those of earthlings, so that the weak influence of the Sun can set them in motion with the same force with which organisms on other planets move. And Kant deduces common law: the substance from which the inhabitants of various planets are composed is lighter and thinner, the further the planets are from the Sun.

And the strength of the soul depends on the mortal shell. If only thick juices move in the body, if living fibers are coarse, then spiritual abilities are weakened. And now a new law has been established: thinking beings are more beautiful and perfect, the farther from the Sun the celestial body where they live is located. A person who occupies, as it were, a middle stage in a sequential series of beings, sees himself between two extreme boundaries of perfection. If the idea of the intelligent beings of Jupiter and Saturn makes us envious, then a look at the lower levels at which the inhabitants of Venus and Mercury are located restores peace of mind. "What an amazing sight!" - exclaims the philosopher. On the one hand, thinking beings, for whom some Greenlander and Hottentot would seem like Newton, and on the other, beings who would look at Newton with the same surprise as we look at a monkey. Today much in the "General natural history and the theory of heaven" (even that which does not cause a smile) seems outdated. Modern science does not accept either the basic hypothesis about education

13
The solar system is made up of cold scattered particles of matter, nor a number of other positions that Kant tried to substantiate. But the main thing philosophical idea- historicism, the idea of development - remains unshakable.
Natural scientific matters will dominate Kant’s spiritual world for a long time to come. But along with them, interest in philosophy also appears. Kant's first actually philosophical work was his dissertation "New Illumination of the First Principles of Metaphysical Knowledge." Kant explores in it the principle of sufficient reason established by Leibniz. He makes a distinction between the basis of the existence of an object and the basis of its knowledge, the real and logical basis. The real basis for the movement of light at a certain speed is the properties of the ether. The basis for knowledge of this phenomenon was provided by observations of the satellites of Jupiter. It was noticed that the pre-calculated eclipses of these celestial bodies occur later in those cases when Jupiter is farthest from the Earth. From this they concluded that the propagation of light occurs in time, and the speed of light was calculated. In these reasonings is the germ of future dualism: the world of real things and the world of our knowledge are not identical.
Yours next piece- “Physical Monadology” - Kant begins by depicting the methodological crossroads at which he found himself. He agrees with the researchers of nature that nothing should be allowed into natural science “without agreement with experience.” However, he is dissatisfied with those who are so attached to this principle that they do not allow anything beyond directly observable data. “After all, they remain only with the phenomena of nature, are always equally far from the understanding of the first causes hidden for them, and no more ever reach the science of the very nature of bodies than those who would convince themselves that, climbing to higher and higher peaks mountains, they will finally touch the sky with their hands." The data of experience, according to Kant, are significant insofar as they give us an idea of the laws of empirical reality, but they cannot lead to knowledge of the origin and causes of the laws. Hence his conclusion; "... metaphysics, which, in the opinion of many, can be completely dispensed with when solving physical problems, alone provides help here, kindling the light of knowledge."
11
It should be borne in mind that Kant had to deal with the metaphysics of the Wolffian school, which expelled all live content from the philosophy of Leibniz. Unlike the previous period, when metaphysics had a positive content and was associated with discoveries in mathematics and physics, in the 18th century it turned exclusively to the systematization of accumulated knowledge and fell into dogmatism. Simplifying and systematizing the picture of the real world, Wolffian metaphysics consistently adhered to the identification of being with thinking and looked at the world through glasses formal logic. It was believed that logical and real grounds are identical, that is, the logical relation of cause and effect is equivalent to the relation of cause and action; things are connected to each other in the same way that concepts are connected. Kant, however, has already shown that this is not so.
In his work “False Philosophy in the Four Figures of the Syllogism” (1762), Kant questions some of the provisions of formal logic. He calls the latter a colossus with feet of clay. He does not flatter himself with the hope of overthrowing this colossus, although he takes aim at it. Kant demands that logic trace the formation of concepts. Concepts arise from judgments. What is the mysterious force that makes judgments possible? Kant's answer is that judgments are possible due to the ability to transform sensory representations into an object of thought. The answer is significant: it testifies to Kant’s first, still very vague desire to create a new theory of knowledge. Before this, he shared the Wolffian admiration for deduction, and was convinced that the possibilities of deriving some concepts from others were limitless (although his own studies of nature were based on experimental data). Now he is thinking about how to introduce experimental knowledge into philosophy. Kant's work did not go unnoticed. It was met with positive responses, and one anonymous reviewer (it is assumed that it was M. Mendelssohn) characterized the author of the article as “a brave man threatening the German academies with a terrible revolution).”
15
The coming philosophical revolution is also foreshadowed by the ideas that Kant expresses in the treatise “The Experience of Introducing the Concept of Negative Quantities into Philosophy.” Kant complains that the problems under consideration are not yet clear enough to him, but he publishes his work based on a firm belief in their significance and the understanding that even incomplete experiments in the field of philosophy can be useful, since the solution to a problem is often found by someone other than himself. puts it on. Kant's attention is drawn to the problem of the unity of opposites. The starting point of his reasoning is the distinction between logical and real grounds established in his dissertation. What is true for logic may not be true for reality. The logical opposite is that, regarding the same thing, a statement is simultaneously affirmed and denied. Logic prohibits believing both statements to be true. Regarding a body, one cannot simultaneously assert that it is moving and at rest. Another thing is the real opposite, consisting in the opposite direction of forces. Here, too, one cancels the other, but the consequence will not be nothing, but something. Two equal forces can act on a body in opposite directions, the consequence will be the rest of the body, which is also something that really exists. The world around us is full of such real opposites. Mathematics, in the study of negative quantities, has long been operating with the concept of real opposition. Philosophy must adopt from mathematics certain principles whose truth has been proven by nature itself.
In 1762, the Berlin Academy of Sciences announced an open competition to find out whether philosophical truths, in particular the principles of theology and morality, contain the possibility of proof as obvious as the truths in geometry; if such a possibility does not exist, then what is the nature of these principles, what is the degree of their reliability and has
16
Is the latter completely convincing? It seemed that the topic was specially invented for Kant, who was beginning to awaken from his “dogmatic sleep” in the arms of Wolffian metaphysics. Comparing philosophy with mathematics, Kant speaks of the qualitative diversity of the objects of the first in comparison with the objects of the second. Compare the concept of a trillion with the concept of freedom. The ratio of a trillion to a unit is clear to everyone, but no one has yet succeeded in reducing freedom to its constituent units, that is, simple and well-known concepts. Many people, of course, consider philosophy an easier science than higher mathematics, but these people call philosophy everything that is contained in books with that name. Meanwhile, true philosophy has not yet been written. Philosophy must adopt the method introduced by Newton into natural science, a method that brought such fruitful results there. However, what about theology? How can you prove the existence of God? The experience on which philosophy must rely is not only the testimony of the senses, but also “inner experience,” direct consciousness. Thanks to the latter, according to Kant, the knowledge of God becomes very reliable. Competition entry demanded an answer to the question of the principles of morality. Here, according to Kant, the necessary degree of evidence has not yet been achieved; things are worse than with theology, although in principle a reliable justification of morality is quite possible. And Kant expresses an important consideration for his further philosophical development; One must not confuse truth and goodness, knowledge and moral feeling. At the same time, he refers to F. Hutcheson and A. E. Shaftesbury as the thinkers who most succeeded in revealing the fundamental principles of morality.
But the main role in awakening Kant’s interest in the problem of man was played by J. J. Rousseau. After Newton, he was the second thinker who had the most significant influence on the young Kant. If through the prism of Newtonian equations the Koenigsberg philosopher looked at the infinite star world, then Rousseau’s paradoxes helped him look into the recesses of the human soul. According to Kant, Newton first saw order and correctness
17
where before him only disordered diversity was found, but Rousseau discovered the unified nature of man in human diversity. Kant owed Rousseau's books, first of all, the liberation from a number of the prejudices of the armchair scientist, a kind of democratization of thinking. “I experience an enormous thirst for knowledge... There was a time when I thought that all this could bring honor to humanity, and I despised the mob, who knew nothing. Rousseau corrected me. This blinding superiority disappears; I am learning to respect people...” This was not just a change of views, it was a moral renewal, a revolution in life attitudes.
In addition to Rousseau, Kant subsequently named Hume as a thinker who helped him awaken from his “dogmatic sleep.” The French enthusiast and the English skeptic - again two opposites merge into contradictory nature Kant. Rousseau “corrected” Kant as a man and a moralist; Hume influenced his theoretical and epistemological searches and prompted him to revise metaphysical dogmas.
Under the influence of Rousseau and the English sensualists, Kant writes “Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and Sublime” (1764). This treatise, which went through eight editions during his lifetime, brought Kant the fame of a fashionable writer. The philosopher appears in an unusual genre for himself - as an essayist. The enthusiastic pathos of the first works disappeared, humor and irony appeared; the syllable acquired grace and aphorism. Kant writes about the world of human feelings, viewing them through the prism of two categories - the beautiful and the sublime. At the same time, there is no talk about aesthetics in the treatise. There are no strict definitions in it. Everything is approximately, figuratively.
The night is sublime, Kant argues, the day is beautiful. The sublime excites, the beautiful attracts. The sublime must always be significant, the beautiful can also be small. The beauty of an act lies, first of all, in the fact that it is performed easily and as if without tension; difficulties overcome cause admiration and are considered sublime. A woman's mind is beautiful, a man's mind is deep, and this is just another expression for the sublime.
18
Here Kant expresses some thoughts about the differences between people by temperament. Again, he does not seek to exhaust the topic; the beautiful and sublime serve for him as a kind of core on which he strings his entertaining observations. The melancholic temperament resides in the realm of the sublime. Kant clearly gives preference to it, although he also sees some of its weaknesses.
Kant devotes the last section of his “Observations...” to the peculiarities of national character. This is one of the first steps of social psychology, a science that has only recently acquired a more rigorous empirical basis. Kant is content with his own observations; subsequently he returned to them repeatedly every time he taught an anthropology course. They are not always accurate, sometimes controversial, and mostly original. Behind his bright, perhaps sometimes arbitrary, passages lies deep meaning: they anticipate a change in the spiritual atmosphere of the country, the coming turn from reason to feelings, the emergence of a keen interest in the unique experiences of the individual. Here you can feel the approach of Sturm and Drang.
This movement will soon shake up intellectual Germany. But so far there are only hidden processes going on. And Kant, in particular, does not publish everything he thinks about. It must be said that Kant developed a habit from a young age: any thought that came into his head was immediately written down on paper. Sometimes these were specially prepared sheets, more often - the first scrap that accidentally caught my eye. Sometimes we find notes here that amaze us with the depth of their insight; they overtake systematized thought. There are unfinished phrases here, and polished aphorisms, and preparations for future works. This is a vital addition to completed works.
In the draft notes dating back to the period of work on the Observations..., Kant (following Rousseau) approaches the problem of alienation. The term is unknown to him, but he grasps the essence of the matter correctly. The point is that ugly social relations transform the results of human activity into something alien and hostile. How
19
good can turn into evil, Kant shows by the example of science. “The harm brought by science to people consists mainly in the fact that the vast majority of those who want to express themselves in it do not achieve the improvement of reason, but only its perversion, not to mention the fact that for the majority science serves only as a tool for satisfying vanity." According to Kant, science in his contemporary society is infected with two diseases. The name of one is narrowness of horizon, one-sided thinking, the name of the other is the absence of a worthy goal. Kant will return to this topic several times. Science needs "supreme philosophical supervision." A scientist becomes a kind of one-eyed monster if he "lacking a philosophical eye." This is a dangerous monstrosity when a person closes himself in one area of knowledge: “I call such a scientist a cyclops. He is an egoist of science, and he needs another eye to look at things from the point of view of other people. The humanization of sciences is based on this, i.e. humanity honey mushroom... The second eye is self-knowledge human mind, without which we have no measure of the greatness of our knowledge." Kant sets himself the task of overcoming the vices of contemporary science. "If science exists, indeed necessary for a person, then this is the one that I teach - namely, to properly take the place indicated for a person in the world - and from which one can learn what one must be in order to be a person." This recognition is of fundamental importance for Kant. He forever parts with scientific arrogance an educator who admires his knowledge, who idolizes the omnipotence of science. The value of knowledge is defined moral orientation; the science to which he wants to devote himself is the science of people. From now on, the problem of man is at the center of Kant's philosophical quest. The whole question is what a person really needs, how to help him.
One thing is certain: a person should not fool his head. Kant’s work “The Dreams of a Spiritual Seer, Explained by the Dreams of a Metaphysician” (1766) is directed against those who try to supplement this. Again, this is not a scholarly treatise, but rather an essay. The reason for writing it was
20
the activities of E. Swedenborg, a remarkable man. A well-known Swedish scientist and inventor, an expert in mineralogy, elected member St. Petersburg Academy Sciences, Swedenborg, in his old age, declared himself a spirit seer. He assured that he had close relationships with the spirits of the dead and received information from them from another world. They talked about him incredible stories. Thus, the widow of the Dutch envoy to the Swedish court allegedly turned to him for help, who was required to pay for a silver service made to order by her husband. Knowing the accuracy of her husband, the lady was sure that the debt had been paid, but she had no evidence. Swedenborg allegedly talked with the spirit of the deceased and soon told the widow where the receipt was kept. Kant conveys this story ironically, seeing in it, as in other similar stories, a bizarre play of the imagination. “Therefore, I will not blame the reader at all,” writes Kant, “if he, instead of considering ghost-seers as half belonging to another world, immediately writes them down as candidates for treatment in a hospital...”
The point, however, is not only about Swedenborg and his followers. Kant puts the adherents of speculative metaphysics on the same level as the “spiritual seers.” If the former are “dreamers of feeling,” then the latter are “dreamers of the mind.” Metaphysicians also dream; they take their ideas for the true order of things. The philosopher does not envy their “discoveries”, he is only afraid that some sensible person, not distinguished by courtesy, will tell them the same thing that the astronomer Tycho Brahe, who was trying to determine the road by the stars, said to his coachman: “Eh, master, You may understand everything well in heaven, but here on earth you are a fool.” This is Kant's farewell word to Wolffian metaphysics. He laughs not only at visionary thinking, but also at speculative speculation; he calls on people of science to rely on experience, and only on experience - the alpha and omega of knowledge.
Kant says goodbye to metaphysics, but cannot part with it. He admits that, by the will of fate, he is “in love with metaphysics,” although she rarely shows him her favor. This “unsuccessful romance” lasted for many years. All my
21
During his university life, Kant taught a course in metaphysics (“according to Baumgarten”), he was tormented by “damned” metaphysical questions - about the essence of the world, God, and the soul. But the further we went, the clearer it became that the answers could not be obtained speculatively. Therefore, Kant dreams of re-educating his beloved; he wants to see her only as a “companion of wisdom”, drawing the boundaries of knowledge.
Educator - time. Kant publishes less and less, and reflects more and more on his “main work.” He mentioned it in one of his letters on New Year's Day 1766. The application for the "Critique of Pure Reason" has been made. The book will appear in fifteen years. During these years, a lot will happen in the spiritual life of Germany. important events. Let us turn to them in order to then return to Kant, fully armed with knowledge of what is happening around him and influencing his spiritual development.

2. LESING AND THE LITERARY REVOLUTION
Kant was not the only one who paved the way for general theory development, who undermined the foundations of dogmatic metaphysics. Almost simultaneously with Kant's attack on the doctrine of the eternity of the solar system, K. F. Wolf made the first attack on the theory of the constancy of species in 1759. Caspar Friedrich Wolf (1734-1794), a German physician and biologist who worked for many years in St. Petersburg, in his dissertation “The Theory of Generation” substantiated the theory of epigenesis, i.e., the development of an organism through neoplasm. New organs gradually emerge from pre-existing ones, the complex is formed from the simple. Wolf's ideas about ontogeny (the development of the individual) were later transferred to phylogeny (the development of the species). In the 18th century Historicism takes its first steps in social disciplines. Generalizing works on political history and the history of philosophy appear. Johann Joachim Winckelmann (1717-1768) laid the foundation modern archeology and art history. A participant in the excavations of Herculaneum and Pompeii, he taught how to systematize the found monuments, distinguish originals from fakes, and called for the study of disappeared cultures.
29
But the most significant impulses came from fiction. The name of Lessing has already been mentioned above as an innovator who was destined to shape attitudes and tastes. N. G. Chernyshevsky will pay attention to what important role Lessing played in the preparation of German classical philosophy. Despite the fact that Lessing left almost no actual philosophical works, writes Chernyshevsky, he “laid the foundation of all new German philosophy with his writings.”

Gotthold Ephraim Lessing (1729-1781) was born in the Saxon town of Kamenz. The son of a pastor, he first studied at the theological faculty of the University of Leipzig, then switched to medicine. Already as a student he began to write. In Berlin he publishes his famous "Literary Letters", which bring him the fame of the first critic
23
Germany. The seventeenth "letter", which is of the greatest interest, ends with an apology for Shakespeare: Shakespeare is a much greater tragic poet than Corneille. After Sophocles' Oedipus, no tragedy in the world will have more power over our passions than Othello, King Lear, Hamlet.
In the treatise "Pope the Metaphysician", dedicated to English poet A. Pope, explores the difference between poetry and philosophy. Is it possible to compare poetry with a system of metaphysical truths? The philosopher adheres to precise and unambiguous terminology. The poet plays with words. He never strives to express the “strict, consistent truth”; sometimes he says too much, sometimes he leaves something out. Among philosophers, Jacob Boehme was capable of this, and only he can be forgiven for this. Strict order of presentation and poetry are incompatible things. "The philosopher who climbs Parnassus, and the poet who intends to descend into the valleys of serious and calm wisdom, meet halfway, where they, so to speak, exchange clothing and turn back. Each brings into his abode the image of the other, but nothing more "The poet became a philosophical poet, and the sage became a poetic sage. And yet the philosophical poet is not a philosopher, and the poetic sage did not turn into a poet."
Drawing a line between art and philosophy is extremely important. In Lessing's time, the expression “beautiful science” (schone Wissenschaft) was in use, denoting art. The distinction between the two types of spiritual activity was not entirely clear. Lessing felt like a writer who stopped “halfway to philosophy.” Here he met the theorist "halfway to literature" - Moses Mendelssohn (1729-1786). The result of the meeting was the treatise "Pope the Metaphysician", written in collaboration.
Lessing is known as a talented journalist, critic, poet, fabulist, and playwright. In 1753-1755 published in six volumes his first full meeting essays. In the last volume - the latest achievement by that time - "Miss Sarah Sampson". Lessing characterizes his play as a “burgher tragedy.” Interest in personal life -
24
This is what is new that the new, “burgher” era brought with it, which replaced feudalism and was marked by the breakdown of the class hierarchy, the establishment of new, bourgeois principles in the economy and in spiritual life. A burgher is a city dweller, a representative of the “third estate”. But not only. A burgher is a citizen, a bearer of law and order. Finally, the burgher is the owner, the bourgeois.
More clearly than in "Sarah Sampson", the civil, burgher ideal of an independent individual living in conditions of law and order is expressed in "Minna von Barnhelm". The play tells about the fate of an officer. The fearless and incorruptible Major Telheim is suspected of bribery, but at the end of the play the news comes: King Frederick II again calls him to his banner. A native of Courland, Telheim serves in the Prussian army and marries a girl from Saxony. This was seen as a call for national unity.
"Minna von Barnhelm" served as the main reason for the emergence of the "legend of Lessing" as a loyal bard of Prussianism. F. Mehring dispelled the legend: in “Minna” he saw not an apology, but a criticism of Friedrich’s order. But this does not provide grounds for another legend, which overestimates the revolutionary nature of the German enlightener.
The question is how to evaluate the play "Emilia Galotti". In the five-volume History of German Literature, Emilia Galotti is called “the first play of the revolutionary German theater.” From “Emilia Galotti” supposedly “comes the theater of the young Schiller and in many ways the theater of Sturm and Drang.” Meanwhile, according to Goethe, “Schiller had absolutely nothing to do with the works of Lessing.” special treatment; in essence, he did not like them, and “Emilia Galotti” was downright disgusting to him.” What was the matter, Goethe does not explain. It is quite possible that Schiller just lacked Lessing’s tyranny-fighting.
Why does Odoardo Galotti kill his daughter, who was seduced by the prince, and not her seducer? Yes, because Odoardo is not a fighter, but an avenger, and also very impulsive. Maybe I'm wrong, but in addition to the problem of law and order that worries Lessing, "Emilia Galotti" contains a noticeable polemic with the newly emerged "Storm" movement
25
and onslaught." The "Sturmers" proclaimed the primacy of feeling over reason, putting the individual above the universal. Lessing showed where this would lead if the sense of proportion was lost. "The father's act is not an example of meaningfulness. In no case! The old man, like his frightened daughter, lost his head in the stupefying court atmosphere, and it was precisely this confusion, the danger that such characters carry, that the poet directly wanted to portray.”
In 1766, Lessing published Laocoon, a treatise on the difference between the plastic arts and poetry. The idea of the identity of these types of art, inherited from antiquity, was questioned in the 18th century. "Laocoon" is polemical. Its author opposed Winckelmann’s concept, set out in the work “Thoughts on the Imitation of Greek Works in Painting and Sculpture.” (By the time work on “Laocoon” was completed, Winckelmann’s “History of Ancient Art” had also appeared; references to it are contained in the last sections of the treatise.) The dispute arose, it seemed, on a private matter. Why is it that in the famous sculptural group the dying priest Laocoon is depicted uttering not an insane scream, but a muffled scream? Winckelmann saw in this an expression of the national character of the Greeks, their stoic greatness of spirit. Lessing had a different opinion: the essence of the matter lies in the specifics of sculpture. Sophocles' tragedy Philoctetes is also a work of Greek art, but its hero, suffering from wounds, screams out loud. What narrative art can express is not allowed to plastic art. The poet has a wider range expressive means. This does not mean that poetry is superior to painting and sculpture. There is simply a difference in the subject matter and the methods of depiction. Some poetic images are not suitable for a painter, and, conversely, other paintings, when trying to convey them in poetry or prose, lose their impact.
Lessing searches for the “root causes.” Art imitates reality, which exists in space and time. Hence there are two types of art. The space is filled with bodies. Bodies with their visible properties constitute the subject of painting. Time is sequence
26
actions. The latter constitute the subject of poetry. The difference, Lessing clarifies, is relative: painting can also depict actions, but only indirectly, with the help of bodies, and, conversely, poetry can depict bodies with the help of actions.
So, the artist (painter or sculptor) has at his disposal not a period of time, but only one moment of it. Therefore, you need to choose the one that is most fruitful. “Only that which excites the free play of the faculty of imagination is fruitful. The more we look, the more we imagine, and the stronger the thought works, the more is given to our vision. But the image of any passion at the moment of highest tension least of all has this advantage. Behind such an image there is nothing more: to show the eye this limiting point means to tie the wings of fantasy." That's why Laocoon only groans; it is easy for the imagination to imagine him screaming, and if he screamed, fantasy could not rise to a single level higher.
The observation is subtle, and it turned out to be true for more than one sculpture; This is the most important feature of art in general. Any artist, including a writer, is looking for a “fruitful moment.” Inconsistency, a figure of silence, a deliberate incompleteness of the image are the favorite techniques of literature. Sometimes a hint is more powerful than a detailed description. Any artist, including a writer, reproduces life, but not in all its detail, but in a general way, leaving room for the imagination of the viewer or reader. Aesthetic experience arises both from “recognition” of reality and from the fact that one has to “interpret” the image created by the artist. This conclusion arises when reading Laocoon. Let us remember the conclusion: the problem of imagination (and its “free play”) will occupy a very important place in Kant’s “critical” philosophy.
In 1767, a new bright stage began in Lessing's life and work. German opened in Hamburg national theater, where the best acting forces are gathered. The new theater invited Lessing to the position of "playwright", i.e. director literary part. Hence the name of the new theater journal started by Lessing -
27
"Hamburg Drama". The notice about the publication of the magazine said: “Our Dramaturgy will be a critical list of all the plays that will be staged on stage, and will monitor every step that the art of the poet and actor will take in this field.” Throughout the year, thin books were published regularly twice a week, containing analyzes of performances and general reflections on the nature of dramatic art. Taken together, they constituted a fundamental treatise that is still considered the cornerstone of theatrical aesthetics. Usually the book contains the result obtained by the author. Here we also have the author's search. We see how Lessing's thought moves, how questions arise before him, how the answer is not immediately revealed.
One of the first issues clearly formulated the program: “The theater should be a school of morality.” But how to do this? Since the time of Aristotle, it has been known that the law of the theater, as well as art in general, is the coincidence of the general and the individual. This applies to the actors’ speech, their facial expressions, and gestures. The gesture must be both “significant” and “individual”. Lessing reminds readers of the advice that Shakespeare's Hamlet gives to traveling actors: words should roll off the tongue easily, do not shout on stage, observe moderation. There are few voices that would not be unpleasant under extreme tension. And hearing, like sight, should not be insulted to the public. Already in Laocoon, boundaries were established for the transmission of the ugly. In "Hamburg Drama" Lessing writes that the art of the actor occupies a middle ground between fine art and poetry. You can afford more in a play than on canvas, but there are limits here too. Living people move across the stage, and yet this does not mean that there is life itself on the stage. Truthfulness should not extend “to the most extreme illusion.” One cannot demand that the play completely coincide with historical facts. Tragedy is not a story told in the form of conversations. With such reservations, Lessing accepts the thesis of art as an imitation of nature, dating back to Aristotle.
28
Reservations also arise regarding the thesis about the unity of the general and the individual. It would seem to be an axiom that in art we are dealing with the “raising of a particular phenomenon into a general type.” But Corneille violated the axiom. Lessing did not like Corneille from his youth. Here he reveals the discrepancy between the principles of the French playwright and the ideas of Aristotle. The French “overloaded the expression, applied the colors too thickly, until the characterized faces turned into personified characters...”.
Corneille is fine, but Diderot also started talking about the fact that in comedy the same degree of individualization is impossible as in tragedy. In life you can hardly find more than a dozen comic characters; The comedian, therefore, brings out not personalities, but types, entire classes. Diderot spoke about " ideal character". Lessing does not so much argue with Diderot as seeks to comprehend the difficulties he identified. Why does Diderot bother to not be in conflict with Aristotle, and at the same time contradict him? In the end, Lessing finds a way out. He talks about two possible variants of artistic generalization, about two meanings of the term “universal character”: “In the first meaning, universal character is one in which those traits that can be seen in many or all individuals are brought together. In short, it is an overloaded character, a personified idea of character rather than a characteristic personality. And in another sense, universal character is one in which a certain middle is taken, an equal proportion of everything that is noticed in many or all individuals. In short, this is an ordinary character, ordinary not in the sense of the character itself, but because such is the degree, the measure of it" 3.
For some reason, those who write about “Hamburg Drama” do not pay attention to this place in the 95th issue. And here is the quintessence of the treatise, according to the author, “fermenta cogitationis” - enzymes of thinking. Lessing believes that only “universality in the second meaning” corresponds to Aristotle’s views. As for the universality of the first kind, which creates “overloaded characters” and “personified ideas,” it is “much more extraordinary” than Aristotle’s universality allows. The problem of two possibilities of artistic generalization is one of the main ones in German aesthetics of subsequent times. To her
29
we'll be back. In the meantime, let us pay attention to one significant tirade contained in the “Hamburg Drama”. Lessing writes: “...it is not only writers who do not like to hear truthful judgments about themselves. We now, thank God, have a school of critics,” whose best criticism is that they undermine the credibility of any criticism. “Genius! genius!” they shout. “Genius is above all rules! What a genius does is the rule.” we're talking about? About the "Storm and Drang" movement.
This was the first all-German social movement caused by the crisis of the feudal order, the crisis in the economy, in social relations, in state system, V different forms ideology. The movement was limited to the spiritual sphere, the “storm” raged only in literature, the “onslaught” did not go beyond printed publications. This was manifested in an explosion of individualism, in an increased interest in personality problems, in inner life individual person, V sharp distrust to reason, to the rationalistic principles defended by the thinkers of the early Enlightenment. Suddenly the complexity, richness, and mysterious depths of man's spiritual life were revealed. This was perceived by many as a discovery surpassing in significance the discovery of America: in every person there are hidden unknown continents of passions, feelings, and experiences.
Lessing was the forerunner of this "literary revolution" and its critic. He showed a keen interest in the life of the individual; the Sturmers drove him to the extreme, to irrationalism and subjective arbitrariness. Kant, with his “Observations on the Feeling of the Sublime and the Beautiful,” contributed to the birth of “Sturm and Drang.” But the strongest impetus for the movement was given by Johann Georg Hamann (1730-1788). A man completely alien to natural science, at the same time an expert in languages and a brilliant polymath, Hamann wrote in a heavy manner, overloaded with hints and omissions. His pamphlet "Socratic Attractions" (1759) is dedicated to "no one and two." "Nobody" is the reading public. One of the “two” is Kant (the second is the businessman Behrens). It is clearly said about Kant that he would like to be like Newton and become a vardein (so
30
was called the quality controller of the coin) philosophy; yes only in money circulation Germany is much more orderly than in the textbooks of metaphysics: the sages have not yet invented a standard by which they could determine the presence of truth in their ideas, as they measure the content of noble metals in a small coin.
Haman speaks not so much about the Athenian sage, but about himself, about his spiritual quest. Like his great predecessor, who stood in opposition to the enlightened Athenians, Haman renounces the enlightenment postulates. “We think too abstractly” is the main problem. Our logic prohibits contradiction, yet it is precisely in it that the truth lies. The ban is "parricide of thought." The Delphic oracle called Socrates the wisest, who admitted that he knew nothing. Which one lied - Socrates or the oracle? Both were right. The main thing for Haman is self-knowledge; here, in his opinion, reason is powerless, knowledge is a hindrance; Only faith based on inner feeling can help. Under his pen, Socrates turns into an irrationalist, a herald of Christianity: the Athenian philosopher wanted to lead his fellow citizens from the labyrinth of scientific sophistry to the truth that lies in the “hidden”, in the worship of the “secret god.” This is how Haman sees his lot.
Another book by Haman that has attracted attention is " Crusades philologist" (1762), a collection in which the central place belongs to an essay with several unusual name"Aesthetics in walnut." First of all, the word “aesthetics” itself was unusual. It was introduced shortly before by A. Baumgarten to designate the doctrine of beauty, which for him was equivalent to the theory of sensory knowledge. A follower of Leibniz and Wolf, Baumgarten considered the aesthetic, the sphere of feelings, to be the lowest level of knowledge. On the very first page of his essay, Hamann categorically states the opposite: in sensory images “the entire wealth of human knowledge consists”; there is nothing higher than the image. Poetry is the native language of humanity. Hamann reproaches the Wolffians for scholasticism, in isolation from life and nature. “Your murderously false philosophy has removed nature from its path.” The Wolfians want to dominate nature; meanwhile they tie themselves hand and foot. Those who think of themselves as masters turn out to be slaves.
31
Johann Gottfried Herder (1744-1803) eagerly listened to Hamann's sermons. A student of Kant in Konigsberg, who absorbed the ideas of his cosmogonic hypothesis and tried to transfer it to other spheres of existence, he was equally guided by Kant’s antipode Hamann. Herder's first works - "Fragments on Recent German Literature" (1766-1768) and "Critical Forests" (1769) - testified to brilliant literary abilities, a desire to avoid extremes, and an interest in the idea of development. In the autumn of 1770, Herder arrived in Strasbourg. Here his meeting with Goethe takes place, which played a significant role in the lives of both leaders of Sturm and Drang. Here Herder writes his famous treatise “On the Origin of Language” (1772), which was awarded a prize at the competition of the Berlin Academy of Sciences.

Herder associates the emergence of language with the development of culture. The treatise is devoted to the consideration of the natural laws that determined the need for the emergence of language. If we consider a person only as an animal, he will appear in a very pitiful and helpless form. However, a person's weakness becomes the source of his strength. A person devoid of instincts develops another ability given to him by nature - “intelligence,” i.e., potential intelligence. Continuous improvement is a human characteristic. This development, the like of which no other animal knows, has no limit. A person is never complete in himself. The development of intelligence affects the development of language, and, conversely, a chain of words becomes a chain of thoughts. The history of language is inseparable from the history of thinking.
A person's weakness also becomes the reason for his strength because it forces him to unite with other people. Family ties, absent in the animal world, are elementary social ties. Without society, a person would become wild, wither, like a flower torn from the stem and roots of the plant. As society develops, it improves its language. The progress of language is endless, as is the development of society itself. Here Herder first puts
32
the question of continuity in the development of culture. Just as an individual assimilates accumulated experience, so nations perceive the achievements of past generations. Cultural tradition is passed on from people to people, taking on more and more new forms. Herder turns to the study of the origins of culture. Having settled in 1771 in Bückeburg, where he took up the post of court preacher, Herder studied folk art, studied the Bible, considering it both as a result of divine revelation and as the oldest monument literature.
In addition to Herder and Hamann, the writer Johann Caspar Lavater (1741-1801) and the young philosopher Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi (1743-1819) joined the religiously inclined wing of Sturm und Drang. Another leader of the “stormy geniuses,” Johann Wolfgang Goethe (1749-1832), did not share the pious aspirations of his friend and mentor Herder. He blasphemes and writes rebellious poetry. “I don’t know anything more pathetic than you, gods! Should I honor you? For what?” These words are taken from Goethe’s “Prometheus,” a poem that became a kind of poetic manifesto for the “left” wing of Sturm und Drang. Among the radical "Sturmers" we find Kant's former student J. Lenz (1751-1792), future Kantians F. M. Klinger (1752-1831) and A. Burger (1747-1794). The movement turned out to be heterogeneous and contradictory: rebellion was combined with political indifference and conservatism, sympathy for the people with extreme individualism, a critical attitude towards religion with pious exaltation. But everyone was united by an interest in man, in his unique spiritual world.
Lessing shared this interest, but avoided extremes. At the center of the ideological disputes of this period is the problem of religion. The state of the contemporary church does not satisfy Lessing, but he is also far from the “newfangled” rationalist theologians who tried to “clean up” Lutheranism. He writes to his brother: “The one who seems to me more concocted by idiots and half-philosophers is religious system, which they want to replace the old one with."
In 1774, Lessing began publishing excerpts from the work of Herman Samuel Reimarus (1694-1768) “Apology, or Essay in Defense of the Reasonable Worshipers of God.”
33

Reimarus's work challenged the inspiration of the Bible and its significance for knowledge of truth; The Bible is full of contradictions, its heroes are deceivers, sensualists, murderers. Reimarus is looking for a true, “natural” religion, not built on revelation, but derived from the inner nature of man; he is a deist and demands a tolerant attitude towards deists. As one might expect, the appearance of Reimarus's texts caused a fermentation of minds. Attacks on Lessing began. Defending himself, Lessing, in a series of brilliant articles, defended the right to research in any field of knowledge, including the history of religion, he expressed bold ideas, ridiculed his main opponent, Pastor Getze, showing his ignorance. Eventually, government intervention silenced Lessing. But the last word in the dispute still remained with him. It was uttered in The Education of the Human Race and in Nathan the Wise.
"Education of the Human Race" is a hundred theses on the moral progress of mankind. Different types of religions are the product of certain historical eras. The genus, like the individual, goes through three ages. The Old Testament corresponds to the childhood of humanity, and the New Testament to youth. Maturity is coming - “the era of the new, eternal Gospel,” when morality will become a universal, unconditional principle of behavior. Old Testament revelations speak of gross spiritual state world, when education is possible only through direct rewards and corporal punishment. In adolescence, a different teacher and different methods of education are needed. Christianity appeals to higher motives of behavior: this is a higher stage of spiritual evolution, although not the last. Lessing is convinced that the human race will reach the highest level - perfection, universal enlightenment and moral purity, when morality will not be associated with faith in God, when a person “will do good for the sake of good, and not because someone’s arbitrariness has destined him for this reward.” In the meantime, he proposes to distinguish the religion of Christ as a totality moral principles and the Christian religion, which is unacceptable to him as the worship of an omnipotent deity. Whether Christ was more than human is problematic for Lessing. What he was a genuine person, If
34
he existed at all, there is no doubt. Kant’s “Religion within the Limits of Reason Only” and the works of the early Hegel, the cradle of his dialectics, which was born in a persistent search for a solution to ethical problems, go back to Lessing’s religious quests.
Lessing is afraid of fanaticism, religious and any other. Evidence of this is “Nathan the Wise,” which cannot be understood without studying the theses of “Education...” (and the latter are incomplete and unclear without “Nathan” - these things complement each other). There was controversy surrounding Lessing's last play on issues of religion and religious tolerance. Without describing all the battles, I will only give a final description of F. Mehring, who insists that “nothing could be more stupid than to look in “Nathan” for the belittlement of the Christian religion or the glorification of the Jewish religion.” The play is journalistic and didactic, the characters are deliberately “poster-like”. The author acted quite consciously, parting (in the methodological aspect) with Shakespeare, from whom he studied all his life, and turning again to Corneille (not a bad playwright at all). Our acquaintance with the “Hamburg Dramaturgy”, with the concept of “non-Aristotelian” artistic generalization set forth there, allows us to draw the following conclusion.
Lessing died early in 1781. The Critique of Pure Reason was published in May. However, there was no direct relay race in the spiritual championship: main work Kant remained unnoticed for a long time, and a heated philosophical controversy suddenly flared up around the name of Lessing posthumously, which drew intellectual Germany away from the problems posed by Kant. This was the famous "pantheism controversy."

Name: German classical philosophy.

CONTENT
Preface
Chapter first. THE EVE
1. First gap
2. Lessing and the literary revolution
3. "The debate about pantheism." Herder
Chapter two. THE COPERNICAN TURN OF IMMANUEL KANT
1. Activity of cognition
2. The primacy of practical reason
3. Kant's system of philosophy. The meaning of aesthetics
4. "What is a person?"
Chapter three. PHILOSOPHY OF ACTIVITY
1. Disputes around Kant. Schiller
2. German Jacobinism
3. Fichte. Jena period
Chapter Four. RETURN TO NATURE
1. Goethe. Dispute over artistic method
2. The Humboldt Brothers
3. The birth of romanticism
4. Early Schelling
Chapter five. IDEA OF UNITY
1. Schelling. Philosophy of identity
2. Fichte. Berlin period
Chapter six. "CLIFE OF MIND" (HEGEL)
1. At the origins of the concept
2. System and method
3. Forms of absolute spirit
Chapter seven. IN THE NAME OF HUMAN
1. Criticism of idealism
2. Anthropological principle (Feuerbach)
Chapter eight. EXODUS TO THE EAST (SCHOPENHAUER)
1. Another way
2. Man in the world of will and representation
3. The fate of the teaching
Conclusion
NOTES
Chapter first
Chapter two
Chapter Three
Chapter Four
Chapter Five
Chapter Six
Chapter Seven
Chapter Eight
V.F. Losev. INSTEAD OF AN AFTERWORD
Index of names

Download the e-book for free in a convenient format, watch and read:
Download the book German classical philosophy - Gulyga A.V. - fileskachat.com, fast and free download.

Download doc
You can buy this book below best price at a discount with delivery throughout Russia.

Lit reading grade 3 part 2. Topic: Life is given for good deeds

Gulyga Arseniy * * * *German classical philosophy

Preface

Chapter first The day before

1. First gap

Gulyga Arseniy
* * * *
German classical philosophy

Chapter first
The day before