Упражнения по теме Conceptualization of a person in the context of science in the XXI century / Осмысление человека в контексте науки в 21 веке

1. Read the text and do some exercises below.

Man is the only creature on the planet capable of asking himself the questions “What am I?”, “Why am I here?” These questions have occupied man since ancient times. Every nation has a mythology that explains the structure of the world and a person’s place in it. However, these questions became truly philosophical only in the era of antiquity, when philosophy itself as a science originated in ancient Greek cities.

Ancient philosophy formed a special concept in the interpretation of nature and man – cosmocentrism – the understanding of the cosmos as a single commensurate whole, possessing a certain spiritual principle, world mind or, in the words of Heraclitus, the beginning of existence – world fire, which is also the soul and mind (logos). In accordance with this, the nature of man was also interpreted as a representative of microcosmism, a completely unique creature open to the world. He was thought as a part of the cosmos, a certain unified supertemporal “order” and “structure” of being (nature), as a “small world”, the microcosm is a reflection and symbol of the Universe, the macrocosm, interpreted as a living spiritualized organism living “according to nature” and “listening” the logo. Since the classical period, the problem of man has been pushed to the fore. Man, of course, was considered as a natural being, but endowed with a special rare property manifested in himself. He was not limited to the fact that he lives, only performing his biological functions, but was endowed with a choice in determining the ways of thinking and making decisions. This made it possible for a person to exist in the form of joint life, cooperation - the implementation of common affairs.

It was characteristic of medieval philosophy to consider questions about the nature of man in accordance with the understanding of God. Medieval philosophers gave various and more numerous answers to the question about the essence of man than representatives of ancient philosophy. But the two premises of these answers remained common. First, man was viewed as “the image and likeness of God.” This revelation during the Middle Ages was not subject to doubt. Secondly, the followers of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle associated the comprehension of human essence with the understanding of man as a “rational animal”, a living being endowed with spirit, reason (“rational soul”) and the ability for social life. Within the framework of medieval philosophy, the concept of man was formed as the crown of creation, the king of nature. However, the “cliché” that man is the image and likeness of God made us think about which of the Divine properties make up the essence of man. From this position, within the framework of Christian traditions, a clearly substantiated concept was developed: God endowed man with reason and free will, the ability to reason and distinguish between good and evil. This is the essence of man, the image of God in him. God endowed man with a body and an animal soul as a link with nature, over which he is called to reign.

The philosophy of the Renaissance was based on humanistic approaches and therefore was anthropocentric, considering the problem of man as a self-valuable being and through the prism of this – understanding the world. Philosophers linked the freedom of a person, the meaning of his life with his own inner activity, creative activity, which acted as the main factor in the self-realization of the individual, individualization, imbued with the pathos of independence, completeness, autonomy of man, his unlimited creative possibilities.

Western European philosophy of the 17th century considered mainly the problem of cognition, which came to the fore. The development of the problem led to the emergence of two opposite cognitive concepts: empiricism and rationalism. The problem of man, his cognitive ability and freedom during this period was solved with the help of a rationalistic

attitude. French philosophy of the 18th century considered it also from the standpoint of rationalism. In this case, the body was considered as an automaton, a machine, common to both man and animal, and the soul was identified with consciousness, that is, from the point of view of Franklin, man was defined as “an animal that produces tools.”

Questions about the essence, the essential structure of man, his relationship to nature, the micro-society, society as a whole, common activities, social postulates of his existence poured into separate philosophical doctrines, which were then integrated into a special study devoted to human problems – anthropology. The doctrine of man should help people find such a “human nature” that is characteristic of all people. This requires more than just science. It is necessary “to form such a society, which is desirable, so that as many as possible, as easily and surely as possible come to this.” That is, a person was thought of as a rational, social being, striving for communication and cooperation with other people. People who live in accordance with the “principles of reason”, in the deepest sense of the word, are one, similar to each other. Therefore, they constantly strive for mutual communication, and in reality, the situation is such that “the common cohabitation of people arises much more convenience than harm” with mutual assistance they can much more easily “satisfy their needs and only by united forces can they avoid dangers.” A unified systematic theory of man is, unfortunately, still an impossible task, but, nevertheless, there are many attempts to solve it in various fields. In modern anthropology, a number of trends are visible, among which the leading role belongs to German philosophical thought:

1) culturological direction, considering a person as a subject of spiritual activity, creator of culture, bearer of socially significant consciousness;

2) religious and philosophical direction, characterized by the interpretation of man in the traditions of idealistic metaphysics (spirit, eternity);

3) biological and anthropological direction, revealing and seeing the difference between humans and animals, even in elementary combinations of perception and movement.

In the first half of the 20th century, philosophy was dominated by the point of view that considers a person in terms of the relationship between personality and society. That is, the essence of a person was presented as a set of social relations, an element of productive forces, a product of anthroposociogenesis. And only later, with the emergence of new disciplines and teachings about man (genetics, ergonomics, differential psychophysiology, etc.), was the beginning of a comprehensive, integrative, activity-based approach to the study of man. In the highest, most “perfect forms of creative work”, reflecting the multifaceted essence of man, find “dual expression and development of mental strength, intentions, feelings of personality”; these different moments, or sides, not coinciding, but “passing into each other and combining with each other,” again form a “integral unity”.

So, a person has thinking and articulate speech, can reflect on his past, critically assessing it, and think about the future, making plans. He is capable of conscious purposeful creative activity, models his behavior and can choose various social roles. He has a predictive ability, i.e. the ability to foresee the consequences of their actions, the nature and direction of the development of natural processes; expresses a value attitude towards reality.

In the course of his activity, a person transforms the surrounding reality, creates the material and spiritual benefits and values he needs, is able to make tools of labor and use them as a means of producing material goods. A person reproduces not only his biological, but also social essence and therefore must satisfy not only his material, but also spiritual needs. The satisfaction of spiritual needs is associated with the formation of the inner (spiritual) world of a person.

a. Using diagrams or diagrams depict how philosophers of different eras understood a person.

b. Read the following sources

(https://www.ects.ru/images/552/File/kopspekt_lektsij_po_filosofii_xavrak.pdf; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_anthropology) and outline the range of issues that modern philosophy and science raises about humans. Present the results in the form of a diagram.

Scientific knowledge carries with it a scientific picture of the world, ways of cognition, evaluation, acceptance and rejection of knowledge. Remembering that a worldview is a person’s idea of the world and his place in it, one has to reckon with the possibility of anthropocentrism and even subjectivity. The man explains and chooses a picture of the world, in particular, decides to what extent one can trust the scientific picture of the world.

From the point of view of scientific systems analysis, all goals considered as the meaning of life form a set of all possible goals. These goals can be compared with each other, which allow us to rank all goals in sequence. The goal that will have the greatest weight can claim to be the true meaning of life.

In practice, the result of such modeling is the theory that the meaning of life is to slow down the rate of entropy growth. If with an increase in entropy in the Universe, life will disappear eventually, then the meaning is actions to postpone this moment or, like utopia, to completely prevent the disappearance of life.

с. What sciences study human? Complete the diagram.

2.Watch these TED-videos:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILDy6kYU-xQ&list=PLJicmE8fK0EiQLKEhNM8qJL8ExHwQZh_0&index=1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MASBIB7zPo4&list=PLJicmE8fK0Ei7nZRhCz2zjNgt-NYPUk1a&index=33

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmxlcJFTaYU&list=PLJicmE8fK0EiQLKEhNM8qJL8ExHwQZh_0&index=7

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHwVyplU3Pg&list=PLJicmE8fK0EiQLKEhNM8qJL8ExHwQZh_0&index=11

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DWnvx1NYUA&list=PLJicmE8fK0EiQLKEhNM8qJL8ExHwQZh_0&index=29

Answer the questions:

- How does Descartes' dictum undoubtedly prove our existence?

- How does Plutarch’s logical paradox help answer the question “Who am I?”

- What proves the complex nature of our consciousness and its connection with the physical body?

- What experiment can demonstrate that our self lies in the connection between the physical body and the mind?

1