Philosophical understanding of society and its history. Philosophical understanding of history Philosophy of the history of philosophy

Introduction

2. Development of philosophical ideas about history (from antiquity to Marxism)

3. The essence of the materialistic understanding of history. Patterns and driving forces of historical development. Methodology of socio-historical knowledge

4. Non-classical concepts of history (O. Spengler, N. Danilevsky, K. Leontiev, D. Toynbee, K. Jaspers)

Conclusion

List of used literature

Excerpts from the text

Modern philosophy of history is a relatively independent area of ​​philosophical knowledge, which is devoted to understanding the qualitative uniqueness of the development of society in its difference from nature.

The term “philosophy of history” was introduced by Voltaire and covered the totality of philosophical reasoning about world history without a special philosophical and theoretical justification for their necessity and legitimacy.

The philosophy of history examines several important problems:

The direction and meaning of history,

Methodological approaches to the typology of society,

Criteria for the periodization of history,

Criteria for the progress of the historical process.

In the philosophy of history there is no unity of opinion on any of the above issues. The points of view are so different that they are rather opposite rather than complementary. Thus, some philosophers recognize historical laws, others deny them. A number of philosophers believe that history has meaning, while others believe that history does not and cannot have meaning.

In the first half of the twentieth century, the time of the emergence of the ideas of existentialism, the subjective-idealistic direction in philosophy, an approach appeared that sought to link the meaning of history with the purpose and meaning of human existence.

Most modern philosophers believe that the historical process does not and cannot have a goal. A person sets a goal for himself and society. In accordance with this goal, he determines the meaning of history.

1. Philosophy of history as part of philosophical knowledge

Philosophy of history is one of the thematic sections of philosophical knowledge and a certain type of philosophical reasoning.

Literature

1. Gubin V.D. Philosophy. – M., 2001. – 331 p.

2. Ermakova E.E. Philosophy. – M., 1999. – 272 p.

3. Brief philosophical encyclopedia. – M., 1994. – 317 p.

4. Marx K., Engels F. Essay. T. 42. – 334 p.

5. Toynbee A. Comprehension of history. - M., 1991. – 324 p.

6. Philosophy of history / Comp. Yu. A. Kimelev. – M., 1995. – 420 p.

7. Philosophy of history by N.Ya. Danilevsky / Bazhov S.I. - M., 1997. – 370 p.

8. Jaspers K. The meaning and purpose of history. - M., 1996. – 340 p.

9. Yakovlev V.P., Kokhanovsky V.P. History of philosophy. – Rostov n/d., 1999. – 576 p.

About work

Price: 1260 rubles

Discipline: " Philosophy»

Topic: " Philosophical understanding of history»

Type: " Abstract»

Volume: 22 * pages

Year: 2009

Sales are fully automatic. The password is issued immediately after completing the purchase procedure. To receive a password for the essay “Philosophical Understanding of History,” make a payment.
Attention!!! Entries may not meet the design requirements of any particular educational institution.
To receive a full-fledged coursework or essay with your requirements, make a new work.

For any questions, please contact us by mail.

Choose a payment method convenient for you

• +4% +10 rubles
• +0.5%
• +4% +10 rubles
• +0.8%

Do people need a historical vision of the world? The question is not simple. Man is a socio-historical creature, created in the course of history. Society has also gone through a difficult history. Therefore, history has always interested people who thought about the questions: who are we, where are we from, what are we for? At the same time, some remained at the stage of stating facts or chronology of events, others went further, trying to understand the general patterns of the historical process.

The ambiguity of such approaches is explained by the fact that the history of people is multifaceted. Firstly, history is the totality of people’s actions, the movement of society in time, a chain of interconnected and interdependent events. This is a real event story. Secondly, history is a description of socially significant events. The dispassionately fixed history interested people as collective memory and at the same time - as a school of education. In this capacity, history interests every person today. Third, from empirical analysis historical facts, as a rule, the problem of the effectiveness of the means of their generalization and interpretation eludes. An empirical researcher uses methodological tools for studying history without their direct preparation, verification and justification. The one-sided empiricism of specialists who gravitate towards facts gives rise to the illusion of immediate reality and the infallibility of controversial conclusions. The real errors of historical illusions are revealed in the scientific cooperation of scientists of different specialties and different generations. Under the pressure of new data, often in a roundabout way, historical researchers approach the understanding of the basis of the study, that is, the verification of the original methodological foundations. Therefore, to solve complex issues knowledge and assessment of the past requires the help of philosophical knowledge, in particular the philosophy of history, the central method of which is the historical method.

Unlike animals, man is a “historical being.” He lives in the flow of events and therefore it is common for a person to think about the connection of times - the connection between “today”, “yesterday” and “tomorrow”. Each of us connects our hopes with the future, memories and regrets with the past, plans and intentions with the present. That is why people are always concerned about the structure, logic and meaning of historical processes. Structure

history is revealed in a system of stages, steps and stages of development of society. There are multi-level, spheral, “box” (“matryoshka”) interpretations of the structure of history. Linear (tape, linear) and pluralistic (parallel-multiple) schemes of the historical process are known. In various periodizations, two, three, five or more stages of the historical process are distinguished. The discrepancy in the interpretation of the structure of history is determined by the choice of historical logic and the basis of periodization, the criteria for identifying historical stages.

The search for the meaning of the historical process is one of the main tasks of philosophical and historical thinking. The term “philosophy of history” was introduced into literary circulation in the 18th century by Voltaire in contrast to the medieval theological philosophy of history. The basic ideas of the philosophy of history arise, however, much earlier. The philosophy of history analyzes what history teaches humanity. It gives a philosophical understanding of history, an interpretation of the integrity and direction of the historical process both as a whole and in the connections of the present, past and future. The philosophy of history develops methods for reproducing the historical process, understanding the structure, meaning, sources and driving forces of historical development.

What unites different historical times and contributes to the understanding of their specific logic? The logic of history is clarified by the degree to which society has achieved the heights of progress and basic socio-historical values: humanity, freedom, self-awareness, happiness, social justice, spiritual harmony and well-being. She gives the meaning of the story. If the history of society loses its meaning, then the lost “connection of times (generations),” disintegration, will pour into our lives in an uncontrollable stream. public life, terror, immoralism, nihilism, barbarism and anarchy. The very fact of the self-preservation of humanity - in history and through history - serves, perhaps, as one of the most significant examples that history has given to humanity. But what is humanity, who represents it and how does it manifest itself in history?

In answering these questions, we turn to the concept of subjects and driving forces of history.

Features of philosophical understanding of history. Formational and civilizational understanding of the historical process.

There is an intermediate area of ​​knowledge, on the border of history and philosophy - philosophy of history (historiosophy). Unlike history, historiosophy is not concerned with the study of specific historical events, their causes and consequences, but with larger questions: does history have meaning? what is the purpose of the story? What are the driving forces of the historical process? Is history a random set of events or does it have a certain pattern?

Many thinkers believed that the course of history is determined by an immaterial spiritual principle, independent of human consciousness. The religious version of the objective-idealistic understanding of history is providentialist the philosophy of history of Aurelius Augustine, outlined in his work “On the City of God.” All history is the implementation of the Divine plan aimed at the triumph of good. All earthly states arise in accordance with the will of God, contribute to the implementation of His plans, and then are destroyed by the will of God. The same applies to the fates of outstanding historical figures. Each event should be viewed from the final point of view - the end of the world and the Last Judgment. It is the Divine plan that makes the historical process meaningful. Augustine was one of the first to propose a linear understanding of history, which affirms the uniqueness and uniqueness of each historical event, contrasting such an understanding of history with the cyclical ideas dominant in antiquity.

A non-religious version of objective-idealistic ideas about history is the philosophy of history of G. Hegel. In his Lectures on the Philosophy of History, Hegel argued that the creator of history is the world spirit, which passes from one people to another. And when the world spirit resides in this people, this people achieves significant success in politics, economics and culture. The world spirit uses peoples, countries and historical figures for its improvement. Hegel counts three historical stages processions of the world spirit: 1. Ancient East, 2. Antiquity, 3. Western Europe. Hegel considers progress in human freedom to be the main meaning of history. In the East only one is free (pharaoh, despot), in the ancient world only a few were free, but in modern Europe the majority are free. Gel puts forward the doctrine of the cunning of the world spirit, which uses outstanding personalities for its own purposes, placing in front of them the desire for enrichment, power, and honor as bait. Wanting to achieve this, historical figures fulfill what was destined by the world spirit. So, having seen Napoleon, Hegel himself admitted that he saw the procession of the world spirit on a white horse. The real results of the activities of outstanding people are far from what they subjectively strive for. When historical figures fulfill the mission entrusted to them by the world spirit, they become unnecessary and quickly disappear from the historical stage.

Many thinkers believed that history depends on and is determined by the consciousness of people. One of the forms of such (subjective-idealistic views) on the course of history is voluntarism, declaring that the course of history as a whole depends on the will of outstanding historical figures. Let's think it would happen Patriotic War 1812, if there had not been the will of Napoleon, and the reforms of Peter 1 without the will of this historical figure. It may seem that the will and desires of historical characters are the main driving factor of history. N.K. Mikhailovsky at the end of the 19th century. put forward theory of "hero and crowd" according to which history is created by lone heroes who carry the crowd along with them personal example. However, opponents of such voluntarism (for example, G.V. Plekhanov) argue that no matter how significant the role of outstanding historical figures is, they cannot fundamentally change the course of history, which is determined by deeper and objective laws. Outstanding figures can only speed up or slow down the course of historical processes, but not change them. So, sooner or later Russia would have joined European civilization, even if Peter 1 had not carried out reforms. Success accompanied Peter not so much because of his will and energy, but because he realized the needs that faced Russia at the corresponding stage of its history. A historical figure who goes against economic and other social laws is doomed to defeat.

Here we can raise the question of the role of chance in history. There has been a joke among historians for several centuries: “If Cleopatra’s nose had been a little shorter, history would have gone differently.” Try to argue or agree with this thesis. Of course, perhaps then Anthony would not have lost the confrontation with Octavian, and would have become the sole ruler of the empire. At the head of Rome there would be completely different people, they would have other advisers, etc. But would this change the global course of history? Most likely not. After all, the crisis of slave relations would have begun regardless of the person sitting on the throne, and the Roman Empire would still have begun to decline and would have become vulnerable to the invasion of barbarians and further destruction.

One of the most prominent opponents of the absolutization of the role of chance in history was L. N. Tolstoy, who criticized, in particular, the opinion of French historians that Napoleon lost Battle of Borodino due to an accidental runny nose.

Another (along with voluntarism) variant of subjective idealistic ideas about history is the doctrine that the course of history is determined by the dissemination of true knowledge, the fight against misconceptions and superstitions. This is exactly how representatives of the Enlightenment reasoned, and a little later many positivists. The Enlightenment people put forward the proposition “Opinions rule the world.” People make decisions based on their ideas about the world. Accordingly, people's opinions should be made reasonable, enlightened, and people (primarily rulers) will make the right decisions that contribute to the good of society. Supporters of this point of view consider the development of knowledge and sciences to be the starting point for the progress of society. But, recognizing the certain role of the progress of knowledge, it should be said that the development of science largely depends on circumstances that are objective in nature, in particular on the level of productive forces and on the method of production.

The materialistic understanding of history implies that the course of history depends on objective material factors that do not depend on the consciousness of people. Materialism recognizes the existence of unchanging historical laws that determine the development of society. Moreover, society has long been considered a completely special reality, radically different from nature. This explained why many philosophers, being materialists when studying nature, remained idealists when considering society.

Geographical and economic determinism can be considered varieties of the materialistic understanding of history. Geographical determinism comes from the decisive influence of geographical factors on the development of society (climate, presence of rivers, size of territory). In particular, climate influences the types of occupations that are possible in a given climate. For example, in the steppes, cattle breeding is possible, but not agriculture. Accordingly, nomadic societies are characterized by instability, since they are not tied to a specific piece of land. Societies founded in river valleys, where agriculture is possible, are more stable, since the farmer cannot leave the area he cultivates unattended. Elements of geographical determinism are noticeable in the views of S. Montesquieu.

Another, more widespread in modern philosophy, type of materialist understanding of history is economic determinism, which is most consistently reflected in Marxism. The development of society, according to Marx, is based on objective laws that do not depend on the consciousness of people.

K. Marx believed that the history of mankind is ultimately determined progressive development productive forces (these include the person himself, tools, objects of labor) and the production relations arising on their basis. The development of society is thus determined primarily by economic factors, which are the basis.

Based on the base, a superstructure arises, generally determined by the nature of production. The superstructure included political, legal, cultural, religious and other relations. It was admitted, however, that the superstructure had a slight inverse influence on the base.

K. Marx postulated that productive forces develop faster than the production relations corresponding to them, which ultimately leads to the destruction of old production relations and the corresponding superstructure to new ones corresponding to the new level of productive forces.

A type of society based on certain relations of production is called a formation by Marx. There are 5 successive formations: 1. Primitive communal, 2. Slaveholding, 3. Feudal, 4. Capitalist, 5. Communist. As a rule, the transition from an old formation to a new one, K. Marx and his followers believed, is accompanied by a revolution. Formational theory asserts the commonality of the historical development path of all countries.

The theory of local civilizations opposes the formational understanding of history . This approach originated in the mid-19th century and became widespread in the 20th century. He opposes the universalistic, formational approach to the history of human development.

According to the theory of local civilizations, there is no unity of world history. The stages of social development that are the same for all humanity, as well as the optimistic theory of progress, are denied. Cultural types, economic and political relations, etc. are different among different peoples. For supporters of this point of view, civilization is not a certain stage or level of development of society (as it was for Morgan, Marx, etc.). By civilization, adherents of this theory understand a certain local (not global) civilization, that is, the culture of a particular people or group of peoples that has reached a certain level.

Russian thinkers of the 19th century are considered the founders of the civilizational approach. Nikolay Yakovlevich Danilevsky(1822 – 1885), whose main work is “Russia and Europe”, and Konstantin Nikolaevich Leontyev(1831 – 1891). In Western European cultural studies of the 20th century, the most influential representatives of the theory of local civilizations were the German thinker Oswald Spengler, who published the book “The Decline of Europe” in 1920 and the English historian and sociologist Arnold Toynbee.

There is no single world history; there are many different socio-cultural communities (local civilizations), which are isolated from each other and develop independently. For example, A. Toynbee in his work “Comprehension of History” identifies 21 civilizations, of which only 7 currently exist (1. Western, 2. Orthodox, 3. Hindu, 4. Chinese, 5. Far Eastern (Korea and Japan), 6. Iranian, 7. Arabic). The remaining 14 (for example, ancient, Babylonian, etc.) ceased to exist. Each of these civilizations is characterized by its own special type of culture, fundamentally different from that present in other civilizations.

Since there is no single history and historical patterns common to all peoples, supporters of the theory of local civilizations categorically oppose the imposition of the norms, values ​​and ideals of one community on everyone else. Therefore, they sharply criticize Eurocentrism. O. Spengler very negatively assessed the usual historical scheme of Eurocentrism (Antiquity - Middle Ages - Modern times) as unacceptable and meaningless for the analysis of other historical regions. In his opinion, Europe, as just one of many historical communities, unjustifiably becomes the center of gravity of the historical system. After all, O. Spengler reasoned, with the same right a Chinese historian could construct a world history in which only a few lines were devoted to the events that took place in Europe (Antiquity, the Renaissance, etc.). Thus, Spengler and other supporters of the theory of local cultures oppose the idea of ​​a single “worldwide” historical process, against the idea of ​​a single line of human evolution.

In this regard, the progressive understanding of the development of society, which dominated in formation theory, is criticized. The history of each community is not continuous progress, but a cycle of existence from its birth to its death. Each civilization is considered by analogy with biological organism, going from childhood to maturity, old age and death. The death of every civilization is an irreversible and inevitable process. And it is not necessary that the society that arises in the place of the deceased will be more perfect than him. It will just be different, completely special. Naturally, the idea of ​​progress considered from such a position will seem absurd.

Plan:

1) Definition of the concept of history;

2) The specificity of historical sciences and their difference from the natural sciences;

3) The main problems of the philosophy of history:

A) The problem of models of the historical process;

B) The problem of the subject of history;

C) The problem of the unity of the basis of history.

1. Common to many definitions of history is the development of something.
The broadest definition is the history of the Universe.

· Story solar system;

· History of planet Earth. Initially, the Earth was cold, subsequently it warmed up, then it became covered with water, after which land surfaces gradually began to form on it.

· History of the origin and development of life on Earth. At first, life originated in water in the form of the simplest forms, then they became more complex - multicellular plants and all kinds of water inhabitants appeared. After some time, land inhabitants appear.

· History of the development of man as a biological species.

· History of cultural human society. This period is shorter than the previous ones. The history of a cultural human society begins from the moment when language, writing and everything that is called culture appears.

· History of individual cultures and a separate state.

· The life story of an individual. The narrowest possible period, since it covers only the biography of an individual person.

If desired, this list can be continued. For example, this is followed by a medical history (it is shorter than a biography of an individual), a history of a particular subject, and so on.

From the above we can conclude that the broadest, in the understanding of history, is the history of the Universe, and the narrowest is the history of an individual.

2. Basic historical sciences: cultural studies, political science, literary studies, linguistics, sociology, economics, art criticism.

Distinctive features of historical sciences from natural sciences:

1) The subject of historical sciences is man (society, culture). In turn, the subject of natural sciences is living and inanimate nature, i.e., that which arose without human influence.

2) B natural sciences the laws of nature are revealed - these are those characteristics that always repeat under certain conditions. Thus, if there is necessary conditions, then these laws will be implemented unquestioningly. In historical sciences, as a rule, there are no laws, there are only patterns.

Pattern is a characteristic that may or may not occur when certain conditions are met. Unlike a regularity, a law is always implemented when the required conditions are met.

What is the pattern of historical sciences connected with? This is due to the fact that the subject of historical sciences is characterized by a maximum degree of freedom, so it is relatively difficult to calculate any law about its behavior.

Human behavior is determined by instinct, therefore, in the same situation, the behavior of society and individual extremely difficult to predict. Consequently, identifying the law in the historical sciences is extremely difficult and almost impossible.

3) In natural sciences, the main method of testing (confirming) knowledge is experiment. In the historical sciences it is impossible or very limited.

Reasons for the impossibility of the experiment:

· Moral criteria prevent experiments on humans, since the outcomes of experiments can be unpredictable and lead to catastrophic consequences.

· "Facade effect". It lies in the fact that when a person knows that an experiment is being conducted on him, he begins to behave in a different way: his behavior changes and the result becomes unreliable.

Instead of experiment, interpretation plays a key role in the historical sciences.

Interpretation- this is the interpretation of a phenomenon in predetermined certain positions.

If history, for example, adheres to socialist views, then a particular event will be viewed from the point of view of socialist views; if history adheres to liberal-democratic views, then a certain event will be viewed through the prism of liberal-democratic positions. There is one event, but interpretations can be very different. They will depend on the perspectives through which the event is viewed. Views can be very different: religious, scientific, philosophical, political, etc.

The question arises: which interpretation will be true? None! The true interpretation is impossible to determine.

For example, in Soviet literature textbooks you can read that all Russian poets and writers fought capitalism, in modern textbooks something completely different is written - there are different interpretations everywhere and none of them is true.
But from all interpretations one can single out dominant is an interpretation that corresponds to the prevailing political regime.

For example, in the Soviet Union the dominant interpretation was that of Marxism-Leninism. This interpretation is not true, it is simply dominant, generally accepted and most appropriate for a given era (given time).

3. If the historical sciences strive to identify the patterns of development of certain events in social and historical life, then the philosophy of history strives to identify the ultimate foundations (first principles) of history.

From the point of view of the philosophy of history, history is a fundamental way of human existence (human existence).

Only man has a history. An animal cannot remember what happened in the past, since it does not have historical memory. An animal's historical memory is replaced by instincts; therefore, animals have no history. Man, on the contrary, has historical memory and this is not accidental. All this is due to the fact that humans have much weaker instincts than animals, so cultural information is needed, which in principle is not transmitted at all. It can only be inherited through traditions, and traditions can only be transmitted through historical memory.
From the above we can conclude that if there is no historical memory, then there will be no traditions. If there are no traditions, then the culture will disappear as quickly as possible. Man will return to the animal stage: he will live only according to instincts, trying to satisfy only natural needs.
Therefore, culture is a fundamental way of human existence. The man is cultured person, because it has a history, there are traditions that support its culture.

The main problems of philosophical history:

1) The problem of the foundation of history: what is the ultimate foundation of history as a way of human existence? What is historical development for humans?
The answers can be very different:

· In ancient philosophy it was argued that history is governed by chance. Historical events happen by chance: there are certain random circumstances that occur at the behest of the Gods (Zeus, Athena, etc.)

An example of such an accident is the Trojan War. According to the version of the folk tale, at the wedding of Peleus and Thetis, all the Olympian gods were invited to honor them, except for the goddess of discord Eris; this last goddess, offended by the neglect shown to her, threw among the feasting people a golden apple with the inscription: “To the most beautiful.” A dispute ensued between Hera, Athena and Aphrodite. They asked Zeus to judge them. But he did not want to give preference to one of them, because he considered Aphrodite the most beautiful, but Hera was his wife, and Athena was his daughter. Then he gave justice to Paris.

Paris gave preference to the goddess of love, because she promised him the love of the most beautiful woman in the world, the wife of King Menelaus Helen. Paris sailed to Sparta on a ship built by Pherekles. Menelaus warmly received the guest, but was forced to sail to Crete to bury his grandfather Katreus. Paris seduced Helen, and she sailed with him, taking with her the treasures of Menelaus and the slaves Ephra and Clymene. On the way they visited Sidon.

The abduction of Helen was the closest pretext to declaring war on the people of Paris. Having decided to take revenge on the offender, Menelaus and his brother Agamemnon (Atrides) travel around the Greek kings and persuade them to participate in the campaign against the Trojans.
This major historical event - the ten-year war - is the choice of a young man in preference to one of the three goddesses.
This attitude to history is associated with the metaphysics of antiquity, that is, with the fact that the ancient Greeks preferred the formation of the permanent and eternal.

· In the Middle Ages, God was the basis of history. History is no longer a chaotic random accumulation of events, but a plan - the principle of providentialism. According to this principle, history has a definite plan, pre-established by God. General overview This plan is aimed at the fact that God will save all the righteous and punish all sinners. This is where the story ends. The most important thing in this principle is that God predetermines the events of history.

· In modern times, the basis for the development of history, in accordance with the metaphysics of things, becomes the human mind: the higher mind becomes the true basis of history. From Hegel's point of view, history is nothing more than the constant progress of the absolute higher mind (absolute spirit). Dialectically, it occurs in three stages:
a) Nobody recognizes anyone;
b) The relationship of slavery and domination is established: a class of domination and a class of slaves are distinguished;

c) At the third stage, the slave is freed.

In modern times, in connection with the transition to a new metaphysics, the basis of history becomes something chaotic and irrational. For example, for Nietzsche it will be the will to power. Another example is psychoanalysis: in it historical events are a manifestation of the activity of the unconscious state. In particular, psychoanalysts explain the events of the Second World War as a set of destructive unconscious decisions.

Models of the historical process:

1. Linear. According to this model, the historical process is a single continuous line that has a common beginning and end.

Rice. 1 " Linear model historical process"

Accordingly, history has a goal: consistent development aimed at achieving some goal (consistent movement towards the end).
During the achievement of this goal, several various stages(periods), but they are all links of one chain.

The most important characteristic of the linear model is that it covers all of humanity, all cultures at once. All humanity has a common beginning, all humanity has a common goal and all humanity has general concepts. Despite ethnic and cultural differences, all people are moving towards the same goal. The history of all people is a single consistent process of development.
The most striking example is the religious (Christian) model. According to this model, the origin of the historical movement is the creation of man. The first point is the fall of Adam and Eve, and the end point is the Righteous Judgment (the salvation of all the righteous and the punishment of all sinners) and the end of the world. After this there will be no story: it will end.

Another example is the Marxist view of history. Starting point, according to the concept of Karl Marx, is a primitive communal system. The absence of class divisions is the starting point of the Marxist concept of history. The end point is communism.

2. Cyclic model of the historical process. The main point of this model is the absence of a single world history: there is no history of mankind. Instead of the history of mankind, there are separate histories of individual cultures, that is, each culture, each civilization has its own a separate story and they are not related to each other - they have nothing in common.

Rice. 2 “Cyclic model of the historical process”

But at the same time, every culture, every history has something in common - this is that they go through a certain cycle in their development. This cycle is similar to the development cycle of a living organism and consists of the following stages:

ü Birth;

ü Maturation;

ü Maturity (flourishing);

ü Aging;

ü Death.

Every culture is born, matures, reaches its peak, ages and dies. Once a culture dies, it is not reborn.
A sign of the youth of a culture is its religious worldview. A sign of maturity is the flowering of art: religion fades into the background, and art reaches extraordinary strength and full flowering. A sign of aging (decline) is the predominance of scientific and ethnic knowledge: science and technology come to the fore.

Examples of crops that have completely gone through this cycle are Ancient Egypt, Ancient Rome, Ancient Babylon, Ancient Greece etc.

There are crops that reach their maturity, but do not die, but are preserved. An example of such a culture is China. China is an ancient civilization, it has reached its peak stage and at this stage exists, although it should have died, according to the cycle discussed above.

The life cycle of a culture lasts approximately a thousand years (“plus or minus” a century).
One of the main representatives early model is Oswald Arnold Gottfried Spengler.

Rice. 3 "Oswald Arnold Gottfried Spengler"

Main job Spengler's "The Decline of Europe" evokes an idea of ​​history.
Once upon a time in ancient times, Europe was a “golden” culture. The period of maturity of Europe is renaissance era This is the era when art reaches its maximum development. Appears large number world-famous artists and composers such as Leonardo da Vinci, Sandro Botticelli, Ludwig Van Beethoven and many others.
This was the case until the 19th century. In the 19th century, Europe begins to age: art is gradually degrading, and science is taking its place. In Europe there is no longer any development of cultural potential; it is completely immersed in science. For recent years life of Europe, artists and composers never appeared who could be put on a par with the great figures of past centuries. Instead, science and technology are developing widely.
Unlike Europe, Russia is at the stage of youth. All Russian art is an imitation of the West, which is at the stage of aging. Lev Nikolaevich Tolstoy, Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky and many other poets, writers, artists and composers only imitated the West, and did not create their own culture. Russian art did not yet exist. However, this has its advantages: when the death of European culture occurs, Russia will have its own culture flourishing. This will happen in a few generations.

3. Synergistic. According to this model, history is a constant alternation of stages of order and chaos. At the same time, chaos plays a positive role: it is the driving factor in the development of history.

What is chaos from a synergetic point of view? Chaos is not just a lack of order (disorder), it represents the presence of many choices and orders. In turn, order– this is one choice (one direction).
By choosing one path, we find order. However, according to the synergetic model, order quickly gives way to chaos. Then chaos again gives way to order and so on ad infinitum.

Rice. 4 “Synergetic model of the historical process”

History opens up to the possibility of choice; this is only possible in a state of chaos.

2) The problem of the subject of history. It comes down to the question “what does history do?”
There are two possible answers to this question (two concepts):

A) Voluntarism. According to extreme voluntarism, history is made by a single strong individual: a strong, outstanding person makes history.
Examples of outstanding personalities are: famous people, like Napoleon, Adolf Hitler, Alexander the Great, Peter I.

The negative aspect of extreme voluntarism is that all of humanity is viewed as a herd that needs a leader (a strong personality). All people do not have their own opinion, they are only guided by the instructions of another (more powerful) person.
For example, Napoleon appeared and led France in one direction, Hitler appeared and led France in the other direction.

Moderate voluntarism asserts that history is created not by an individual, but by an entire people. An individual is only a representative of the will of the people. That is, if we consider Napoleon from this point of view, he is not the leader of the entire people, but only a representative of the will of the people.

B) Fatalism (from Latin fatalis - predetermined by fate, fatal). According to this concept, man does not play any role in history; history develops on its own. People are just pawns and pieces in this game.

| 2 |

Philosophy of history is one of the thematic sections of philosophical knowledge and a certain type of philosophical reasoning. At the same time, it cannot be classified as one of the spheres of philosophical knowledge or philosophical disciplines that form the foundation of philosophy and exist as long as philosophy itself, such as ontology, theory of knowledge or ethics. Rather, the philosophy of history is characterized by a relative short-term existence as a field of philosophical knowledge, equal in rights with basic forms. Nevertheless, the philosophy of history played a very important role significant role in the history of European philosophy, in the history of theoretical and artistic culture, and in some respects - in social history in general. In this regard, we note only some of the most important circumstances.

The philosophy of history has always been in a mutually conditioning relationship with historical consciousness. The very existence of a philosophy of history is unthinkable outside the context of historical consciousness. At the same time, the philosophical understanding of history had a largely formative impact on historical consciousness and, accordingly, on socio-historical life itself.

Further, it should be emphasized that in recent centuries the philosophy of history has invariably accumulated a variety of social ideologies. In addition, for many centuries the destinies of the philosophy of history were closely intertwined with the destinies of Christian theology, and without taking this circumstance into account, the history of Christian theology will inevitably be incomplete.

The philosophy of history, finally, had a significant influence on the process of formation of modern social scientific knowledge, in particular on the process of formulation of sociological theory.

To establish a philosophy of history, several conditions must be met. Firstly, social life must be fluid and changeable. Secondly, historical consciousness must take shape as a certain reflex of a mobile and qualitatively changeable social life. Thirdly, there must be a philosophy that has the spiritual and intellectual resources for philosophical thematization and comprehension of history.

All these and a number of other very significant conditions, which will be discussed below, were fully met within the framework of European culture. Consequently, we can rightfully talk only about the European philosophy of history. In general, the philosophy of history cannot be considered a philosophical constant in the sense that where there is more or less formed philosophical and theoretical activity, there will certainly be philosophical reflection regarding the historical process, the historicity of the present, the historicity of individual human existence, etc. Therefore, this anthology is dedicated to European, or more precisely Western European, philosophy of history.

European civilization has developed three main forms theoretical attitude to history - theology of history, philosophy of history and scientific historiography. You should not arrange them, as is sometimes done, in chronological order. These three forms of theoretical comprehension of history do not line up in a sequence of continuity, and none of them fully replaces the others. Rather, it makes sense to say that either the theology of history, or the philosophy of history, or scientific historiography in different eras determines the horizon of the theoretical understanding of history. At the same time, the form of theoretical attitude to history that prevails in a certain era is correlated in one way or another with other forms, even if such a correlation does not take on a clearly expressed character or if these others are present only in a rudimentary form.

Theology of history, philosophy of history and scientific historiography as forms of theoretical attitude to history are diversely connected with various ideological and worldview formations. Such formations, as a rule, include certain pictures of the historical process, appeals to one’s own past, calls for creating the future, etc. All this is intended to serve primarily as a means of historical legitimization of the activities of the corresponding collective social subject.

The subject of philosophy of history is the historical dimension of human existence. The object of philosophical consideration becomes one or another segment of the historical life of mankind or world history generally. A special area is formed by the philosophical study of the boundaries, possibilities and methods of historical knowledge in its various forms, primarily the study of scientific, historiographical and philosophical knowledge of history. In this case, philosophy takes on the functions of methodological reflection regarding historical knowledge in its theoretical forms. Hence the division of philosophy of history into two varieties, which has been accepted in the last century. The first carries out philosophical thematization, philosophical research and understanding of the historical process as a certain existential sphere, an objective given, as one of the most important, if not the most important, context of human existence. Such a philosophy of history, most vividly and fully embodied in classical examples, which had a clear predominance in the history of the existence of this philosophical discipline, is usually called material, or substantial philosophy of history. This name is intended to separate the first type of philosophy of history from the second, associated with reflection on the nature of historical knowledge, especially theoretical ways of comprehending history, and accordingly designated as formal or reflective.

This anthology presents works or excerpts from works that develop the problems of material, or substantial, philosophy of history. In this regard, in this article we will briefly consider the philosophical and historical issues of this plan.

Material philosophy of history strives to solve several basic philosophical and theoretical problems. One of them is the establishment of the main causes and factors of history as such or history as a whole. Indicating such structural moments allows, on the one hand, to present history as a special sphere endowed with its own existential specificity, and on the other, to show its structure, orderliness and, accordingly, depict it as something understandable or even rational.

The solution to this problem is, as a rule, associated with the establishment of dominance in history by universalities of one kind or another. Comprehension of such universalities as the laws of history as a whole or the laws of individual stages, stages, such as fundamental factors(natural, biological, etc.), which determine sociogenesis and social dynamics, is understood as the comprehension of the essential, i.e. the main and determining content of history.

The main constitutive feature of this approach to the goals of the philosophy of history is the focus on some kind of essential-ongological comprehension of historical life, this is always an ontological conceptualization of its primary sources, fundamental structures, final or highest driving forces. The identification of such a task for the philosophy of history as the main one usually served as a justification for its claims to theoretical status.

Another task of the philosophy of history is dictated by the desire to implement some kind of chronological and procedural division of historical life. The division of history into eras, stages, stages and other segments that are relatively closed in content allows us to depict it as an ordered process, each period of time of which is largely determined by the previous ones and, in turn, plays a certain, if not a determining role in what the subsequent ones will be like. times, what the future will be like.

The next task is to identify some general form or “figures” of the course of history. The statement that history takes the forms of line, circle, spiral and others is intended, first of all, to offer some solution to the problem of the relationship between the general content of history and specific and diverse historical phenomena. This statement also allows us to indicate the nature of the relationship between the past, present and future. This may be a linearly directed unfolding, in which times cannot repeat each other; it can be a historical movement in a circle or cyclical, not bringing with it any fundamental novelty; this may be a spiral-shaped flow of historical life, meaning a certain combination of linear and circular movement, etc.

As if the final task of philosophical comprehension of history can be considered attempts to identify the “meaning of history.”

The semantic-theoretical attitude to history is always limited to two extreme positions. The first is to posit an objective, comprehensive historical meaning. Theorizing about such meaning must be reconstructive or reflective. The historical life of an individual is a stay or activity in the semantic sphere that embraces him.

The meaning of history is seen in the implementation of certain principles, ideas, essences or values. Such objectively existing universalities constitute the historical life of mankind into an organized, orderly whole, transparent to philosophical reflection. This reflection itself, discerning and affirming the meaning of historical life, serves either the goals of a more adequate and complete understanding of the divine plan for man and his history, or the goals of the enlightened liberation of humanity, the full realization of the “essence of man,” the embodiment of the inexhaustible creative and constructive possibilities of humanity.