2 Answers

  1. Different answers are probably possible here, since the “new time” is, after all, several centuries and a large number of countries where philosophy has developed – with its own accents, key questions and discussions.

    And yet, it seems that it is not a stretch to say that what is characteristic of modern times is that the problem of cognition, i.e., its sources, the limits of possible knowledge, and the methods of obtaining it (how do we know something about the world? what can and can't we know? how can we produce new reliable knowledge?).

    From Cartesian “Reasoning on Method” to Kant's “Critique of Pure Reason” and further to the ideas of logical positivism (the Vienna Circle, etc.) and its critics (see Quine's “Two Dogmas of Empiricism”), the problem of knowledge remained at the center of discussions, laying the foundation for discussion of other issues.

  2. The central problem of philosophy is the same for all time: what is primary-matter or consciousness? Bourgeois philosophers keep silent about this problem, passing on religious variants supposedly passed down to us from our ancestors. As long as there is an exploitative society, the answer will be class-based. Consciousness is primary for the bourgeoisie, matter is primary for the workers, peasants, and the working (non-creative) intelligentsia.

Leave a Reply

8 Answers

  1. To answer this question, it is necessary to take into account that the peculiarity of the problems that philosophical thought was engaged in in the Modern era has as its premise the peculiarity of solving the problem of cognition of a single philosophical subject in Antiquity.

    A new epoch in the course of the history of philosophy means that there is a significant change in the way of thinking of the subject of philosophy and a change in the single subject itself.

    In its truth, the object of philosophy is the universal unity of being and thinking. But this definition will become clear and will receive its proof only at the end of the history of philosophy.

    So, from this result, we can say that in the Ancient era this universal unity of being and thinking necessarily appears as an immediate one. This means that in Antiquity the unity of being and thinking is such that there is no distinction between being and thinking, form and content, subjectivity and objectivity. There is no movement of form development separate from content development. The philosopher thinks what IS, and there is what is thought. There is being and thinking, but it is impossible to distinguish which of them is which.

    But the form of immediacy or indistinguishability of thinking and being does not exhaust all the universal content. Therefore, the process of cognition goes further, and the object takes on a new form.

    In the New Epoch, the universal unity of being and thinking is revealed in a new form as reflective or in the form of a relation. Being and thinking begin to reveal themselves as different, i.e., they reveal their own definiteness in order to act in relation to each other.

    What does it mean to reveal one's own definiteness? This means that the independence of form and content, the independence of thinking and being, the independence of subjectivity and objectivity in relation to each other are affirmed.

    Since philosophical thought begins with the distinction between being and thinking, the main problem of the Modern era is the problem of finding the unity of being and thinking. On the one hand, this is a problem of the method, and on the other hand, it is the knowledge of a new subject.

    And the individual results of philosophers in solving this problem constitute the entire palette of solutions, which was expressed in a vivid confrontation between empiricism and metaphysics, and ended with Kant's critical philosophy. What opened the way for the third epoch, the Newest, in the history of philosophy.

    Since being and thinking, having exhausted the definiteness of their immediacy, began to reveal the definiteness of their mediated relation, as a consequence, in the knowledge of the philosophical subject, it became possible to go in two ways: from being to thinking and from thinking to being. This was expressed by two branches of philosophical thought: empiricism and metaphysics.

    The most prominent representatives of empiricism: Fr. Bacon and J.. Locke. Metaphysicians: R. Descartes, B. Spinoza, V. Leibniz.

    These lines of thought differ in their opposite relation to the source of our knowledge:

    • empiricism – there is nothing in thinking that is not present in feeling.
    • metaphysics – there is nothing in feeling that is not present in thinking.

    That is, empiricists see the unity of being and thinking in being, and metaphysicians-in thinking.

    Both extremes are not true, that is, they cannot give a universal unity, it always remains only special. This is what Kant showed in his critical philosophy.

    In experience, we do not have the Universal, because we are dealing only with the multitude of the individual. But in metaphysical categories, we do not have anything in common, but only our subjective abstractions.

    Philosophical thought continued its journey in the knowledge of a single philosophical subject in German classical philosophy.

  2. Existence, being, life

    The reason for writing this text is the lack of definitions (unambiguous) concepts: being, being, life, truth, God, man, love.

    I ask people who agree with my definitions to provide a link to the text or quote it without restrictions.

    You don't have to specify the authorship, because I don't consider myself an author …


    No one puts new wine into old wineskins; otherwise the new wine will burst the wineskins, and the wine will run out, and the wineskins will be lost; but the new wine must be put into new wineskins.

    (Mark 2: 22).

    God created the world as a home for man in order for man to build a home for God in his heart (Masha K. 4.5 years old)


    Entity – information.

    Being is an exchange of information.

    Life is the being of Truth.

    Truth-God is Love.

    Being (God) is a Person Who Embodies the Truth in life.

    Personality – self-consciousness and will.

    The goal of a person's life is to extend it into eternity.

    The meaning of a person's life is the Embodiment of Truth.

    Man is a way of thinking and a semblance of Divine relations, the rational will of eternity.

    God needs man, and man needs God in order to LIVE!

    The horror of non-existence is the driving force of man's quest for eternal life.

    The primordial existence of information in the form of ideas, the existence of reason and LIFE as the rational existence of one's own essence-this is the PATH of a self-aware PERSON.

    At its core, history is a narrative about God and His Word (Truth=God is Love), as well as the true meaning of life.

    The uniqueness of Truth ensures the eternity of life.

    God creates Truth in His Mind and treats it with Love. The essence of God is Love.

    This is NOT about the” nature ” of God … This is the content of His original self-determination, His Rational Will. But God reveals His essence ONLY through FAITH in the Truth=God is Love. This Is His Personal Revelation, The Epiphany.

    From a different understanding of the meaning of words come all sorts of nonsense, but God in the Holy Spirit Gives birth to the spirit of understanding the Truth in a person. If a person does not understand this, then he will not understand the difference between nature as such (the created environment) and the Essence of God, will not accept His Love, will not be born into eternal life.

    The Manifestation of God is Threefold:

    As the Father He creates the world;

    As the Son, He is made man in the world He created by His Word;

    How the Holy Spirit works in the souls of men, giving birth to the spirit of understanding the Truth from His Spirit.

    Life is realized by God as a way of eternal existence of Truth, as the Embodiment of an Ideal Idea (God is Love), as a CO-creation of His Image and Likeness in order to have someone to love.

    Life as the being of Truth is also the main content of human life, which only in unity with God finds the meaning of co-existence as such.

    Life as a Path to Truth is formed from two sides:

    materialization of the ideal and idealization of the material, which at the” meeting point ” give a sense of True CO-existence (CO – creativity) – communication in the Holy Spirit and leave a memory of themselves as a conscious meaning of Life as the Embodiment of Subject-subject relations: God is man, Love is love. Thus, real life becomes a subjective reality for God and man.

    God is a Person-Jesus Christ, Who brings the Truth to life by His Will.

    A person becomes a Christian person, living according to the Will of God by His Word (Truth) and (making Him human) partaking of the Life of God.

    Participation in the life of God is human happiness – the joy of being.

    If you think about it, then the bread of the Eucharist can be likened to the unity of form and content, and wine – to the content that has NO form. If we liken our soul (created by God) to the form of content that has NO content, and wine to the Truth, then communion of bread and wine is the acquisition by the Holy Spirit of form, and the form of the spirit of Truth, which defines a person as a soul in which the Word of God lives, born in it by God according to human FAITH.

    You can also remember that a pot of clay is necessary so that what is poured into it does not disappear and takes shape.

    ONLY the existence of the spirit of understanding the Truth in our consciousness determines a person as a subject of relations to the Truth, and indeed our entire real life.

    And ONLY our love, our personal relationship to Jesus Christ, makes us the people for whom God created the universe, who are able to build a home for the Word of God in their soul.

    As we approach God in our way of thinking and similar relationships, people also become closer to each other, forming the Church of Christ (which will not be “overcome by the gates of hell”) – a community of the living.

  3. Philosophy answers the question: what is the world and what is the place of man in this world? Philosophy is preoccupied with the question: does God need to order the world? Yes, you do.

  4. The philosophical question is posed differently in different periods, and it is never possible to predict what limitations are implicitly behind its formulation. Modern philosophy is most concerned with the question: does something exist independently of us? Are we dependent on something else?


    Modern philosophy is absolutely incompetent, stupid, stupid, fruitless, false…

    Philosophy has not yet determined its place of service to humanity.

    The most important task of philosophy is the role of the lookout for developing humanity.

    Philosophers! Damn it! Philosophers are verbiage!

    Humanity warps,groans, rushes in different directions, gives birth to new ideas and rules of its existence, and you, bastards, solve the problem – Which is primarily Subjectivism or Objectivism.

    You bastards should be dispersed. To study philosophy after nine hours of work at the machine or on construction sites. Then you'd be of some use.”

    Philosophers! you owe a great debt to humanity, You should be driven into the taiga, the forest should be cut down with axes.

    Philosophers! You are guilty of a great deal of verbiage.

    MINISTRY OF EDUCATION (what to do and how to do it) engage with philosophers from the moment you read this article.

  6. The central problem in the philosophy of modern times, I believe, is to correctly understand the psychology of a person at this time.there are a lot of significant events and you need to understand them correctly and adapt to this life and be needed in this new time

  7. All the same, and so it is clear. Kant has a work called The Critique of Pure Reason. As the same Wikipedia writes:

    The key issue of “Criticism” is the study of the cognitive potential of the mind, in isolation from the knowledge obtained by empirical (experimental) means.

    Still, it seems simple.

  8. In the problems of the New Age, we can conditionally distinguish between a critical and a positive program. The critical program is associated with the need for a radical restructuring of the thinking apparatus. In fact, the scientific revolution would be impossible without a revolution in thinking. To create new ways of thinking, you need to get rid of the old ones. The old methods were set by scholasticism, and therefore scholasticism was replaced. How did scholasticism hinder the development of scientific thinking? Let us recall that the main feature of scholasticism is dogmatism, that is, dogmatism. thinking in search of answers to a question turns to the text, not to experience. Justification is given through a reference to authority, which does not guarantee us the reliability of the result (which is why Pascal says that science should not be based on authority). In addition, theology was based on teleological (goal) justification, and science on deterministic (causal), the idea of a goal located in the object itself does not give anything to scientific research and leads to religion. It is precisely in connection with the restructuring of thinking that skeptical and critical tendencies are widespread in Modern philosophy (the skepticism of Pascal and Descartes, the struggle against Bacon's “idols”).

    Within the framework of a positive program, the problem of the scientific method dominates. It should be noted that the question of the method of scientific knowledge in Modern times arises for the first time. Why is this method necessary? It allows us to give knowledge an objective character, i.e. the property of universality and necessity (the basic principles of classical science). Universality indicates the general validity of the result, its independence from the personal characteristics of the subject, and necessity shows that the result is such not by chance, but is obtained in a strict way and can be confirmed as many times as it is required for a reliable conclusion.

    In connection with the problem of method in Modern philosophy, two main directions are distinguished: empiricism and rationalism. Empiricism (F. Bacon) considers experience to be the basis of reliable knowledge, while rationalism (Descartes, Leibniz, Spinoza) believes that the sources of reliable knowledge are rooted in reason itself.

    The next major problem in Modern philosophy is the problem of substance. Substance (Lat. “what lies at the bottom”) is a category of ontology that denotes the primary basis, which does not need anything else for its existence. In philosophy, this problem appeared in antiquity and continued to be relevant until Modern times. In Modern times, the main options for solving this problem are distributed as follows::

    dualism (two substances – – R. Descartes;

    monism (one substance – – B. Spinoza;

    pluralism (multiple substances – – G. Leibniz.

    Accordingly, after Modern times, the problem of substance has lost its relevance, has become a fiction.

Leave a Reply