in concepts, the objectification of consciousness occurs in the form of mental discovery and terminological definition of individual objects and phenomena of reality.

JUDGMENT – is a thought expressed by a sentence and containing a false or true statement(“Water freezes and evaporates” – true, “Water burns” – false).

A judgment can be expressed not only in language sentences, but also in symbols (2 + 2 = 4 is a true judgment, 2 + 2 = 6 is a false one).

Everything that cannot be assessed in terms of truth or falsity is not a judgment, and refers to other forms of thought (Bring me water! Is the water cold? Water - how much meaning is there in this word... 2 + 3; 4, 5, 6, 9 , 48).

Thus, the structure of a judgment must contain such concepts and semantic connections between them that can be proven or disproved from the point of view of objectivity. Based on this,

judgment is the objectification of consciousness in the form of identifying the truth or fallacy of the connections and relationships existing between concepts that thinking discovers or creates independently.

CONCLUSION is a form of thinking through which a new judgment is logically deduced from one or more judgments. The initial judgments in the conclusion are called premises, and the new judgment obtained logically from the premises is called a conclusion (or consequence). For example:

All crimes are punishable by law (1st premise).

Theft is a crime (2nd premise).

Theft is punishable by law (conclusion from two premises).

All conclusions are subject to one condition: if the initial premises are true, then the conclusion derived from them is true. A true conclusion makes the inference correct. A correct inference, then, is true (or plausible) inferential knowledge about reality. Based on this ,

inference is the objectification of consciousness as a result of thinking’s comprehension of reality.

Thus, thinking objectifies consciousness, embodying and representing its content in the various results of its work.

But the very results of the work of thinking require, in turn, additional own objectification in order to become a product of information exchange between people. Without this objectification, all the results of thinking would remain the subjective property of individuals (subjects), unknown to other subjects.

Objectification subjective human thinking into forms that are objectively understandable to another subject (person), carried out by means of language.

LANGUAGE – it is a sign system that stores and transmits information. Languages ​​can be natural (speech) or artificial (alphabet, mathematical formulas, notes, numbers, conventional signals, etc.). Thanks to language, precise and universally accepted designations for objects and phenomena of reality are established, which creates conditions for understanding the thinking processes of individual subjects by other subjects and for exchanging the results of this thinking between them.

Thus, language is a means of objectification of consciousness, during which thoughts acquire some material form of expression that is generally accepted by everyone and understandable to everyone.

Based on this, the elements of language (words, sentences, signs, formulas, etc.) are means that exist in the structure of language, which denote the corresponding concepts, judgments, conclusions, images, etc., that exist in the structure of thinking.

But at the same time we cannot talk about the identity of language and thinking, since the structure of language and the structure of thinking are specifically different:

– a linguistic sign has no meaning outside the structure of its language,

– and the element of thinking has a universal meaning outside any structure of consciousness and in any structure of consciousness.

Consequently, linguistic functions regarding the objectification of consciousness can be formulated in two directions:

1.Formulation of thoughts and the results of thinking in universally understandable forms for storage and exchange.

2. Communication of thoughts and results of thinking.

Thus, the correlation between language and thinking is expressed in the fact that thinking objectifies the content of consciousness into conceivable forms, and language ensures their universal understanding, storage and communication.

Basic terms

GNOSEOLOGY ( epistemology ) – the doctrine of knowledge.

CONCLUSION ( consequence ) – final judgment, logical conclusion from initial judgments (premises).

KNOWLEDGE – system of results of cognitive activity of consciousness.

INTELLIGENCE – rational, based on the activity of the mind, consciousness.

INTELLIGENTALIZATION – increasing the degree of rationality and richness of meaning.

METAPHYSICAL– divorced from real experience, having no analogues in reality.

THINKING – the mind's ability to form thoughts.

ONTOLOGY – the doctrine of being, that is, of what really exists.

OBJECTIFICATION – transformation of the semantic content of any reality into an object for cognition (into an object, thought, idea, model, diagram, etc.).

OBJECTIFICATION OF CONSCIOUSNESS – This is the transformation by thinking of the contents of consciousness into objects (conceivable forms), with which thinking can work.

FEELING – reflection of the properties of reality by human senses .

CONCEPT – a terminologically formulated representation using language that captures the most essential features of an object or phenomenon.

PACKAGE– initial reasoning.

PSYCHE – a set of mental processes and phenomena of a person that form his subjective inner world.

INTELLIGENCE - the ability of thinking to transform intellectual material and its creative synthesis into various systems of knowledge about reality.

REASON – the ability of thinking to dissect reality into separate semantic facts, classify them according to distinctive features, conceptually endow them with definitions and test them for compliance with the established order of things.

MEANING FORMATION– transformation of sensory sensations into intellectual abstractions.

CONSCIOUSNESS– the ability of the human psyche to cognize the world around us, to become self-aware, to develop an emotional attitude and to carry out purposeful activities of both a practical and spiritual nature

RELATIONSHIP– manifestation of the unity of incompatible concepts, objects or phenomena through their naturally inextricable connection in their existence.

JUDGMENT – a thought expressed by a sentence and containing a false or true statement .

CONCLUSION – a form of thinking through which a new judgment (conclusion, consequence) is logically derived from one or more judgments (premises) .

LANGUAGE– a sign system that stores and transmits information.

26. The essence of the cognitive process. Subject and object of knowledge. Sensory experience and rational thinking: their basic forms and the nature of correlation.

Cognition is the process of obtaining knowledge and forming a theoretical explanation of reality.

In the cognitive process, thinking replaces real objects of reality with abstract images, and, operating with them, gets the opportunity to theoretically reproduce the order of real reality in consciousness.

Thus, cognition is the result of the interaction of two participants in the cognitive process: subject and object. The subject of cognition is a cognizing thinking, a cognizing individual or a group of individuals, and the object of cognition is that (as part of reality) towards which the cognitive thinking and cognitive activity of the subject is directed.

The interaction of the subject and object of cognition is characterized by the fact that the object in the process of cognition remains passive, and the subject of cognition is active:

– discovers an object in the experience of one’s sensations;

– receives some sensory knowledge from sensations;

– creates, with the help of the mind, an abstract model of an object and forms its theoretical explanation.

Thus, the processes of cognition begin with simple forms of knowledge and move on to more complex ones, constantly increasing the completeness and depth of knowledge of reality.

The simplest form of knowledge is sensory knowledge.

SENSORY COGNITION- This the process of forming knowledge through direct experience of human sensory sensations.

Sensory sensations are the reflection of the properties of reality by human senses. Feel, Thus, there are not only the simplest, but also the most approximate forms of knowledge of reality, since:

1. The sensations are isolated, and at the moment of cognition they give an idea only of individual properties of the cognizable object.

2. Completeness of object characteristics, his connections and relationships are in reality always exceeds the cognitive capabilities of sensations.

3. Feel are not a universally necessary form of knowledge, they too subjective since they are formed in the individual consciousness of a person, having previously arisen in his individual body. Thus, they directly depend on the physiological abilities to fully reflect certain properties of the reality of a particular person, as well as on the characteristics of his body.

4. Sensation exists only in the presence of a felt object. The image of a cognizable object in the form of sensation cannot exist in the consciousness of the subject without contact of the subject’s sense organs with the object of cognition, and, consequently, sensation cannot participate in abstract cognitive operations of thinking.

Thus, sensations are the first stage of sensory cognition, from which sensory cognition moves on to its next stage, to perceptions.

PERCEPTIONS arise from sensations but are a more complex form of sensory knowledge. It is at the stage of perception that the mind begins to intellectualize the material of individual sensations and form from them a general conceptual image of the object of knowledge.

This conceptual image includes only those properties of the object that are immediately detected by the senses at the moment of cognition.

Thus, perception is a generalized sensory image of an object of cognition, expanded by thinking by adding together all its sensations.

Perception gives a more complete picture of the object of knowledge, but still cannot yet participate in complex operations of thinking, since perception is not abstract enough, because it is always tied to a specific object, which is sensually given at a specific moment of cognition.

The next stage of sensory cognition, which is sufficiently abstract in nature to become a participant in abstract logical operations of thinking, is the representation .

An individual person combines in himself the universal, inherent in him as a member of the human race, social traits inherent in him as a member of a certain social group, and individual unique to him. From ancient times, starting from mythological worldview, there is an idea that a person is dual, consisting of body and soul. For a long time it was argued that the main thing in a person is animation, consciousness, and reason. IN religious-idealistic worldview the human soul was understood as a manifestation of the highest, divine origin. The body is mortal, the soul is immortal. In the materialism of the Ancient world, the soul was interpreted as the result of a specific combination of material principles (in atomism - a connection of atoms with a special shape). As a rule, the soul was understood as the “carrier” of a person’s inner spiritual world, his consciousness, emotions, and reason.

During the Renaissance, and especially in German classical philosophy, the emphasis is on human activity, activity, and freedom. German classical philosophy considered activity as an essential characteristic of human existence, but at the same time it understood activity mainly as a spiritual, mental activity. The rational principle in a person is created by the activity of the subjective “I”.

Dialectical-materialistic philosophy, distinguishing between material and spiritual activities, he affirms the fundamental role of material, practical activities. The ability for spiritual activity itself is historically formed and improved in social conditions, with the development of social practice. Man is a social being.

As philosophy developed, the main features of man were identified: animation, activity, sociality. We must not forget that man is also a biological organism. Man is formed both as a natural biological and as a social being. Man is born three times: physically, socially And spiritually. And this makes a lot of sense.

Although man has always been the object of close attention in philosophy, in the 20th century. a proposal was put forward about the need for a special philosophical science focused on human knowledge - the so-called philosophical anthropology. One of its founders, M. Scheler, argued that all the main questions of philosophy come down to the question of what a person is and what position he occupies in the world. The initial problem of philosophical anthropology is the problem of human formation.

3.2. The Becoming of Man

From the fossil remains of ancient creatures, paleontologists have compiled a general picture of the evolution that led to man. Biochemical studies of humans and apes (chimpanzees, gorilla) have shown an insignificant genetic difference between them. Time parameters have been clarified. It is believed that the splitting of the evolutionary branch (from common ancestors to humans and apes) occurred about 5 million years ago.

The idea of ​​a commonality between man and the great apes has been expressed for a long time, but its recognition was difficult, causing fierce objections, especially from churchmen. In the last century, Charles Darwin’s book “The Descent of Man and Sexual Selection” (1871) sparked a lively debate. Darwin compared a number of properties between humans and animals, which is still of considerable interest today. Darwin outlined an approach to understanding man as a biosocial being. Dialectical-materialist philosophy, taking into account the achievements of modern science, also affirms the dual, biosocial nature of man. In solving the problem of the formation of man and society, she proceeds from the following fundamental principles.

Labor played a decisive role in the development of man.

The formation of man and society is a transition from the biological form of the movement of matter to the social one. In this case, of course, the biological form of movement does not disappear, but in a dialectical sense is “removed” by the social one.

After the formation of a person, his development proceeds under the determining influence of social factors.

Originally as tools natural objects were used: stick, stone. Using the first “natural” tools, man enters into a new relationship with nature; he had a new power at his disposal.

The use of “natural” tools by our ancestors opened up the possibility of various types of activities, moving away from narrow specialization. With the emergence of the beginnings of labor activity, the nervous system developed, a flexible hand adapted to grasping various objects developed, and a transition to constant movement on the hind limbs took place. The use of the first tools contributed to the maturation of social ties. The specifics of the lifestyle begin to be determined not by biological, but by social relationships. A person develops socially determined needs.

At the next stage, a transition occurs from “natural” tools to artificial ones. With the manufacture of tools began something that does not exist in the animal world - material production.

3.3. Origin of consciousness

One of the most important problems of philosophical anthropology is the problem of the origin of consciousness. Identifying the nature of consciousness, resolving the question of its connection with material phenomena is a question of enormous importance not only in theoretical, but also in practical terms; clarification of the dependence of the course of mental processes on objective conditions opens up the possibility of directed changes in people's consciousness.

Knowledge of consciousness faces a number of difficulties. The fact is that consciousness is not given to us directly. The images that arise in the brain are not externally observable. Externally, you can observe a person’s behavior, his emotions, his speech; When examining the brain, one can observe the physiological processes occurring in it. But it is impossible to observe, even with the help of instruments, consciousness. Images in consciousness do not have the same material properties that the objects reflected by these images have (for example, fire burns, the image of fire in consciousness does not have this property). Therefore, it turns out that when the physiological activity of the brain, human behavior, emotions, speech is studied, it is not consciousness itself that is studied directly, but its material basis and its materialization in human activity. In this case, consciousness can be judged indirectly, indirectly.

A special way of studying consciousness is introspection (introspection) for your own spiritual life. However, there is a specific difficulty. So, for example, if we begin to analyze our emotions or thoughts, then during the course of this analysis they begin to disappear (the thought of the thought displaces the thought itself).

However, with all the difficulties in understanding consciousness, in order to further talk about it and its origin, we must try to give at least an undeveloped, working definition of consciousness. In dialectical-materialistic philosophy, a definition of consciousness is developed, including an indication of its two main functions: reflecting and controlling. Concretizing this approach, we can offer the following definition: consciousness is a human ability display material objects in ideal images and purposefully regulate their relationships with these objects. Here it is necessary to stipulate that such a definition of consciousness somewhat narrows its content, since consciousness operates not only with images of material objects, but also creates various images that are not directly related to the reflection of material objects. However, the fact is that the initial images of consciousness are precisely the images of material objects.

Consciousness is a property of highly organized matter. Being a specific property of highly organized matter, it has its own objective foundations in matter.

When explaining the origin of human consciousness, some philosophers of the past (however, there are some today) assumed that consciousness was, as it were, “spread” throughout nature, that all matter was “animate” (this point of view is called “hylozoism”). There is only a quantitative difference between the consciousness inherent in all natural objects and the consciousness of man. The hylozoistic concept is erroneous in general, but there is a rational point in it - about the prerequisites for our consciousness in nature.

V.I. Lenin put forward the idea of ​​reflection as a universal property of matter. “It is logical to assume,” Lenin wrote, “that all matter has a property essentially related to sensation, the property of reflection.” In the course of the development of dialectical-materialist philosophy and science, the idea of ​​reflection as a universal property of matter received its justification and concretization.

Reflection is associated with the interaction of objects. Without interaction there can be no reflection. However, reflection is not identical to interaction. The specifics of reflection are revealed in the following points.

The ability of material objects to perceive certain environmental influences. This moment of reflection can be called “reflection-perception”.

Change of an object as a result of the influence of other objects on it. The specifics of this change depend on the nature of the external influence and the internal content of the reflecting object. Let's call this moment “reflection-change.”

The ability of an object to retain the results of influences. The structural features of the influencing object are reproduced in the content of the reflecting object. Thus, thanks to induction and resonance in various acoustic and magnetic phenomena, the structural features of some systems are “transmitted” and “remembered” by others. Let's call this moment “reflection-trace”.

The ability of objects to react in a certain way to external influences. Here it should be noted that the reaction of an object depends on its “history”, its “remembered” past interactions with the environment. Let's call this moment “reflection-reaction”.

Reflection- this is the ability of material objects to perceive certain environmental influences, change under the influence of these influences, retain in their structure the features of the influencing objects and manifest their internal content in the response.

The original form of reflection in living nature is irritability– the ability of a living organism to perform the simplest specific selective reactions in response to the actions of specific physicochemical stimuli.

As living organisms develop, specialization of cells and tissues occurs; Nervous tissue is formed, concentrating the ability to perceive the influences of the external environment, and muscle tissue, concentrating the ability to motor reactions. Appears on the basis of nervous tissue sensitivity– the ability to display the environment in sensations and sensory images.

A further complication of reflection in animals is due to the fact that a living organism orients itself in the environment, reacting not only to those influences that are directly included in the metabolism, but also those that warn of the possibility of the appearance of the former (they are their signals).

The highest form of reflection is human consciousness. The human brain reflects the environment in ideal images and controls human behavior. The brain, like humans as a whole, was formed in the course of biological and social evolution. This evolution is the path from a creature adapting to environmental conditions to a conscious person who transforms the environment (and himself) in accordance with his needs. This transition was a qualitative leap in the development of reflection.

The material basis of consciousness is the brain. The evolution of the brain was, firstly, under the influence of natural, biological conditions. But natural conditions alone cannot explain either the evolution of the brain or the formation of consciousness. The social environment and the development of the human form of life were of decisive importance for the emergence of consciousness. Social factors in the formation of consciousness were work activity, communication, and exchange of information (language).

Labor as an expedient activity for the manufacture and use of tools played a decisive role in the development of human mental abilities.

Consciousness is a social phenomenon in its origin, in its content and in the functions it performs. Consciousness not only developed historically under the determining influence of work, communication and language - they play a decisive role in the formation of each individual consciousness always, in any historical era.

3.4. Structure of consciousness

Consciousness exists as a fundamental property of the brain. At the same time, you need to understand that there is a significant difference between consciousness and material objects. The reflection of external objects in the brain is not the formation of their physical imprints. The image of an object, the thought of it and the object itself are not the same thing. Images of consciousness do not have the same properties and do not obey the laws that are inherent in material objects; they, for example, do not have volume, mass, hardness, etc. Images of consciousness are something subjective, spiritual, ideal. Consciousness is subjective images of the objective world. Subjectivity here lies in the fact that consciousness belongs to individual people, subjects, and also in the fact that, although the images of consciousness are objective (more or less correctly reflect reality), nevertheless, in these images there is a subjective moment - dependence on the state of the organism, on human experience, conditions of perception, etc.

Consciousness is the reflection of objects in the form of ideal images. Objects are reflected in sensory-visual and logical-abstract images. The system of these images constitutes the content of consciousness. Consciousness as a reflection of reality is knowledge, information about objects.

The reflection of reality in consciousness is not a simple mirror image, copying, but a very complex process, during which newly emerging images are combined with previous ones, processed, and comprehended. The mind can create ideas and concepts about what is not there or what may appear. But any, including the most fantastic ideas and ideas, ultimately arise on the basis of data obtained in the process of reflection.

An important point of consciousness is memory– the ability of the brain to store and reproduce information. Consciousness without memory cannot exist, build complex images based on simple ones, or create abstract images and ideas.

Consciousness includes not only educational, but also emotional, motivational, volitional components.

A person not only reflects certain phenomena of reality; emotional experiences and assessments of these phenomena arise in his consciousness. These experiences and assessments can be both positive (joy, satisfaction, etc.) and negative (sadness, anxiety, etc.). Emotional states vary in their strength and duration. Emotions, as it were, highlight objects from the point of view of human needs, stimulate his actions and motivation.

Motivation is a set of goals that motivate a person to take certain actions. Motivation is related to goal setting; Goal-setting is based on dissatisfaction with the world and oneself. Creative imagination, an idea of ​​the results of one’s activities, and the development of ideals play a big role in motivation. A person builds an ideal, a certain image of how the world should be structured and what it should be like, and then raises the question of how to achieve this ideal. The latter requires will. Will– the ability to act consciously to achieve a set goal. This requires a specific mental stress - an effort of will. Thanks to the will, consciousness is realized in practical action. Volitional effort, as it were, completes the dynamics of consciousness. Volitional control of human behavior is based on knowledge, emotions and motivation.

During the disclosure structures of consciousness further it is necessary to indicate self-awareness. The formation of self-awareness begins in a person in early childhood, when he begins to distinguish himself from everything else. Subsequently, a person gradually develops a holistic idea of ​​his “I”. Self-awareness can be characterized as a person’s awareness of his feelings, thoughts, interests, his position in the system of relationships with other people, etc. In self-awareness, communication with other people and taking into account their opinions about oneself play an important role.

In self-awareness, a person subjects himself to reflection. Reflection (self-analysis) can be represented similarly to the structure of consciousness discussed above.

1. Self-knowledge, self-observation, knowledge of oneself, one’s position, abilities, etc.

2. Emotional assessment (positive or negative) of one’s qualities.

3. Developing motivation, defining goals and ways of self-change.

4. Volitional efforts to achieve goals, self-regulation, self-control.

The concept of consciousness is often correlated with the concept of consciousness. The concept of consciousness, of course, presupposes consciousness in a person, while consciousness and awareness are not identical. Consciousness is associated with an understanding of social duty, a sense of responsibility for one’s actions; we can say that the greater the place in motivation occupied by the understanding of social duty, the higher the level of a person’s consciousness.

Continuing the analysis of the structure of consciousness, it is necessary to highlight level of consciousness and subconscious (unconscious).

Language means any system of signs, serving a person to receive, store and process information. The primary is natural human language, historically developed speech, a system of words that serves for thinking and communication.

The prerequisites for human language were the complex motor and sound forms of signaling that existed in higher animals. In the process of transition from animal ancestors to humans, speech signaling system; sounds from a means of expressing emotions and a stimulant to action become a means of designating things, their properties and relationships, and serve for intentional communication.

The emergence of articulate speech was a powerful means of further development of man and his consciousness. Thanks to language, social experience, cultural norms and traditions are transmitted, The continuity of different generations and historical eras is realized through language.

One of the interesting problems is the problem relationship between consciousness and language. There is an opinion that a person can think without words and only when he wants to convey his thoughts to someone, he puts them into words. In some cases, a person experiences difficulties in conveying his thoughts; it seems to him that he has a clear thought and the only difficulty is that suitable words and phrases are not found. Some people believe that not only is it possible to think without language, but that such thinking is “real” thinking. However, we cannot agree with this point of view.

From its very origins, consciousness exists in the material shell of language; through language it becomes valid, accessible to perception by other people. “From the very beginning there is a curse on the “spirit” - to be “burdened down” by matter, which appears here in the form of moving layers of air, sounds - in a word, in the form of language. Language is as ancient as consciousness; language is a practical consciousness, existing for other people and only thereby existing also for myself, real consciousness.”

Thought takes on material, verbal form not only when we speak or write, but also when we think. There is a specific speech center in the brain. The process of thinking is associated with signals that go to this center from the organs of speech, hearing, vision, etc. It has been experimentally shown that the language shell appears along with thought.

Language consists of signs. A sign is some material phenomenon; but not every material phenomenon is a sign. A certain material phenomenon becomes a sign when it is included in a sign situation. This situation is schematically expressed by a semantic triangle. Here O is a certain object, Z is another object, which is a sign, C are images in the human mind. There is a causal relationship between O and C, as well as between Z and C; between O and Z there is a special connection called a substitution connection. The sign situation is as follows: a certain phenomenon, called a sign, replaces the phenomenon O, the sign is perceived by consciousness and an image of the object O appears in consciousness. Subsequently, the situation becomes more complicated, signs appear that denote other signs.

Various signs function in language. Some signs (the so-called iconic signs, from lat. iconus– similar) are identical to the phenomena being replaced. Other, so-called schematic signs, are not identical, but are similar in some respects to the phenomena being designated. Still others, the so-called symbolic signs, have neither resemblance nor resemblance to the objects they replace and are accepted as a result of agreement. The vast majority of signs are symbolic. A person’s mastery of a language starting from childhood is its inclusion in a system of agreements.

Language performs two main functions:

1) organization of knowledge and its storage;

2) communication, communication, transfer of information.

In its first function, language consolidates the results of thinking. The history of language clearly shows how, as we move from concrete-objective thinking to abstract thinking, the language undergoes the process of developing words denoting general concepts.

The process of understanding is associated with comprehension, when a certain meaning is assigned to certain signs of language and linguistic expressions. This meaning is common to people using the same language. General meanings are realized in the individual consciousness, corresponding to the extent to which a person has mastered the information available in society. Basics communication condition– identical understanding of statements and identical emotional experiences of communication partners.

3.6. Activity

The reflection of reality in consciousness, as it were, turns into activity and ends in it. This reveals the unity of consciousness and activity.

Activity is a way of human existence. But not all actions and processes in a person relate to activity. A person breathes, eats, etc. - here he is no different from the actions of animals. A person with a cold coughs, a person snores in his sleep, etc. - these actions do not belong to the philosophical category of activity. Human activity is distinguished by its purposeful in nature. Human activity, on the one hand, is subject to natural laws and on the other hand – certain goals, which a person sets for himself.

Human action is preceded by goal setting– forming an image of what can happen as a result of an action. Before doing anything, a person imagines what the result of the activity will be, imagines a certain sequence of actions that can lead to the realization of the goal.

Purposeful activity differs from instinctive activity. The latter is carried out without a preliminary idea of ​​the goal, plan (method, method) of action, it follows a genetically established program based on unconscious reflection. This is exactly what animals do. In this regard, Marx wrote: “The spider performs operations reminiscent of those of a weaver, and the bee, with the construction of its wax cells, puts some human architects to shame. But even the worst architect differs from the best bee from the very beginning in that before he builds a cell of wax, he has already built it in his head. At the end of the labor process, a result is obtained that was already in a person’s mind at the beginning of this process, that is, ideally.” Animals adapt to the environment, and humans, through their activities, transform it, creating a “second nature,” an artificial environment.

It is purposefulness that distinguishes human activity from processes occurring in nature. Purposefulness and reflection are interconnected. Purposeful activity is based on reflection of reality its laws; knowing them makes it possible to achieve the goal. At the same time, reflection itself is stimulated by purposeful activity. An interesting fact is that emotional activation is necessary (although not sufficient) for productive reflective activity. Let us recall the well-known thesis that without human emotions there can be no search for truth.

Activity structure can be represented as follows.

Subject of activity: individual, social group.

Object of activity.

A goal is a model of what could be the result of an activity.

Method (method) of activity.

Acts of activity are individual actions.

Means of activity – a set of material (or ideal) instruments of activity.

Result (product) of activity.

Achieving a goal presupposes will, which focuses on achieving the goal and overcoming emerging obstacles. It should be noted here that in the general case there is no complete coincidence of goals and results of actions. Activity usually leads to two results: direct ones, which correspond to a consciously set goal, and secondary ones, which were not foreseen or even realized in advance. Side effects can sometimes be not only unexpected, but also unwanted.

The activity may be reproductive, reproducing what is already known, existing, and creative, creating something new and socially significant. Images can be formed in the mind that, in a certain sense, are ahead of reality. Based on the reflection of possibilities and trends of reality, a person has the ability to foresee and organize his activities accordingly.

In general, the activity of consciousness is characterized by purposefulness, imagination, generation of new ideas, and management of activities.

People's activities are very diverse. Today there is no single, generally accepted classification of activities. If we approach the isolation and classification of its types from the point of view of the development of an individual person, then we can proceed from the following considerations.

The first type of activity leading in early childhood is play activity. It is of great importance; in games, children learn about reality, master norms of behavior, and develop physical and mental abilities. Gaming activity accompanies a person throughout his life, being an important element of leisure time.

The second type of activity is educational activities. In education, knowledge, skills, and abilities are acquired for the entire future life. A person prepares for independent life. Learning does not end at adolescence; a person learns throughout his life.

The third, main form of activity is work activity. It aims to create products and services needed to satisfy needs. Labor here is understood in the broad sense of the word, including both physical and mental labor.

The main form of work activity is production of material goods. The goals that people set for themselves in the production process are determined by material needs. It is impossible to achieve the goals that a person sets for himself while remaining in the sphere of reason. Just because a person has set this or that goal, nothing is done by itself. To make changes in reality, to achieve a goal, you need to influence the world around you with material means, practically.

Practice- it is sensual, objective, material people's activities, through which they purposefully transform the surrounding natural and social world. Practice- this is not any movement, action, effort, but conscious activity with an idea of ​​the goal, conditions, and means aimed at the object of practice. In practice, there is a synthesis of objective activity with the creative nature of consciousness.

Practice includes three main activities: material-production, scientific-experimental and socio-political. The former is aimed at the natural environment, the latter at the social environment, and scientific and experimental activities are focused on both the natural and social environments.

The practical process includes three components: goal-setting, material-physiological and instrumental activity. The goal is a prerequisite for the material and practical act of activity. The transition from a goal to an objective result begins with the activation of certain organs of the body (primarily muscles) and ends with the use of material tools.

With technological progress, changes occur in both the physiological and instrumental aspects of practice. The state of the nervous system becomes more and more important, and at the same time the instrumental supply of practice develops. In a certain sense, a person is a product of his own practical labor activity. By changing the world, a person changes himself both materially and spiritually.

3.7. Personality

They say: a person is not born, but rather becomes. This clearly implies that the concepts of man and personality are not identical. But what is personality?

In philosophy there were and exist different understandings of personality. U Hegel The decisive feature of personality is “autonomy of will”, or “self-awareness”. It was said that not every person is a person. You need to have the gift of “pure thinking” to become a person.

The term “personality” in its original meaning meant the mask of an actor in the Greek theater, then it began to mean the actor himself and his roles. Later, this term takes on a different, deeper meaning. Personality is understood as the result of human development. An individual, an individual (for example, a child) becomes a personality as he masters the experience of humanity.

Social experience is not encoded in nerve cells it is fixed in the culture created by humanity. An individual becomes a personality as he masters this culture. In principle, every person can master culture. One should not think that a personality is only an outstanding person. Every normal person who is included in culture, masters it, is capable of making independent decisions and is responsible to society for his actions is an individual.

Dialectical-materialist philosophy asserts that the essence of man as an individual is determined by social relations, primarily by social labor. In work, a person distinguishes himself from nature, distinguishes himself from other people and enters into communication with them, and then this is reflected in his consciousness: a person recognizes himself as an individual. The content and self-awareness of an individual is determined, in addition to work activity, by family and household relations, social activities, etc. A person is influenced by the lifestyle of the social group to which he belongs. A person speaks a language that is a product of social development, thinks in concepts that were developed by a number of previous generations. Each personality has social content embedded in it. The process of personality formation is the process of socialization of the individual.

Specific personalities as a result of the socialization of the individual, even if they were formed in conditions of approximately the same social environment, are however unique. No two individuals are exactly alike; Each person has his own way of behaving, communicating with other people, and expressing himself in actions.

The content of personality is multifaceted. In its structure, first of all, its psychological characteristics are distinguished. Every personality has your temperament. Hippocrates used the word “temperament” to designate individual abilities and characteristics of human behavior. He believed that all people can be divided into four types by temperament: sanguine, choleric, phlegmatic and melancholic. Psychologists believe that a person’s temperament depends on the properties of the nervous system. The person has innate properties of the nervous system: sensitivity and reactivity, performance, strength, mobility and balance of excitation and inhibition processes.

Although the properties of temperament are innate, this is not an obstacle to conscious self-education, compensation for certain properties of temperament, consciously developed behavioral skills. In principle, people of any type of temperament can achieve success in any field of activity.

When organizing the activities of any team, it is important to know and take into account the temperaments of employees. Thus, in a team, choleric people can often be aggressive, boastful, vain, and stubborn. Young people with a choleric temperament are characterized by maximalism and negativism. Sanguine people are ambitious and tend to flaunt their virtues, while melancholic people usually disguise them. Phlegmatic people react calmly to criticism. Cholerics and melancholics in a state of fatigue can easily enter a state of irritation, accompanied by affective outbursts. Naturally, a team needs psychological compatibility and a balance of temperaments of its members. Psychologists consider phlegmatic and sanguine people the most compatible; Cholerics and melancholics most often conflict with each other.

Based on temperament, in the process of a person’s life activity, it is developed character is a set of stable personality traits, defining her typical behavior patterns. The character of a person is manifested in her attitude towards other people, towards herself, and towards business.

Individual psychological traits of a person consist not only of temperament and character, but also abilities. Abilities are genetically determined by the structure and functioning of the brain. Abilities that ensure particularly successful activities are called giftedness. Here it must be emphasized that abilities and talent in themselves do not guarantee that a person will achieve high creative results; This requires serious work and strong-willed efforts.

Now let's move on to social aspect of personality, which includes, first of all, motives, attitudes And value orientations. They arise from the social position of the individual and are prescribed by his environment.

Motive– the attitude of a person to his possible action, which determines the choice of momentary behavior. Installation– a state of readiness, a mood for behavior in a certain situation. The attitude determines behavior not only at the moment, but also for a longer period. Value orientations- a system of attitudes in the light of which a person evaluates situations and chooses a certain method of behavior. Value orientations are based on the ideals and beliefs of the individual.

The social aspect of personality, further, lies in the system of social roles it performs. A social role is a normatively approved mode of behavior, expected from everyone occupying a certain position in society (for example, a young man fulfills the social role of a student). In the course of his life, a person performs many social roles, since at the same time or at different times he can belong to different groups, in each of which he plays a specific role. From a variety of roles, a person can choose for himself the main, so-called internalized role. If this role is performed for a long time, it has a noticeable impact on personal qualities (for example, a teacher and an officer can be recognized outside of school and the place of duty).

Combination of specific biological, psychological And social features makes a person unique as an individual. This uniqueness is reflected by the concept "I". Each personality, each “I” has its own composition of needs. Usually isolated three groups of needs:

basic, biological(in food, water, etc.);

social(the need to belong to a certain group, to occupy a certain place in it, to enjoy attention, to be an object of respect, etc.);

cognitive(need to know the world around you and yourself).

These or those needs take their place in the scale of personal values. The life path of an individual significantly depends on how these needs and values ​​are combined in the individual. If, say, the satisfaction of biological needs is in the foreground, then this can lead to personality degradation (food turns into gluttony; increasingly frequent consumption of alcohol leads to alcoholism, etc.). A person can see the meaning of his life differently. For some it is personal success, for others it is caring for others, for others it is nature conservation, etc.

Today there are often calls for “soulfulness” and “spirituality”. But sincerity is associated with altruism, the need to be useful “to others”; “spirituality” - with the need for cognition, development of the emotional sphere, etc. They also talk about the need to form a “comprehensively developed personality.” But how should we understand it? Since ancient times, there has been an idea of ​​such a person; its characteristics include a number of parameters:

Strength and health;

Diligence, mastery of practical skills;

Intelligence, wisdom, understanding of life;

Kindness, morality, a high degree of humanity;

Beauty, development of taste, aesthetic feelings. In lapidary form it looks like this: strong – diligent – ​​wise – kind – beautiful(the so-called humanistic canon).

3.8. Personality and society

Starting a discussion about relationships between the individual and society, It must be borne in mind that historically there have always been specific societies with specific types of personalities. But in these specific societies and specific types of individuals there were some common features, which allows us to raise the question of the relationship between the individual and society in a general way. Further, the matter should not be presented in such a way that at first there were individual people, and then they united into society. Aristotle also wrote that man was originally a “social animal.”

Society is a stable system of relationships between people. Society as a system of relationships between people has an impact on individuals as its elements. Sociologists point to two ways society influences an individual:

Specially organized influence on the individual through education, propaganda, etc.;

Impact on the individual through the restructuring of its microenvironment and living conditions.

Man is a product of the time and circumstances in which he lives. Views and ideas are generally determined by society; a person thinks as the “spirit of the times” forces him to think. With changes in the social system, the position of the individual, his interests and needs change.

The relationship between the individual and society is, first of all, a relationship of interests. Public interests express what society as a whole is interested in (development of the economy, means of communication, environmental protection, etc.). Public interests also include the interests of social groups of a given society. Personal interests express the needs of an individual person related to providing for his material needs and spiritual needs.

There are different concepts regarding the relationship between public and personal interests. One of them gives priority to the interests of the individual. This concept was specified, for example, in the requirement freedom of private enterprise, non-interference of the state in the affairs of entrepreneurs. The concept of priority of individual interests sometimes develops into the concept absolute personal freedom. But if you look at the real state of affairs, after all a person cannot be independent of the environment, both social and natural. Moreover, if one individual could become absolutely free, this would mean the unfreedom of others. Although there cannot be absolute personal freedom, people are vitally interested in increasing the degree of freedom, liberation from oppression, exploitation, and violence.

Another concept states priority of public interests over personal ones(for example, the concept of “natural morality” by F. Bacon).

And finally, the third concept states the need to combine public and personal interests into a kind of harmonious unity. At the same time, of course, it must be taken into account that it is impossible to achieve complete coincidence of personal and social needs and interests. The interests of people here must be considered in relation to the main features of the lifestyle of their social environment.

In our country, the idea of ​​a harmonious combination of public and personal interests was officially promoted; The ideal way of life was mutual assistance and mutual responsibility, increasing social and political activity of people, etc. But in fact, individuals did not have opportunities for comprehensive development, human individuality was treated with suspicion, even the term “individualism” was usually interpreted as “bourgeois individualism". The interests of the state were put in first place, but in fact, behind the “national”, state interests were hidden the interests of a certain social group - the leadership of the party-state bureaucracy.

The founders of dialectical-materialist philosophy argued concept of humanism. Humanism in a broad sense means the affirmation of the human right to freedom, happiness, development of one’s abilities, equality, and social justice. The good of man is the criterion for evaluating any social actions and institutions.

Today we have two tasks before us. The first is to restore the true meaning of public interests, without identifying them with the state and the interests of some individual groups. The second is the development of the individual, his initiative, originality, etc. The implementation of these tasks is not an easy task, implying a democratization of society from which we are still quite far away.

When analyzing the problem of the relationship between the individual and society, attention is drawn to the phenomenon called alienation.

3.9. The problem of alienation

Alienation is understood as the disunity of people, their inability for friendship and love, self-doubt, moral nihilism, etc.

Let us point out the main concepts of alienation. The concept of the social contract (Hobbes, Locke, Spinoza, Rousseau, etc.) stated that under conditions of private property a person alienates his natural rights in favor of the state; the state must guarantee citizens security, protection of property, etc. But this alienation creates the possibility of human enslavement by the state.

Hegel said about the alienation of a person from the results he created"physical and spiritual skills." At the same time, an individual person is alienated from “universal life” and becomes dependent on “foreign power” - the state, law, morality, etc.

According to Marx alienation is:

Loss of the right to manage one’s own activities;

Alienation of labor products from the manufacturer;

Alienation from decent living conditions;

Mutual alienation;

Loss of people's social meaning.

Marx believed that the source of alienation is private property.

Alienation is the process of transforming the results and products of human activity into something that does not depend on him and dominates him. Consequently activity is deprived of creative content. In classical capitalism, which Marx spoke about, the worker is alienated from the product of his labor. Given the private nature of appropriation, workers cannot feel attachment to the product of their labor. The conveyor belt destroys creativity in work. That was in the past. But has it disappeared now?

It is not only the worker who is subject to alienation. A characteristic feature of our time is the participation of a large number of scientists, designers, designers and people of other special professions in monopolized industrial production. These people also become alienated from the products of their creativity.

Alienation affects the artistic and creative intelligentsia. The emptiness and lack of spirituality of many works of literature, cinema, music, etc. are often correlated with the “low taste” of the masses. But in fact, these works are the result of the alienation of their creators, as a result of which these works are not the fruit of free imagination, but must follow the standards of “mass” culture.

The entrepreneur is also, in a certain sense, subject to alienation. He is alienated from workers. He needs them to work in his enterprise, and he treats them in a sense as appendages of machines.

It is generally believed that The unlimited dominance of private property leads to alienation. But there is another side to the coin. Practice of the XX century. showed that The unlimited dominance of public property also leads to alienation. What is public means it is not mine, and I treat it accordingly. This was clearly evident in totalitarian regimes. A way out of the extremes that give rise to alienation, apparently, based on a combination of private and public property.

Alienation has its origins not only in economic, but also in certain socio-political relations, when people are removed from the leadership of the state, public opinion is specifically processed, individuality is suppressed, people are separated, etc.

The process of alienation also occurs in the spiritual life of society. The transformation of the individual into an object of exploitation, political subordination, manipulation of individuals by dominant groups creates in a person’s mind a gap between his desires and social norms, the perception of these norms as alien and hostile to the individual, a feeling of isolation, loneliness, etc. The external social world is perceived as alien and hostile to the individual. Durkheim spoke of “anomie” as people’s loss of understanding of the significance of social norms, the disappearance of a person’s sense of solidarity with a particular social group.

Alienation as a psychological phenomenon is an internal conflict, rejection of something that seems to be outside a person, but connected with him. Alienation in some cases is specially formed. An example would be interethnic and interethnic relations. Alienation here finds its expression in chauvinistic images of “monsters,” when this or that people is presented as inferior, subhuman, etc. A hater, placing himself in an exceptional position, attributes to others everything that is cruel and inhumane, for which he himself feels a desire.

Communication and isolation are a contradictory eternal situation in the life of an individual. Sometimes a person wants to communicate, sometimes to be alone, and there is nothing wrong with that. Just don't go to extremes. And these extremes - conformism, on the one hand, when a person loses his individuality in excessive communication, and alienation, on the other hand, when a person isolates himself from other people, seeing them as his enemies. To overcome the roots of alienation, it is necessary to destroy economic exploitation, democratize all public life, and humanize human relations.

The following three components are clearly present in the composition of consciousness: something conscious, i.e. an object consciousness, someone conscious, i.e. subject consciousness, and some kind of relationship between subject and object. The relationship between subject and object will be discussed later; Now let's focus on the subject. The subject of consciousness is that being which is designated by the word “I”. Subject and object are two poles of consciousness, differing from each other as follows: there are many objects of consciousness, they are constantly changing; walking among the fields and meadows, I rejoice at the onset of spring, watch the flight of a lark, a minute later, having received news of a friend’s illness, I experience and recognize sadness, etc., etc. With all these changes of objects, the subject is always one and so is my self. Thanks to identity I exists unity of consciousness" and recent joy and present sadness, and all perceptions in

== 140

walking time belong to a single individual consciousness, which I called my consciousness.

I, serving as the unifying center of consciousness, is profoundly different from such objects as joy, sadness, the flight of a lark: these objects have a temporary form; they arise, flow and disappear in time, A. I has no temporary form.

Let's call everything that has a temporary form a word event. The flight of a lark, joy, sadness are something that changes instantly, falls into the past and everything is born again. I, conscious of all these events, time itself does not flow, does not fall into the past and is not born again and again: it is not accomplished, but is unshakable There is as one and the same self, standing above the dizzying flow of events in time. So I am not an event; it ontologically (existentially) belongs to a different realm of being than events. Let's call events, i.e. everything that has a temporary form and, therefore, flows in time, the word real being, and everything that does not have a temporary form, in a word ideal being. According to this usage, I there is an ideal being.

Having found the subject of consciousness, we can establish what should be called the words “subjective” and “mental”. When I, the subject of consciousness, experience joy or sadness and recognize them through discrimination, I find these processes as “my” states: they are manifestation my self in time, my life; I am the source and bearer of these feelings, which is expressed quite accurately by the words “I am happy about the walls”, “I am sad”. In the same way, intentional

== 141

certain acts, for example, the act of attention, the act of discrimination, are directly experienced as “my” acts, which is expressed by the words “I am attentive”, “I am discriminating”. In all the listed cases, the structure of what I found is such that it contains two sharply different elements - the self standing above time and its manifestations in time belonging to it. I has no temporal form, but it is the source of not only the content of its manifestations, but also their temporal form; some of its manifestations, for example acts of attention, discrimination, I I can easily start, extend, stop. This order of mine in the form of time should be noted, calling I not only timeless, but also overtime being.

A supertemporal being, which is the source and bearer of its manifestations in time, is substance. Due to the fact that many people are accustomed to understand by this word a dead passive substrate of qualities, I prefer to replace the word “substance” with the word substantial figure bearing in mind the meaning of the concept of substance that Leibniz gave it. By the words “subjective state”, “subjective act”, etc. we will designate everything found in consciousness that is directly experienced as “mine” - my joy, my sadness, my attention, etc. Direct observation reveals that between I and these processes there is a relationship between them accessories to our self.

== 142

Feeling disgust, I push the plate away from her. It is quite obvious that the act of pushing away is my manifestation, at least in the sense that I am the initiator of this action and an accomplice in its implementation *.

Let us now compare such contents I am conscious of as “my” joy, sadness, an act of attention, a feeling of disgust, on the one hand, and the conscious repulsion of the plate, on the other hand. Obviously, these are extremely different phenomena of my self from each other: the first have a temporary form and do not have any spatial form, while the second has both a temporal and spatial form. The first essence mental, t mental processes, repulsion is physical, i.e. material process. By the word “mental process” we will mean those processes that have only a temporary form, and by the word “material process” we will mean those that have a spatio-temporal form)

So, relying on absolutely reliable self-testimony of objects immanent in consciousness, we have established two essentially important truths. Firstly, one and the same self, i.e. one and the same substantial agent is capable of performing not only mental, but also material acts. Secondly, the composition of consciousness can contain not only mental, but also material processes: repulsion can be in such a way

* For details about the structure of such acts, see my article “Psychology of the human self and psychology of the human body.” Zap. Russian Scientific Inst. in Belgrade, 1940, issue. 17; Psych logie des menschlichen Ich und Psychologie des menschlichen Kc pers, Zap. Russian Scientific Research Associations, No. 75, 194 Prag.

== 143

least directly realized, like my joy. So, the psychologization of the entire composition of consciousness, i.e., the assertion that everything immanent in consciousness is mental, is refuted by the evidence of experience.

The first truth eliminates such false but very widespread teachings, such as, for example, Descartes’s thought that there is a substance-spirit/or soul, which is the bearer of only mental processes, and another substance, matter, which is the bearer of only material processes. In fact, we have found that the same substantial agent, the self, is capable of creating both mental and physical processes. Therefore I, the substantial agent, am a being metapsychophysical(V. Stern’s term), standing above the area of ​​mental and material processes, capable of creating these processes, combining them into a single whole, for example, performing an act of repulsion meaningfully and expediently under the guidance of its desire to free itself from an unpleasant object.

The second truth established above shows the fallacy of the idea that everything immanent in consciousness must be my mental state: my material manifestation can also be realized by me directly in the original.

Now it is necessary to take another important step forward regarding the question of knowledge of the external world.

Consciousness and thought are very broad natural scientific and philosophical concepts, including a wide variety of types of phenomena, the interpretation of which depends on the researchers and the problems they consider. One of the most general definitions was given by the physicist-theologian A.V. Moskovsky, considering the connection of metaphysics with the physics of today. Based on the philosophical concept of Plato’s “whole” - “holon”, he emphasizes its existence as an object of non-aggregate nature and gives it the following definition: “A holon is a fundamentally integral object, that is, an object whose integrity is irreducible to any interaction of its parts,” and further develops his thought in the following thesis:

“...Fundamental integrity is not reducible to interaction, but sometimes appears as interaction.”

A similar point of view on the integrity of the physical world of reality is shared by the Ukrainian philosopher I.Z. Tsekhmistro, in his work devoted to the holistic philosophy of science, notes:

“...The main difficulty here is to achieve an adequate understanding of this unique property of the world as one (few)... We can call this unique property of the integrity of the world a parameter (or rather a super-parameter)... Bearing in mind this unique integrity in nature and its extraordinary properties, we will use the term “holoparameter” to denote it.

Everything said above is clearly confirmed by the examples and information we provide in the chapter on the creative power of Consciousness. The author of one of the generalizing works on the nature of consciousness, philosopher S. Priest, considers seven possible approaches and interpretations of Consciousness on the part of philosophers: dualism, logical behaviorism, idealism, materialism, functionalism, two-aspect approach, phenomenological approach, to which should be added the leading theories - intentionality of consciousness and a nonlinear theory of consciousness based on the ideas of synergetics.

The psychophysical and psychophysiological problems that arise in this case - “mental and physical”, “consciousness and body”, “consciousness and brain” and many others - have not yet been resolved due to the complexity of the concept of Consciousness. In this regard, S. Priest points out: “... It is known that “consciousness” is difficult to define verbally... Please note that the existence and nature of consciousness cannot be captured using any physical description of the world... Consciousness is nothing beyond experience... I would like to make a radical assumption, consciousness does not exist."

S. Priest’s opinion is fully shared by one of the world’s authoritative physicists, R. Penrose:

“..I assert that the phenomenon of consciousness cannot be described within the framework of modern physical “theory”, and, summarizing what has been said about consciousness, he adds: “... we have to admit that today there is no generally accepted criterion for the manifestation of consciousness.”

Earlier, the same idea was expressed by the famous psychophysicist D. Stokes in his fundamental book devoted to the problems of Consciousness:

“..Parapsychology data suggests that we have mental abilities that cannot be explained on the basis of modern physical theories. It turns out that humans are more than mere physical bodies and that the conscious mind may play a truly fundamental role in the universe."

A generalization of research work in the field of Consciousness, with the exception of only the materialistic theory of consciousness, leads researchers to the conclusion about the NOT material essence of Consciousness and the connection of physical reality with Consciousness through some one fundamental quantity or one process, and one should completely agree with this. The idea of ​​NSS at first seems blasphemous and cannot be accepted by modern physical science, since in its research it operates only with metric concepts - mass, charge, speed, spin, tension, etc. It should be noted that the further quantum physics goes into research microworld, the more she has to operate with probabilistic concepts, images of virtual (imaginary) particles, fields, energies, space-time, that is, not real material quantities, but their reflection (“shadows”), possible representations that do not have a real nature.

Speculative hypotheses dominate this entire construction, and their proof seems to be a matter of the distant future, but now this brings them closer to the concept of Consciousness as a vacuum substance, and it seems to many that a solution has been found. In particular, Professor I.Z. Tsekhmistro notes:

“However, there is indeed a deep connection between quantum physics and the problem of consciousness. This connection was reflected in the von Neumann interpretation of quantum mechanics, which extremely aggravated the psychophysical problem...” and explains what was said on the basis of important heuristic conclusions made at one time by the physicist A. A. Grib in his work on the experimental verification of quantum correlations at macroscopic distances : “...In quantum mechanics, the reduction of a wave packet (the transformation of a wave function with one probability or another into an eigenfunction of the operator of the measured quantity) requires turning to a new reality that is not reducible to ordinary particles and fields, and is somehow connected with consciousness.. "This new reality, which serves as a prerequisite for the existence of consciousness, under certain conditions is capable, like a field, of changing the momentum and energy of a particle, reducing the wave packet and changing the probabilities of measurement results." After analysis, he comes to the following conclusion: “This “new reality” is the subquantum property of the unique integrity and indecomposability of the physical world into many elements.”

So, Consciousness existing in the world is explained on the basis of the concept of subquantum integrity, the indecomposability of the physical world of reality. Thus, the idea of ​​a “serf” has triumphed, but, unfortunately, this replacement of concepts does not clarify numerous phenomena showing the creative power of Consciousness, which remain inexplicable. With this approach, Consciousness becomes, as it were, a general, unified, all-encompassing definition of the essence of the physical vacuum, that is, the deep basis for the construction of the entire virtual physical reality of the world. And then the desire of physicists to consider Consciousness as an integral part of the overall picture of the universe, in the form of a functionally independent field mechanism that acts like a physical vacuum, becomes understandable.

What grounds then do we have for claiming the immaterial essence of consciousness? First of all, even if we assume a certain similarity between the physical vacuum and Consciousness as virtual formations, the analogy drawn between them is rather conditional, since there is at least one very significant difference between them - the presence in the human psyche of the creative, purposeful power of thought. Consciousness has a special force and energy component that is capable of fulfilling a person’s mental desire, but the physical vacuum does not have such a component. In addition, one should take into account the fact that over the entire long hundred-year period of development of modern science, no one anywhere (!) has been able to study the physical characteristics of such a concept called Consciousness. Supporting this statement, S. Priest puts it this way: “Regarding consciousness, this is its ephemeral and invisible nature. And also the inexpressibility of this concept. Both of them are explained by the fact that there is no such thing as consciousness." Philosopher I.Z. Tsehmistro notes: “...It follows from this that consciousness is a completely real, although not mixed with the physical and chemical states of the brain and therefore not observable by physical and chemical means,” and adds: “... consciousness exists as something clear, isolated and not mixed with the entire set of physical and chemical processes.”

As will be shown later, thanks to Consciousness and mental desire, a person is capable of creating de novo any type of matter. In physics, various types of interaction and transformation of particles, fields and energies are known, but the creation of living or inert matter as a result of mental action is the prerogative of only a special property of human Consciousness. A distinctive feature of this property of human Consciousness is also its unique and universal ability to transform into any fields, particles, energies known in physics and simultaneously belong to micro-, macro- and megaphysical systems. The logical conclusion inevitably follows from this that Global Consciousness is a fundamental superstructural mental formation that has no analogues in the physical reality of our world.

In any theory, an object is represented by a linguistic sign, a concept that does not simply point to it, but expresses our thought about this object. In everyday consciousness and in the epistemological teachings of early philosophers, the naive-realistic concept of an object, closest to the so-called common sense, is formed. From the point of view of naive realism, the world confronts the knowing subject as a universal object that exists before cognition and completely independently of it. Human concepts and ideas are considered as simple copies, casts from reality, arising as a result of the direct impact of an object on the cognitive consciousness - the human soul. Naive realism is based on the deep conviction that our knowledge is knowledge about the objective world itself, about the things that we encounter in life. It is these things that act as objects and appear before our consciousness as they are.

The main difficulty that the naive-realist concept faces is that for a significant part of the concepts it is not possible to find subject referents and the number of such concepts is constantly growing. If, as Democritus said, sensations and thoughts arise due to the penetration of images into our souls ( eidos), emanating from objects, then what is the origin of abstract concepts to which no corporeal objects correspond? What is represented in such concepts? The answer to this question presupposes a rejection of the purely receptive concept of cognition and recognition of the subject’s ability to actively interact with the cognizable object.

Ancient thinkers form a new, different from the naive-realistic, idea of ​​the cognitive attitude as a very broadly understood ability to act, or activity. Anyway, Plato states quite clearly that the basic forms of knowledge, which he distinguishes as knowledge (episteme) And opinion (doxa), are nothing more than manifestations of specific forms of this universal ability ( dinameis). In the broadest sense this capacity for action is an inherent property of everything that exists. If a thing by its very presence did not produce changes in its surroundings, how could its existence be discovered? And would it even be possible to talk about its existence if it did not manifest itself in anything at all? Therefore we can say that things are precisely because they produce.

Recognition of the decisive role of the result of the implementation of some active ability leads to certain consequences. For the theory of knowledge, one of the most important consequences is the presence of a deep internal connection between ability, her object And result of the application abilities for this object. In other words, different capabilities aimed at different objects. One ability - one function - one object. In particular, Plato is clearly inclined to believe that no ability can be deprived of its own object. For example, in the project of his ideal state, each ability corresponds to a single function and a single object.

Aristotle also recognizes that for the knowledge of things of different kinds there are different parts of the soul: “... one is the one with the help of which we contemplate such essences, whose principles cannot be different... the other is the one with the help of which we [understand] those [whose beginnings] can [be both this and that].” Such a close connection between knowledge and its object is expressed in the tendency to consider the cognitive act as some kind of direct contact between the knowing subject and the object of knowledge. The knowledge arising as a result of such contact is understood as “direct acquaintance” of the cognitive ability with his object, similar to direct touch or even setting his.

Knowledge different from true opinions, just as the impression of an eyewitness differs from impressions compiled from hearsay or stories. The knowledge of the ancient gods surpasses human knowledge because, being eternally living, they were present in all events (in contrast to the omniscience of the Christian God - the creator and “designer” of the world). But eyewitness testimony retains its truth value only on the condition that once seen remains unchanged. Thus, the ancient concept of the object of knowledge paradoxically combines two mutually exclusive trends.

In modern European philosophy, the first of the noted trends is associated with the idea of givens object to the knowing subject; it develops primarily in line with the empirical tradition. The second is more related to recognition constructive nature of the object and manifests itself, rather, in the traditions of rationalism and criticism.

† Empirical tradition considers objects as independent entities that exist independently of any experience. Objects – these are fragments of external reality that form the solid basis of experimental knowledge; these are the sensory ones themselves things, and not constructs generated by the action of cognitive abilities. Everything else, in particular those hypothetical constructs that are specified at the theoretical level, are considered only as some “pseudo-objects,” subjective fictions that have no referents in reality, although they play a certain role in cognition.

Objects, the concepts of which are introduced in the course of theoretical reasoning, are not recognized as real to the same extent as the objects of our everyday experience: stones, trees, houses, people... Only that which is accessible to direct or indirect (instrumental) observation is considered real here . However, this situation, when any theoretical construction can be expressed in terms of ordinary language, and for each of its concepts one can easily find a sensory-perceptible referent object, persists only in the early stages of the development of science.

The development of scientific and theoretical knowledge required the development of many idealizations, those. such assumptions and assumptions that, in principle, do not correspond (and sometimes even contradict) ordinary experience. The introduction into the context of scientific knowledge of such “conceptual constructs” as, for example, “material point”, “incompressible fluid”, “absolutely black body”, very acutely raised the problem of the objectivity of knowledge, since such constructs do not have obvious referents. At first, they simply tried not to notice this problem. Naturalists of the 17th, 18th and even partly of the 19th centuries seemed undoubted that the concepts of classical mechanics represented an exact copy, " picture"of the real world. However, the number of such idealized "pseudo-objects" as part of scientific theories was constantly increasing, and all attempts to reduce them to a set of sensory perceived referents turned out to be untenable. As a result, on the one hand, the recognition that cognizable objects are “constructions” of theorizing thinking, and on the other hand, within the framework of the materialist tradition itself, a more complex idea is formed about the ways of “giving” an object to the cognizing consciousness.

† Marxist theory of knowledge retains the idea of ​​the independence of the object from the cognizing subject, but at the same time recognizes that “consciousness does not immediately and simply coincide with nature.” The object of human cognition is not identical to a natural object, which is not “given” to the subject as such, but will be recreated in the system of knowledge, reflected in it in the characteristics of the actions performed with it. The relationship of a subject to an object is always mediated by the structure of the practical activity in which he is included as its subject. The activity of consciousness in relation to an object is manifested in emphasis, concentration of attention precisely on this fragment of reality. Therefore, although cognition is based on the immanent characteristics of real things, the choice of which of them will be the focus of cognitive interest remains with the subject. Human thinking is not able to completely control an object: it primarily captures those aspects of it that are related to the specific goal of the subject. When the goal changes, the object itself does not change, but other aspects of it become the focus of attention; its other characteristics are considered significant. Thus, the various goals of the subject do not create the characteristics of the object, but only contribute to the identification of various aspects inherent in it. The more diverse the “roles” in which an object “performs,” the more fully its diverse characteristics are represented in the system of knowledge about it.

Subject of study acts as a kind of modification of the cognizable object, representing its projection, which, within the framework of this study, is of a relatively independent nature. Just as a thing, illuminated from different sides, casts different shadows, which nevertheless remain reflections of the same thing, objects of study, formed in the light of different subjective goals, are reflections of the same object, which acts in this case as an invariant transformations of the subject of research. All cognitive operations are carried out precisely with such idealized objects, which change in the process of cognition, approaching an adequate reflection of the real object. At the same time, intermediate constructions, which at a certain stage of the development of scientific knowledge were assumed to be reflections of really existing objects ( phlogiston, ether etc.), may later be recognized as completely fictitious, but this will not at all affect the reality of the objects themselves.

Since Kant, the understanding of the object associated with the idea has increasingly prevailed in European philosophy. design his knowing consciousness. Reasoning about the object, Kant recognizes given all our sensory contemplations. But in order for these contemplations to truly become knowledge, they must necessarily be connected into some kind of unity, otherwise they would be simply a chaotic accumulation of impressions. But if given is of external origin, then connectedness– this is a matter for the subject. An object, in Kant’s understanding, appears as a result of the subject’s unification and ordering of sensory impressions: "An object there is something in the concept of which merged diverse, embraced by a given contemplation." Such a unification is design object, carried out by the cognizing subject. Knowledge about the world, Kant believes, arises only in the process of cognition. But then knowledge of being cannot be the basis of knowledge itself, because in this case we find ourselves in a vicious circle. To solve this problem, philosophy must shift attention from the object to the subject and make it the central point of the theory of knowledge precisely as designer object.

Everything that we find in a cognizable object is put there in advance by the cognizing subject as a result of the implementation of his inherent abilities to carry out cognitive activity. Consequently, all characteristics of an object are nothing more than representations of the subject. However, it does not at all follow from this that designing object, we have complete control over all its manifestations. For example, such a mathematical object as a natural series of numbers is a theoretical construction, but this does not mean that the “constructor” himself actually knows all the elements of this series. Therefore, the recognition that the cognizable object designed subject, does not entail a rejection of the understanding of cognition as the discovery of previously unknown properties and relationships in it.

However, another problem arises here. If an object is considered as a reality that exists independently of consciousness, its very independence acts as a guarantor of the continuity of subjective experience. Although the experience of an individual is finite and limited, from a historical perspective individual differences are commensurable and objective truth is attainable. Kant believes that an object is a construction created by a subject. However, the continuity of experience in his theory of knowledge is still preserved, albeit in a different way. The guarantor of continuity now becomes the transcendence of the subject, representing not a historically limited person or a specific community of people, but a certain innate complex of cognitive abilities. If, in the theory of knowledge, the understanding of an object as designs connects with the idea historically limited subject, subjective experience loses its universal character and becomes torn, incommensurable, for each subject receives the “right” to create his own objective world.