the main Railings

Ancient Roman philosophy. Philosophy of ancient Rome Philosophers of ancient Rome general characteristics

Remark 1

Since $ 3 a century in the Mediterranean, a situation has developed in which Rome, becoming a strong power, sets the direction of ancient philosophy, replacing ancient Greek.

The cities of mainland Greece come under the influence of Rome.

In Roman philosophy, Platonism comes to the fore, which dissolves in Epicureanism, skepticism and Stoicism.

Thanks to the expansionary policy of the Roman state, a vast framework of Roman thinking is being formed. Particularly successful are political and legal concepts and teachings that have ancient Greek roots in their beginning.

A common feature of ancient Roman philosophy is the highlighting of ethics, which is associated with a correct and happy lifestyle.

Each school of this period develops its own idea of perfection and its own image of a sage. This image of the sage remains the same. The philosopher begins to associate with the "strange" figure. Genuine philosophizing in everyday life takes on a specific character.

History of Stoicism

Finished works on a similar topic

Course work Roman philosophy 450 RUB
abstract Roman philosophy 270 RUB
Test Roman philosophy RUB 230

There are three stages:

Ancient standing ($ III-II $ centuries BC). Founder Zeno of Kitiysky.
Middle standing ($ II-I $ centuries BC) Representatives: Panetius of Rhodes ($ 180-110), Posidonius ($ 135-51). It was they who brought Stoicism to Rome.
Late standing or Roman stoicism. This is a purely ethical phenomenon. In the $ I-II $ cc. AD it existed simultaneously with the Judeo-Christian tradition, which influenced the formation of Christian doctrine.

Stoicism

The most prominent figures of Stoicism were Seneca Lucius Anney, Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius ... From Seneca, there are works in Latin. Epictetus, who was a Greek slave, did not leave behind any written sources. Marcus Aurelius is a Roman emperor who left his works in Greek.

Stoicism can be called the "religion" of the Roman aristocracy. How can happiness be achieved, and how does it relate to virtue? These are the questions confronting the representatives of stoicism.

Happiness is life in harmony with nature. Happiness is an individual phenomenon.

Human nature is perfect, therefore it contributes to the nature of the whole. You can only improve the nature of a particular person, while improving nature as a whole. The discernment of the truth is always associated with the transformation of oneself. It is impossible to see the truth without transforming your being.

The Stoics shared Aristotle's ideas about man as a polis and logistic being. The Logos is the unchanging foundation of everything. He also determines the perfection of the world and man. A person must live according to the logos. Man is a cosmopolitan. He must live in accordance with the logos of nature. Cosmopolitanism is a concept that originates in Stoicism. The policy is a copy of the universal state.

Judgments about the macrocosm and the microcosm originate from the Stoics. The microcosm repeats the macrocosm.

Quintus Annius argued that the Roman is the one who values freedom, nobility, piety above all else.

In Roman culture, human destiny is thought of as fatalism. A person actualizes it when he reaches his goal, when he becomes himself. This is piety and the highest manifestation of freedom. A person must serve duty and fulfill his fatum without succumbing to emotions. All love lies outside the concept of honor and duty. The European Renaissance draws on the ideas of humanism from Antiquity. The Roman concept of humanism is associated with rethinking the role of man, his cultivation.

The Romans discover the world as history for the first time.

The most important thing is fear of death. It cannot be viewed without comprehending nature. Accordingly, enjoyment is impossible without comprehension of nature. The Stoics committed suicide because philosophy is dying. Striving for the eternal, we strive for death.

Epicureanism

Founder - Epicurus.

The Epicurus school is the only example of atomism in Roman philosophy. One of the representatives of Epicureanism was Titus Lucretius Carus. He correlates his teachings with the teachings of Democritus and Epicurus.

This philosophical trend existed for quite a long time in Roman culture. This was a very influential trend until 313, before the arrival of Christianity. Further, it was brutally supplanted by representatives of Christianity.

Skepticism

Another no less important trend in ancient Roman philosophy. Representative - Enesidem of Knossos ... His teaching was greatly influenced by the ancient Greek skepticism of Pyrrho. The main motive for Enesidem's skepticism was opposition to the dogmatism of early philosophical concepts.

He paid attention to the inconsistency of the theories of other philosophers. His skeptical views concluded that it is impossible to make any judgments about reality that are based on sensations. This is a doubt about the correctness of the most influential theories of all ancient philosophy. In the period of younger skepticism, the figure of Sextus Empiricus is singled out, who followed the same path of doubt in both Greek philosophy and mathematics, rhetoric, and grammar.

Remark 2

Major attempts at skepticism- to prove that this direction is the original path of philosophy, not mixed with other philosophical tendencies.

Eclecticism acquires wide significance in ancient Roman philosophy. This trend includes many significant personalities of political and Roman culture, such as Cicero. Representatives of this trend possessed a huge amount of knowledge. These are real encyclopedists of their era. Eclecticism was based on a collection, a union of different philosophical schools, which were united by a conceptual approach. Eclecticism was formed on the basis of academic philosophy, which covered knowledge from the teachings of nature to the teachings of society.

In the late crisis of the Roman state, criticism of the rational knowledge of the world appears, which led to mysticism, with an increase in Christianization. The concept of Roman Neoplatonism begins to gain momentum. This is the last solid movement in the final stage of the existence of the Roman Empire. This is a reflection on decaying social relations.

ROMAN PHILOSOPHY

From the beginning of the III century BC. e. in the Mediterranean region, the influence of Rome is significantly increasing, which, from an urban republic, is becoming a strong power. In the II century. BC e. he already owns a large part of the ancient world. The cities of mainland Greece also fall under his economic and political influence. Thus, the penetration of Greek culture begins in Rome, of which philosophy was an integral part. Roman culture and education developed in completely different conditions than those that were several centuries earlier in Greece. The Roman campaigns, directed in all directions of the then known world (on the one hand, in the area of mature civilizations of the ancient world, and on the other, on the territory of "barbarian" tribes), form a broad framework for the formation of Roman thinking. Natural and technical sciences developed successfully, political and legal sciences are reaching unprecedented proportions.

Roman culture is characterized by the desire to enrich itself with the best of what is faced by Rome, striving for world domination. Therefore, it is logical that Roman philosophy is also formed under the decisive influence of Greek, in particular Hellenistic, philosophical thinking.A definite impulse for the expansion of Greek philosophy in Rome was the visit of its Athenian ambassadors, among whom were the most prominent representatives of the Greek philosophical schools that existed at that time (middle 2nd century BC).

From about this time, three philosophical trends developed in Rome, which were already formed in Hellenistic Greece - Stoicism, Epicureanism and Skepticism.

Stoicism. Stoicism was most widespread both in republican and later in imperial Rome. Sometimes it is considered the only philosophical movement that acquired a new meaning in the Roman period. Its beginnings can be seen already in the influence of Diogenes of Seleucia and Antipater of Tarsus (who arrived in Rome with the aforementioned Athenian embassy). A notable role in the development of Stoicism in Rome was also played by representatives of the middle stance Panethius from Rhodes and Posidonius, who worked in Rome for a relatively long period. Their merit is that they contributed to the widespread spread of Stoicism in the middle and upper classes of Roman society. Among the students of Panethius were such outstanding personalities of ancient Rome as Scipio the Younger and Cicero.

Panethius, in the basic tenets of his doctrine, largely adhered to the old stoicism. So, he meets the concept of logos, analogous to the concept, for example, in Chrysippus, who adhered to similar ontological views. In the field of ethics, he brought the ideal of the Stoic sage somewhat closer to practical life.

The further development of Roman Stoicism was greatly influenced by Posidonius. In the field of ontology, he develops the main philosophical problems of the teachings of Aristotle, as well as issues bordering on natural science and cosmology. He combines the original philosophical and ethical views of Greek Stoicism with elements of the teachings of Plato, and in some cases with Pythagorean mysticism. (This reflects a certain eclecticism that was typical of Roman philosophy of that period.)

The most prominent representatives of Roman Stoicism (New Stoi) were Seneca, Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius.

Seneca (c. 4 BC-65 AD) came from the class of "horsemen", received a comprehensive natural science, legal and philosophical education, for a relatively long period he successfully practiced law. Later he becomes the educator of the future emperor Nero, after whose accession to the throne he receives the highest social status and honors. In the second year of Nero's rule, he dedicated to him the treatise "On Mercy", in which he urges Nero as a ruler to maintain moderation and adhere to the republican spirit.

As prestige and wealth grows, Seneca comes into conflict with his environment. After a fire in 64 AD. e. hatred of Seneca in Rome is growing. He leaves town and lives on his nearby estate. Charged with plotting a conspiracy, he was forced to commit suicide.

Seneca's legacy is vast. His most outstanding works include Letters to Lucilius, Discourse on Providence, On the Resilience of a Philosopher, On Anger, On a Happy Life, On Free Time, On Virtue, etc. For with the exception of "Questions of Nature" ("Quastiones naturales"), all of his work is devoted to ethical issues. If the old standing believed physics to be the soul, then the philosophy of the new standing considers it to be a completely subordinate domain.

In views on nature (as well as in other parts of his work), Seneca, however, in principle adheres to the teachings of the old stop. This is manifested, for example, in the materialistically oriented dualism of matter and form. Mind is considered to be an active principle that imparts form to matter. In this case, the primacy of matter is unambiguously recognized. He also understands the soul (pneuma) in the spirit of the old stoicism, as a very subtle matter, a mixture of the elements of fire and air.

In epistemology, Seneca, like other representatives of Stoicism, is a supporter of ancient sensationalism. He emphasizes that the mind has its origin in feelings. When deciding on the activity of the soul, he, however, accepts some elements of Platonic philosophy, which is manifested primarily in the recognition of the immortality of the soul and the characterization of corporeality as the "fetters" of the soul.

Seneca proceeds from the fact that everything in the world and in the universe is subject to the power of strict necessity. This follows from his concept of God as an immanent, ruling force that dominates reason (logos). Seneca characterizes it as "the highest good and the highest wisdom", which is realized in the harmony of the world and its purposeful structure.

Unlike the old stand Seneca (as well as all Roman Stoicism) almost does not deal with logical problems. The center and focus of his system is ethics. The principle of harmony with nature (to live happily means to live in accordance with nature) and the principle of human subordination to fate are distinguished as the main ones. The question of how to live life is the subject of his treatises "On the brevity of life" and "On a happy life." They project both the personal experience of Seneca and the public relations of the then Rome. The loss of civil liberties and the decline of republican virtues in the era of imperial rule lead him to significant doubts about the future. “Life is divided into three periods: past, present and future. Of these, the one in which we live is short; the one in which we will live is doubtful, and only the one that we lived in is certain. Only he is stable, fate does not affect him, but no one can return him either. " Seneca rejects the desire for the accumulation of property, for secular honors and positions: “The higher one ascended, the closer he is to the fall. Very poor and very short is the life of the person who, with great efforts, acquires what, with great efforts, he must keep. " However, he used his social position and became one of the richest and most influential people in Rome. When his enemies pointed to the fact that his own life is very different from the ideals that he proclaims, he answered them in his treatise On a Happy Life: “... all philosophers talk not about how they live themselves, but about how must live. I speak about virtue, but not about myself and I am fighting against sins, which means against my own: when I overcome them, I will live as I should. "

Seneca sees the meaning of life in achieving absolute peace of mind. One of the main prerequisites for this is overcoming the fear of death. He devotes a lot of space to this problem in his writings. In ethics, he continues the line of the old stand, emphasizing the concept of man as an individual striving for improvement in virtues.

A life in which a person devotes all or the overwhelming part of his efforts to his own improvement, a life in which he avoids participation in public affairs and political activity, is, according to Seneca, the most worthy. “It is better to seek shelter in a quiet dock than to be voluntarily thrown back and forth all my life. Think how many shocks of waves you have already undergone, how many storms swept through your private life, how many of them you unconsciously caused upon yourself in public life! I do not mean that you drown your days in sleep and pleasure. This is not what I call a fulfilling life. Strive to find tasks that are more important than those that you have been doing so far, and believe that it is more important to know the account of your own life than the common good that you have been concerned about until now! If you live like this, communication with wise men, wonderful art, love and the accomplishment of good awaits you;

awareness of how good it is to live and one day it is good to die. " His ethical views are imbued with individualism, which is a reaction to the turbulent political life in Rome.

Another prominent representative of Roman Stoicism, Epictetus (50-138), was originally a slave. After he was released, he devoted himself entirely to philosophy. In his views, there is a lot from the old stop, who influenced him, and from the work of Seneca. He himself did not leave any work. His thoughts were recorded by his disciple Arrian of Nicomedia in the treatises "The Reasoning of Epictetus" and "The Manual of Epictetus". Epictetus defended the point of view according to which philosophy, in fact, is not only knowledge, but also application in practical life. He was not an original thinker, his merit mainly lies in the popularization of Stoic philosophy.

In his ontological concepts and in his views in the field of the theory of knowledge, he proceeded from Greek Stoicism. The works of Chrysippus had an exceptional influence on him. The core of Epictetus' philosophy is ethics based on a stoic understanding of virtue and life in accordance with the general nature of the world.

The study of nature (physics) is important and useful not because on its basis it is possible to change nature (the surrounding world), but because, in accordance with nature, a person can order his life. A person should not desire what he cannot master: “If if you want your children, your wife and your friends to live permanently, then you are either crazy, or you want things that are not in your power to be in your power and that that is alien is yours. " And since it is not within the power of man to change the objective world, society cannot, and one should not strive for this.

Epictetus criticizes and condemns the then public order. He emphasizes the idea of the equality of people, condemns slavery. This is how his views differ from the Stoic doctrine. The central motive of his philosophy - resignation to a given reality - leads, however, to passivity. "Do not want everything to happen as you want, but wish that everything happens as it happens, and it will be good for you in life."

Epictetus considers reason to be the real essence of man. Thanks to him, man participates in the general order of the world. Therefore, one should not worry about well-being, comforts and, in general, bodily pleasures, but only about one's soul.

Just as reason rules over man, so the world mind, the logos (God), rules over the world. He is the source and determining factor in the development of the world. Things, as a controlled god, should obey him. Freedom and independence, which he attached great importance to. Epictetus limits only spiritual freedom, freedom of humility with reality.

Epictetus' ethics is essentially rationalistic. And although it is expressively marked by subjectivism, it still protects (in contrast to the irrationalist currents that were forming at that time) the power of the human mind.

In essence, the entire philosophy of Epictetus is an expression of the passive protest of the lower social classes against the existing social order. This protest, however, does not find a real way out. Therefore, it translates into a call to come to terms with the existing state of affairs.

Emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (121-180) also belongs to the Roman Stoics, during whose reign the crisis phenomena became even more intense. The upper social classes refuse to change anything in order to preserve the existing social order. In Stoic ethics, they see a certain means of moral revival of society. The Emperor in his reflections "To himself" proclaims that "the only thing that is in the power of man are his thoughts." “Look into your gut! There, inside, there is a source of good, which is able to beat without running out, if you constantly dig up to it. " He understands the world as eternally flowing and changeable. The main goal of human aspirations should be the achievement of virtue, that is, submission to "reasonable laws of nature in accordance with human nature." Marcus Aurelius recommends: "A calm thought with everything that comes from the outside, and justice with everything that is realized at your own discretion, that is, your desire and action, let them consist in generally useful actions, for this is the essence in accordance with your nature."

Marcus Aurelius is the last representative of ancient Stoicism, and in fact this is where Stoicism ends. Certain traces of mysticism appear in his work, which is closely related to the decline of Roman society. Stoic doctrine, in particular, the emphasis on the need to "subordinate oneself" (to the world mind - logos - to God), largely influenced the formation of early Christianity.

Epicureanism The only materialistic (for its time, clearly materialistic) philosophy in ancient Rome was Epicureanism, which spread significantly in the last years of the Roman Republic and at the beginning of the imperial rule. Its most prominent representative was Titus Lucretius Kar (c. 95–55 BC), who wrote the philosophical poem "On Nature", which is also a valuable work of fiction of the literature of that time.

Lucretius fully identifies his views with the teachings of Democritus and Epicurus; the latter he considered the best Greek philosopher. In his work, he skillfully explains, proves and promotes the views of the early representatives of the atomistic doctrine, consistently defends the basic principles of atomism from both earlier and contemporary opponents, giving at the same time the most integral and logically ordered interpretation of atomistic philosophy. At the same time, in many cases he develops and deepens the thoughts of Democritus and Epicurus. The only thing Lucretius considers is atoms, and emptiness.

Matter is, first of all, the primary bodies of things,

secondly, everything that is a collection of the named elements.

No force, however, can destroy atoms,

they always win with their impenetrability.

The first is deeply different, double character

have those two things as stated above,

matter and space, everything happens in it;

they are necessary in themselves and are pure.

Where the void stretches, the so-called space,

there is no matter; and where matter has spread,

there is no emptiness and space in any way.

The first bodies are complete without emptiness.

Secondly, in the things that have arisen, emptiness exists,

next to it is solid matter.

In this form, Lucretius expounds the teachings of Democritus and Epicurus about atoms and emptiness, emphasizing at the same time the inability to create matter as such.

If the first bodies are solid

and without cavities, as I have already said,

they are undoubtedly eternal.

The infinity of matter in space is also connected with the indestructibility and non-creation of matter, that is, with its infinity in time.

The universe itself cannot constrain itself;

truth is the law of nature; he desires the boundaries of matter

formed emptiness, and matter - the boundaries of emptiness,

the merit of this alternation is the endless universe.

Atoms, according to Lucretius, movement is inherent. In deciding the question of movement, he stands on the principles of Epicurus. He tries to substantiate in a certain way deviations from the rectilinear motion of atoms.

Here's what you should know about movement:

if atoms fall vertically in space due to

its own weight, here in an undefined place

and they vaguely deviate from the path

just enough so that the direction is slightly different.

If this deviation did not exist, everything would fall into

the depths of emptiness, down like raindrops,

elements could not collide and connect,

and nature would never create anything.

From this it follows that the Epicurean parenclitic movement for Lucretius is the source of the particles. Together with the size and shape of atoms, it is the cause of the variegation and variety of things in the world.

He considers the soul to be material, a special combination of air and heat. It flows through the whole body and is formed by the finest and smallest atoms.

What matter is the spirit and what does it consist of,

soon my words will be enumerated to you.

First of all, I say that the spirit is extremely subtle;

the bodies that form it are extremely small.

This helps to understand and you yourself will understand that:

nothing happens so fast in the world

as that which the thought itself represents and forms.

From this it is clear that the spirit has the greatest speed,

than everything that is accessible to the eye;

but what is also movable, it must be composed of bodies

perfectly round and smallest.

In a similar way, he defends atomistic views in the field of the theory of knowledge, which he also developed in many directions.

In Lucretius's understanding of atomistic theory, one can already find the outline of evolutionism. He held the view that all organic arose from inorganic and that complex organic species developed from protozoa.

The neighbors then began to unite in friendship,

No longer wishing to mend lawlessness and enmity,

and the children and the female were taken under guard,

showing with gestures and awkward sounds,

that everyone should have sympathy for the weak.

Although consent could not be universally recognized,

the best and most part of the contract sacredly fulfilled.

The materialism of Lucretius has its own atheistic consequences. Lucretius not only excludes gods from a world in which everything has natural causes, but also opposes all belief in gods. He criticizes the idea of life after death and all other religious myths. Shows that belief in gods arises in a completely natural way, as a product of fear and ignorance of natural causes. In particular, he points to the epistemological origins of the emergence of religious ideas (the disclosure of the social roots of religion was, of course, impossible in his time).

In the field of ethics, Lucretius consistently defends the Epicurean principles of a calm and happy life. The means of achieving happiness is knowledge. For a person to live happily, he must free himself from fear, in particular from the fear of the gods. He defended these views both from stoic and skeptical criticism, and from their vulgarization in the understanding of some supporters of Epicureanism from the highest circles of society.

The influence and dissemination of the consistently materialistic and logically integral philosophical system of Lucretius was undoubtedly facilitated by the artistic form of presentation. The poem "On Nature" belongs not only to the heights of Roman philosophical thinking, but also to highly artistic works of its period.

Epicureanism in Roman society was retained for a relatively long time. Even in the era of Aurelian, the Epicurean school was among the most influential philosophical trends. However, when in 313 AD. e. Christianity becomes the official state religion, a stubborn and merciless struggle begins against Epicureanism, and in particular against the ideas of Lucretius Cara, which ultimately led to the gradual decline of this philosophy.

Roman Epicureanism, in particular the work of Lucretius Cara, marked the pinnacle of materialistic tendencies in Roman philosophy. He became an intermediary link between the materialism of the ancient Greek Stoics and the materialistic currents of modern philosophy.

Skepticism. Another significant philosophical trend in ancient Rome was skepticism. Its main representative Enesidemus of Knossos (c. 1st century BC) is close in his views to the philosophy of Pyrrho. The influence that Greek skepticism had on the formation of Enesidem's thoughts is evidenced by the fact that his main work he devoted to the interpretation of the teachings of Pyrrho ("Eight books of Pyrrhic discourses").

Enesidem saw skepticism as a way to overcome the dogmatism of all existing philosophical trends. He paid much attention to the analysis of contradictions in the teachings of other philosophers. The conclusion from his skeptical views is that it is impossible to make any judgments about reality based on immediate sensations. To substantiate this conclusion, he is served by the formulations of the so-called tropes, which have already been mentioned.

The next five tropes, which were added by the successor of Enesidemus Agrippa, further increased doubts about the correctness of the ideas of other philosophical trends.

The most prominent representative of the so-called minor skepticism was Sextus Empiricus. His teaching also comes from Greek skepticism. This is evidenced by the title of one of his works - "Foundations of Pyrrhonism". In other works - "Against the dogmatists", "Against mathematicians" - he sets out the methodology of skeptical doubt, based on a critical assessment of the basic concepts of the then knowledge. Critical assessment is directed not only against philosophical concepts, but also against the concepts of mathematics, rhetoric, astronomy, grammar, etc. His skeptical approach did not escape the question of the existence of gods, which led him to atheism.

In his works, he seeks to prove that skepticism is an original philosophy that cannot be confused with other philosophical trends. Sextus Empiricus shows that skepticism differs from all other philosophical currents, each of which recognizes some essences and excludes others, in that it simultaneously questions and admits all essences.

Roman skepticism was a specific expression of the progressive crisis of Roman society. Searches and studies of contradictions between the statements of previous philosophical systems lead skeptics to a broad study of the history of philosophy. And although it is in this direction that skepticism creates a lot of money, on the whole it is already a philosophy that has lost the spiritual strength that lifted ancient thinking to its heights. In essence, skepticism contains more outright rejection than methodological criticism.

Eclecticism. Eclecticism in Rome is much more widespread and important than in Hellenistic Greece. Its supporters include a number of prominent personalities of the Roman political and cultural life both in the last years of the Roman Republic and in the first period of the empire. The most famous among them was the eminent politician and orator Marcus Thulius Cicero (106-45 BC), the creator of Latin philosophical terminology.

Representatives of Roman eclecticism possessed an enormous amount of knowledge. In a number of cases, they were true encyclopedists of their era. Their combination of various philosophical schools was not accidental and unfounded, a certain conceptual approach was strengthened precisely by a deep knowledge of individual views. The gradual convergence of theory with the field of ethics expressed the general situation in philosophy.

Eclecticism, developing on the basis of academic philosophy, reaches the boundaries of encyclopaedism, encompassing the knowledge of both nature and society. Cicero belonged, perhaps, to the most significant branch of Roman eclecticism, which developed on the basis of Stoic philosophy.

"Stoic" eclecticism in the presentation of Cicero focuses on social issues, and in particular on ethics. His motive was the combination of those parts of different philosophical systems that bring useful knowledge.

Cicero's social views reflect his position as a representative of the upper strata of Roman society during the republican period. He sees the best social order in a combination of three main state forms: monarchy, aristocracy and democracy. He considers the goal of the state to provide citizens with security and free use of property. His theoretical views were largely influenced by his real political activities.

In ethics, he largely adopts the views of the Stoics, pays considerable attention to the problems of virtue set forth by the Stoics. He considers man to be a rational being who has something divine in him. He calls virtue the overcoming of all life's adversities by willpower. Philosophy in this matter provides a person with invaluable services. Each of the philosophical directions comes to the achievement of virtue in its own way. Therefore, Cicero recommends to "combine" everything that is the contribution of individual schools of thought, all their achievements into one whole. By this, in fact, he defends his eclecticism.

Neoplatonism. The progressive crisis of Roman society in the last years of the republic and in the first years of the empire is naturally reflected in philosophy. Mistrust in the rational development of the world, to a greater or lesser extent manifested in various philosophical directions, together with the increasing influence of Christianity, more and more strengthened the multiplying signs of mysticism. The irrational movements of this era tried in various ways to adapt to the changing role of philosophy. Neo-Pythagorean philosophy, of which Apollonius of Tkana was a typical representative, tried to strengthen itself by returning to the mysticism of numbers, bordering on charlatanism; the philosophy of Philo of Alexandria (30s BC - 50 AD) sought to combine Greek philosophy with the Jewish religion. In both concepts, mysticism appears in a concentrated form.

More interesting was neo-Platonism, which developed in the 3rd-5th centuries AD. e .; in the last century of the Roman Empire. It is the last integral philosophical movement that arose during the period of antiquity. Neoplatonism takes shape in the same social setting as Christianity. Like the rest of the irrationalist philosophical trends of late antiquity, neoplatonism, to a certain extent, is a manifestation of the rejection of the rationalism of previous philosophical thinking. It is a specific reflection of social despair and the progressive disintegration of social relations on which the Roman Empire was based. Its founder was Ammonius Saccas (175–242), and the most prominent representative of Plotinus (205–270).

Plotinus believed that the basis of all that exists is a supersensible, supernatural, overmind divine principle. All forms of being depend on it. Plotinus declares this principle to be absolute being and says about it that it is unknowable. "This being is and remains God, does not exist outside of him, but is precisely his very identity." This only true being is comprehensible only through penetration into the very center of pure contemplation to pure thinking, which becomes possible only with the "rejection" of thought-ecstasy (extasis). Everything else that exists in the world is derived from this one true being. Nature, according to Plotinus, was created in such a way that the divine principle (light) penetrates through matter (darkness). Plotinus even creates a certain gradation of existence from external (real, true) to the lowest, subordinate (inauthentic). At the tops of this gradation is the divine principle, then - the divine soul, and below all - nature.

Simplifying somewhat, we can say that the divine principle of Plotinus is an absolutization and some deformation of the world of Plato's ideas. Plotinus devotes much attention to the soul. She is for him a certain transition from the divine to the material. The soul is something alien to the material, bodily and external in relation to them. This understanding of the soul distinguishes the views of Plotinus from the views of not only the Epicureans, but also the Greek and Roman Stoics. According to Plotinus, the soul is not organically connected with the body. She is part of the common soul. The bodily is the bond of the soul, worthy only of overcoming. "Plotinus, as it were, pushes aside the bodily, sensual and is not interested in explaining its existence, but only wants to cleanse it from it, so that the universal soul and our soul do not suffer damage." The emphasis on "spiritual" (good) leads him to the complete suppression of all bodily and material (evil). This translates into the preaching of asceticism. When Plotinus speaks of the material and sensible world, he characterizes it as inauthentic being, as non-existent, “having in itself a certain image of being”. By its nature, inauthentic existence has no form, properties or any signs. This solution to the main philosophical problematics in Plotinus marks his ethics. The principle of goodness is connected with the only truly existing - with the divine mind, or soul. On the contrary, the opposite of good - evil is associated and identified with inauthentic being, that is, with the sensible world. From these positions, Plotinus proceeds to the problems of the theory of knowledge. For him, the only true knowledge is the knowledge of true being, that is, of the divine principle. The latter, of course, cannot be comprehended by sensory knowledge; it is also not cognizable in a rational way. The only way to approach the divine principle Plotinus considers (as already mentioned) ecstasy, which is achieved only by spiritual effort - mental concentration and suppression of everything bodily.

The philosophy of Plotinus specifically expresses the hopelessness and insolubility of contradictions that become all-encompassing. This is the most expressive harbinger of the end of ancient culture.

Porfiry (c. 232-304) became a direct disciple of Plotinus and the continuer of his teachings. He showed great attention to the study of the works of Plotinus, published and commented on them, compiled a biography of Plotinus. Porfiry was also engaged in the study of problems of logic, as evidenced by his "Introduction to the categories of Aristotle", which marked the beginning of the dispute about the real existence of the common.

The mystical teaching of Plotinus is continued by two other neo-Platonic schools. One of them is the Syrian school, the founder and most prominent representative of which was Iamblichus (late 3rd - early 4th centuries A.D.). From the surviving part of his great creative heritage, it can be judged that, in addition to the traditional range of problems of neo-Platonic philosophy, he was also occupied with other problems, such as mathematics, astronomy, music theory, etc.

In philosophy, he develops the thoughts of Plotinus concerning the divine principle, mind and soul. Among these Plotinov's essences, he distinguishes others, transitional ones.

Also noteworthy is his attempt to substantiate ancient polytheism in the spirit of Plotinus' philosophy. Simultaneously with the divine principle as the only truly existing, he recognizes a number of other deities (12 heavenly gods, the number of which he then increases to 36 and further to 360; then there are 72 earthly gods and 42 gods of nature). This is essentially a mystical-speculative attempt to preserve the ancient image of the world in the face of the coming Christianity.

Another school of Neoplatonism - Athenian - is represented by Proclus (412–485). His work in a certain sense is the completion and systematization of neo-Platonic philosophy. He fully accepts the philosophy of Plotinus, but in addition to this he publishes and interprets Plato's dialogues, in the comments to which he expresses original observations and conclusions.

It should be noted that Proclus gives the clearest explanation and presentation of the principle of the dialectical triad, in which he distinguishes three main points of development:

2. Separation of the already created from the creator.

3. The return of the created to the creator.

The conceptual dialectics of ancient Neoplatonism is marked by mysticism, which reaches its pinnacle in this concept.

Both neoplatonic schools deepen and systematically develop the basic ideas of Plotinus' mysticism. This philosophy, with its irrationalism, aversion to everything bodily, emphasis on asceticism and the doctrine of ecstasy, had a significant impact not only on early Christian philosophy, but also on medieval theological thinking.

We have traced the emergence and development of ancient philosophy. For the first time practically all the main philosophical problems crystallized in it, the basic ideas about the subject of philosophy were formed and, although not explicitly, the problem was posed, which F. Engels formulated as the main question of philosophy. In ancient philosophical systems, philosophical materialism and idealism were already expressed, which in many ways influenced subsequent philosophical concepts. Lenin stated that the history of philosophy has always been an arena for the struggle between two main trends - materialism and idealism. The immediacy and, in a certain sense, the straightforwardness of the philosophical thinking of the ancient Greeks and Romans make it possible to understand and more easily understand the essence of the most important problems that accompany the development of philosophy from its inception to the present day. In the philosophical thinking of antiquity, in a much clearer form than it happens later, worldview clashes and struggles are projected.

The initial unity of philosophy and the expanding special scientific knowledge, their systemic allocation explain very clearly the relationship between philosophy and special (special) sciences.

Philosophy permeates the entire spiritual life of ancient society, it was an integral factor in ancient culture. The richness of ancient philosophical thinking, the formulation of problems and their solution were the source from which the philosophical thought of subsequent millennia drew.

This text is an introductory fragment.

11. Philosophy of al-Farabi. Yuri Balasaguni's philosophy. His work: "Blessed Knowledge" Abunasyr Muhammad ibn Muhammad Farabi (870-950) is one of the greatest thinkers of the early Middle Ages. He is a multifaceted encyclopedic scientist and one of the founders of the Eastern

27. Kazakh philosophy: history and modernity (Abai, Valikhanov, Altynsarin), the origins of the trait, traditions and innovations. Professional philosophy in Kazakhstan. (Rakhmatullin -

8. German classical philosophy and its main problems. Philosophy of Kant: the concept of "things in themselves" and transcendental knowledge. Antinomies of pure reason German classical philosophy is considered as an independent stage in the development of philosophy, because on

15. Analytical philosophy of the twentieth century. Philosophical program of neopositivism and its crisis. "Post-positivism" and the philosophy of science Analytical philosophy (Moore, Russell, Wittgenstein) was formed in the XX century and saw the task of philosophy not in the synthesis of scientific knowledge, but in

§ 1. Social philosophy and philosophy of history Social philosophy of the late XX century. could claim an aristocratic origin: her ancestor was the classical philosophy of history. However, the connection between them is severed. They are separated by a whole era, during which there were

II. ROMAN INFANTRY The Latin word legio was originally used to denote a group of people selected for military service, and thus was synonymous with the army. Then, when the size of the Roman territory and the strength of the enemies of the republic demanded larger

1. Philosophy between religion and science. The struggle between philosophy and religion. Philosophy and Society The position of the philosopher is truly tragic. Almost no one likes him. Throughout the history of culture, hostility to philosophy has been revealed, and, moreover, from the most diverse sides. Philosophy

2. Philosophy is personal and impersonal, subjective and objective. Anthropologism in philosophy. Philosophy and life Kierkegaard especially insists on the personal, subjective character of philosophy, on the vital presence of the philosopher in all philosophizing. He contrasts this

Chapter XXIX. ROMAN EMPIRE AND ITS ATTITUDE TO CULTURE The Roman Empire influenced the history of culture in various, more or less independent ways. First: the direct impact of Rome on Hellenistic thought; it was not very important or deep. Second:

7. ATHENS AND SPARTANES IN GREECE IN THE PARADIGM OF HYPERBOREAN KNOWLEDGE. ROMAN EMPIRE OR ORBIS TERRARUM, THE ABSOLUTE OWNER OF THE BASICS AND STRATEGIC KNOWLEDGE OF HYPERBORHEA IN THE WORLD

10. LUNAR SEMIAN CHRISTIANITY IN THE HISTORY AND OPPOSITION OF HYPERBOREA. ROMAN EMPIRE AND STRATEGIES OF THE EMPERORS OF THE HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE OF THE GERMAN NATION This period of history, the beginning of the Middle Ages, in academic history is also called the Dark Age or

PHILOSOPHY OF NEW TIME AND THE AGE OF EDUCATION, GERMAN CLASSICAL

From the beginning of the III century BC. e. in the Mediterranean region, the influence of Rome is significantly increasing, which, from an urban republic, is becoming a strong power. In the II century. BC e. he already owns a large part of the ancient world. The cities of mainland Greece also fall under his economic and political influence. Thus, the penetration of Greek culture begins in Rome, of which philosophy was an integral part. Roman culture and education developed in completely different conditions than those that were several centuries earlier in Greece. The Roman campaigns, directed in all directions of the then known world (on the one hand, in the area of mature civilizations of the ancient world, and on the other, on the territory of "barbarian" tribes), form a broad framework for the formation of Roman thinking. The natural and technical sciences developed successfully, political and legal sciences are reaching an unprecedented scale. Therefore, it is that Roman philosophy is also formed under the decisive influence of Greek, in particular Hellenistic, philosophical thinking. A definite impetus for the expansion of Greek philosophy in Rome was the visit by Athenian ambassadors, among whom were the most prominent representatives of the Greek philosophical schools that existed at that time (mid-2nd century BC).

From about this time, three philosophical trends developed in Rome, which were already formed in Hellenistic Greece - Stoicism, Epicureanism and Skepticism.

Stoicism. Stoicism was most widespread both in republican and later in imperial Rome. Sometimes it is considered the only philosophical movement that acquired a new meaning in the Roman period. Its beginnings can be seen already in the influence of Diogenes from Seleucia and An-typatra from Tarsus (who arrived in Rome with the aforementioned Athenian embassy). A notable role in the development of Stoicism in Rome was also played by representatives of the middle stance - Panethius of Rhodes and Posidonius, who worked in Rome for a relatively long period. Their merit is that they contributed to the widespread spread of Stoicism in the middle and upper classes of Roman society. Among the students of Panethius were such outstanding personalities of ancient Rome as Scipio the Younger and Cicero. Panethius, in the basic tenets of his doctrine, largely adhered to the old stoicism. So, he meets the concept of logos, analogous to the concept, for example, in Chrysippus, who adhered to similar ontological views. In the field of ethics, he brought the ideal of the Stoic sage somewhat closer to practical life.

The most prominent representatives of Roman Stoicism (new sta) were Seneca, Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius.

Seneca (c. 4 BC-65 AD) came from the class of "horsemen" 28, received a comprehensive natural science, legal and philosophical education, for a relatively long period he successfully practiced law. Later he becomes the educator of the future emperor Nero, after whose accession to the throne he receives the highest social status and honors. In the second year of Nero's rule, he dedicated to him the treatise "On Mercy", in which he urges Nero as a ruler to maintain moderation and adhere to the republican spirit.

Seneca's legacy is vast. His most outstanding works include Letters to Lucilius, Discourse on Providence, On the Resilience of a Philosopher, On Anger, On a Happy Life, On Free Time, On Virtue, etc. For with the exception of Questions of Nature, all of his works are devoted to ethical issues. If the old standing believed physics to be the soul, then the philosophy of the new standing considers it to be a completely subordinate field.

Unlike the old stand Seneca (as well as all Roman Stoicism) almost does not deal with logical problems. The center and focus of his system is ethics. The principle of harmony with nature (to live happily means to live in accordance with nature) and the principle of human subordination to fate are distinguished as the main ones. The question of how to live life is the subject of his treatises "On the brevity of life" and "On a happy life." They project both the personal experience of Seneca and the social relations of the then Rome. The loss of civil liberties and the decline of republican virtues in the era of imperial rule lead him to significant doubts about the future. “Life is divided into three periods: past, present and future. Of these, the one in which we live is short; the one in which we will live is doubtful, and only the one that We have lived in is certain. Only it is stable, fate does not affect it, but no one can return it either ”29. Seneca rejects the desire for the accumulation of property, for secular honors and positions: “The higher one ascended, the closer he is to the fall. Very poor and very short is the life of the person who, with great efforts, acquires what with even greater efforts he must keep ”30. However, he used his social position and became one of the richest and most influential people in Rome. When his enemies pointed to the fact that his own life is very different from the ideals that he proclaims, he answered them in his treatise On a Happy Life: “... all philosophers talk not about how they live themselves, but about how how one should live.

I speak about virtue, but not about myself and I am fighting against sins, which means against my own: when I overcome them, I will live as I should ”31.

Another prominent representative of Roman Stoicism, Epictetus (50-138), was originally a slave. After he was released, he devoted himself entirely to philosophy. In his views, there is a lot from the old stand, which influenced him, and from the work of Seneca. He himself did not leave any work. His thoughts were recorded by his disciple Arrian from Nicomedia in the treatises "The Reasoning of Epictetus" and "The Manual of Epictetus". Epictetus defended the point of view according to which philosophy, in fact, is not only knowledge, but also application in practical life, He was not an original thinker, his merit mainly consists in the popularization of Stoic philosophy.

In his ontological concepts and views in the field of the theory of knowledge, he proceeded from Greek Stoicism. The works of Chrysippus had an exceptional influence on him. The core of Epictetus's philosophy is ethics, based on a stoic understanding of virtue and life in accordance with the general nature of the world.

The study of nature (physics) is important and useful, not because on its basis it is possible to change nature (the surrounding world), but because, in accordance with nature, a person can order his life. A person should not desire what he cannot master: “If you want your children, your wife and your friends to live permanently, then you are either crazy, or you want things that are not in your power to be in yours. power and that what is alien is yours ”33. And since it is not within the power of man to change the objective world, society is not within the power of man, one should not strive for this.

Just as reason rules over man, so the world mind, the logos (God), rules over the world. He is the source and determining factor in the development of the world. Things, as a controlled god, should obey him. Freedom and independence, to which he attached great importance, Epictetus limits only to spiritual freedom, freedom of humility with reality.

Emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (121-180) also belongs to the Roman Stoics, during whose reign the crisis phenomena became even more intense. The upper social classes refuse to change anything in order to preserve the existing social order. In Stoic ethics, they see a certain means of moral revival of society. The Emperor in his reflections "To himself" proclaims that "the only thing that is in the power of man are his thoughts." “Look into your gut! There, inside, there is a source of good, which is able to beat without running out, if you constantly dig up to it. " He understands the world as eternally flowing and changeable. The main goal of human aspirations should be the achievement of virtue, that is, submission to "reasonable laws of nature in accordance with human nature." Marcus Aurelius recommends: "A calm thought with everything that comes from the outside, and justice with everything" that is realized at your own discretion, that is, your desire and action, let them consist in actions generally useful, for this is the essence in accordance with your nature. "

Marcus Aurelius is the last representative of ancient stoicism, and in fact this is where stoicism ends. In his work, certain traces of mysticism appear, which is closely associated with the decline of Roman society. The Stoic doctrine, in particular the emphasis on the need to "subordinate oneself" (to the world mind - logos - to God), largely influenced the formation of early Christianity.

Epicureanism. The only materialistic (for its time, clearly materialistic) philosophy in ancient Rome was Epicureanism, which spread significantly in the last years of the Roman Republic and at the beginning of the imperial rule. Its most prominent representative was Titus Lucretius Kar (c. 95-55 BC), who wrote the philosophical poem "On Nature", which is also a valuable work of fiction in the literature of that time.

Matter, first of all, is the primary bodies of things, and secondly, everything that is the totality of the named elements. No force, however, can destroy atoms, they always win with their impenetrability. The first is deeply different, those two things have a double character, as it was said above, matter and space, everything happens in it; they are necessary in themselves and are pure. Wherever emptiness, so-called space, stretches, there is no mother; and tai, where matter has spread, there is no emptiness and space in any way. The first bodies are complete without emptiness. Secondly, in the things that have arisen, emptiness exists, and next to it is whole matter.

In this form, Lucretius expounds the teachings of Democritus and Epicurus about atoms and emptiness, emphasizing at the same time the inability to create matter as such.

If the first bodies, solid and without cavities, as I have already said, they are undoubtedly eternal. Infinity of matter in space is also connected with the indestructibility and non-creation of matter, that is, with its infinity in time.

The universe itself cannot constrain itself; truth is the law of nature; he wants the boundaries of matter to be formed by emptiness, and matter - by the boundaries of emptiness, the merit of this alternation is the universe without end 39.

What you should know about motion is this: if atoms fall vertically in space due to their own weight, here at an indefinite place and indefinitely they deviate from the path - only so much that the direction is slightly different. If this deviation did not exist, everything would fall into the depths of emptiness, down like raindrops, elements could not collide and combine, and nature would never create anything 40.

He considers the soul to be material, a special combination of air and heat. It flows through the whole body and is formed by the finest and smallest atoms.

What matter the spirit is of and what it consists of, my words will soon be enumerated to you. First of all, I say that the spirit is extremely subtle; the bodies that form it are extremely small. This helps to understand and you yourself will understand that: nothing happens in the world as quickly as what the thought itself represents and forms. From this it is evident that the spirit has the greatest speed than anything that is accessible to the eye; but what is also movable, it is true that it consists of completely round and smallest bodies 41.

In a similar way, he defends atomistic views in the field of the theory of knowledge, which he also developed in many directions.

Lucretius tries to explain in a natural way the emergence of society. He says that originally people lived in a "semi-wild state", without knowing fire and dwelling. Only the development of material culture leads to the fact that the human herd is gradually turning into a society. Naturally, he could not come to a materialistic understanding of the causes of the emergence and development of human society. His desire for a "natural" explanation was limited by both social and epistemological parameters. However, despite this, his views on society were, in particular, in comparison with the then idealistic approach, significant progress. Just like Epicurus, he believed that society, public organization (law, laws) arise as a product of mutual agreement between people (contract theory): Neighbors then began to unite in friendship, No longer wishing to mend lawlessness and enmity, and children and women the floor was taken under guard, showing with gestures and awkward sounds that everyone should have sympathy for the weak. Although consent could not be universally recognized, the best and most part of the treaty was faithful to fulfill 42.

The next five tropes, which were added by the successor of Enesidemus Agrippa, further increased doubts about the correctness of the ideas of other philosophical trends.

Roman skepticism was a specific expression of the progressive crisis of Roman society. Searches and studies of contradictions between the statements of previous philosophical systems lead skeptics to a broad study of the history of philosophy. And although it is in this direction that skepticism creates a lot of value, on the whole it is already a philosophy that has lost the spiritual strength that lifted ancient thinking to its heights. In essence, skepticism contains more outright rejection than methodological criticism.

Neoplatonism. The progressive crisis of Roman society in the last years of the republic and in the first years of the empire is naturally reflected in philosophy. Mistrust in the rational development of the world, to a greater or lesser extent manifested in various philosophical directions, together with the increasing influence of Christianity, more and more strengthened the multiplying signs of mysticism. The irrational movements of this era tried in various ways to adapt to the changing role of philosophy. Neo-Pythagorean philosophy, of which Apollonius of Tiana was a typical representative, tried to strengthen itself by returning to the mysticism of numbers, bordering on charlatanism; the philosophy of Philo of Alexandria (30s BC - 50 AD) sought to combine Greek philosophy with Jewish religion. In both concepts, mysticism appears in a concentrated form.

More interesting was neo-Platonism, which developed in the 3rd-5th centuries AD. e., in the last centuries of the existence of the Roman Empire. It is the last integral philosophical movement that arose during the period of antiquity. Neoplatonism takes shape in the same social setting as Christianity. Like the rest of the irrationalist philosophical trends of late antiquity, neo-Platonism, to a certain extent, is a manifestation of the rejection of the rationalism of previous philosophical thinking. It is a specific reflection of social despair and the progressive decomposition of social relations on which the Roman Empire was based. Its founder was Ammonius Saccas (175-242), and the most prominent representative was Plotinus (205-270) 43.

Plotinus believed that the basis of all that exists is a supersensible, supernatural, over-rational divine principle. All forms of being depend on it. Plotinus declares this principle to be absolute being and says about it that it is unknowable. "This being is and remains God, does not exist outside of him, but is precisely his very identity." 44 This is the only true being is comprehensible only through penetration into the very center of pure contemplation and pure thinking, which becomes possible only with the "rejection" of thought - ecstasy (extasis). Everything else that exists in the world is derived from this one true being. Nature, according to Plotinus, was created in such a way that the divine principle (light) penetrates through matter (darkness). Plotinus even creates a certain gradation of existence from external (real, true) to the lowest, subordinate (inauthentic). At the top of this gradation is the divine principle, then - the divine soul, and below all - nature.

Simplifying somewhat, we can say that the divine principle of Plotinus is an absolutization and some deformation of the world of Plato's ideas. Plotinus devotes much attention to the soul. She is for him a certain transition from the divine to the material. The soul is something alien to the material, bodily and external in relation to them. This understanding of the soul distinguishes the views of Plotinus from the views of not only the Epicureans, but also the Greek and Roman Stoics. According to Plotinus, the soul is not organically connected with the body. She is part of the common soul. The bodily is the bond of the soul, worthy only of overcoming. "Plotinus, as it were, pushes aside the bodily, sensual and is not interested in explaining its existence, but only wants to cleanse it from it, so that the universal soul and our soul do not suffer damage." The emphasis on "spiritual" (good) leads him to the complete suppression of all bodily and material (evil). This translates into the preaching of asceticism. When Plotinus speaks of the material and sensible world, he characterizes it as inauthentic being, as non-existent, “having in itself a certain image of being” 46. By its nature, inauthentic being has no form, properties or any signs. This solution to the main philosophical problematics in Plotinus marks his ethics. The principle of goodness is connected with the only truly existing - with the divine mind, or soul. On the contrary, the opposite of good - evil is associated and identified with inauthentic being, that is, with the sensible world. From these positions, Plotinus proceeds to the problems of the theory of knowledge. For him, the only true knowledge is the knowledge of true being, that is, of the divine principle. The latter, of course, cannot be comprehended by sensory knowledge; it is also not cognizable in a rational way. The only way to approach the divine principle Plotinus considers (as already mentioned) ecstasy, which is achieved only by spiritual effort - mental concentration and suppression of everything bodily.

The philosophy of Plotinus specifically expresses the hopelessness and insolubility of contradictions 47, which become all-encompassing. This is the most expressive harbinger of the end of ancient culture.

Porfiry (c. 232-304) became a direct disciple of Plotinus and the continuer of his teachings. He showed great attention to the study of the works of Plotinus, published and commented on them, compiled a biography of Plotinus. Porfnrius was also engaged in the study of problems of logic, as evidenced by his "Introduction to the categories of Aristotle", which marked the beginning of the dispute about the real existence of the common.

In philosophy, he develops the thoughts of Plotinus concerning the divine principle, mind and soul. Among these Plotinov's essences, he distinguishes others, transitional ones.

Also noteworthy is his attempt to substantiate ancient polytheism in the spirit of Plotinus' philosophy. Simultaneously with the divine principle as the only truly existing, he recognizes a number of other deities (12 heavenly gods, the number of which he then increases to 36 and further to 360; then there are 72 earthly gods and 42 gods of nature). This is, in fact, a mystical-speculative attempt to preserve the ancient image of the world in the face of the coming Christianity.

Another school of Neoplatonism - Athenian - is represented by Proclus (412-485). His work in a certain sense is the completion and systematization of neo-Platonic philosophy. He fully accepts the philosophy of Plotinus, but in addition to this he publishes and interprets Plato's dialogues, in the comments to which he expresses original observations and conclusions.

It should be noted that Proclus gives the clearest explanation and presentation of the principle of the dialectical triad 48, in which he distinguishes three main points of development: 1. The content of the created in the creator. 2. Separation of the already created from the creator. 3. The return of the created to the creator. The conceptual dialectics of ancient Neoplatonism is marked by mysticism, which reaches its pinnacle in this concept. Both neoplatonic schools deepen and systematically develop the basic ideas of Plotinus' mysticism. This philosophy, with its irrationalism, aversion to everything bodily, emphasis on asceticism and the doctrine of ecstasy, had a significant impact not only on early Christian philosophy, but also on medieval theological thinking. We have traced the emergence and development of ancient philosophy. For the first time practically all the main philosophical problems crystallized in it, the basic ideas about the subject of philosophy were formed and, although not explicitly, the problem was posed, which F. Engels formulated as the main question of philosophy. In ancient philosophical systems, philosophical materialism and idealism were already expressed, which in many ways influenced subsequent philosophical concepts. Lenin stated that the history of philosophy has always been an arena for the struggle between two main trends - materialism and idealism. The immediacy and, in a certain sense, the straightforwardness of the philosophical thinking of the ancient Greeks and Romans make it possible to understand and more easily understand the essence of the most important problems that accompany the development of philosophy from its inception to the present day. In the philosophical thinking of antiquity, in a much clearer form than it happens later, worldview clashes and struggles are projected. The initial unity of philosophy and the expanding special scientific knowledge, their systemic allocation explain very clearly the relationship between philosophy and special (special) sciences. Philosophy permeates the entire spiritual life of ancient society, it was an integral factor in ancient culture. The richness of ancient philosophical thinking, the formulation of problems and their solution were the source from which the philosophical thought of subsequent millennia drew.

ROMAN PHILOSOPHY

antique the period of Hellenism (3rd – 2nd centuries BC - 5–6th centuries). We can talk about the separation from this Hellenistic. philosophy proper Roman, associated with those philosophers, to-rye had a special to Rome itself.

Western Rome. developed on the basis of large-scale slavery and land ownership, the conquest of vast territories, which led to the subordination of many. nationalities, which caused the creation of a huge bureaucratic apparatus and the development of sophisticated politicians. management methods. To implement these polit. tasks needed a subtly developed, synthesis of unprecedented universalism and unprecedented subjectivism. The Romans were characterized by a combination of maximum practicality and theoretical. aspirations, which resulted in the creation of a large number of studies in various fields of science. R. f. reflected this combination of practicality and logical. sophistication, universalism and whimsical subjectivism.

Main R.'s periods f. stand out according to the stages of development of Rome. While Roman slavery and land ownership grew in purely quantitative terms, Rome. Philos. sought to go beyond the narrow horizons of the classical. polis and the semi-religious, semi-secular mythology associated with it, sought to move away from the old religious and mythological forms. But when the Roman slave empire became a world empire, it demanded a religious and mythological consecration. Hence the corresponding periodization of R. f.

The first period (3rd – 1st centuries BC) can be called the protocracy or the period of secularization, that is, liberation scientific. thoughts from submission to religion and mythology. The growing up demanded rights for himself and wanted to protect himself in every possible way from those societies. catastrophes, which were accompanied by growth as Rome. republics and Rome. empire. Already among the first representatives of Rome. literature was, for example, the writer Quintus Annius, who compiled the op. under the name "Eugemer", the surviving fragments of which testify to the great popularity of the Greek in Rome. enlightener Eugemer. During this period in Rome. soil developed, which soon became almost official. the doctrine of Rome. states, with their demands to free the individual from any dependence, with their materialism, providentialism and fatalism - the circle of Scipio the Younger (2nd half of the 2nd century BC), to which belonged the satirist Gaius Lucilius, Cicero. The teacher of these Scipio Stoics was the greatest Greek. Stoic Panetius. Panetius and his numerous disciples [except those mentioned - Quintus Tuberon, Mucius Scsevola, Rutilius Rufus, Aelius Stilon (teacher of Varro)] brought Stoicism closer to the vital needs of the growing Roman Republic and instead of the morality of the complete apathy of the former Stoics, they recognized the living in man. Epicureanism was introduced, besides Siron and Philodemus, by Lucretius. In his philosophy, R. f. embraced everything in all its universality and deeply understood the subtlest subject on the path of his complete liberation from this and the afterlife. Finally, the third school of early Hellenism, which found for itself in the Middle Academy, as well as the New Academy, also had such adherents in Rome as Varro, representatives of the Sextii school. Varro later exerted a fruitful influence on the architect Vitruvius, writer and scholar Pliny the Elder. Many went from Epicureanism to Stoicism, such as the poets Virgil and Horace.

Second period (1st century BC - 2nd century). In connection with the end of the republic in Rome and the emergence of the empire of the R. f. could no longer remain only in educational positions. This was the period of the initial investment, i.e. reverse secularization of the process of subordination to scientific. thoughts of religion and mythology.

The formation of a huge world slave-owning power contributed to the establishment of absolutist government, the organization of huge human masses and, above all, an incredibly expanded slave population. In the conditions of the ancient world, such absolutism received religious sanctification and design. The emperor was established, and since then the whole philosophy, the further, the more it acquired not only Caesarean, but also theological. ... Already Virgil, in his youth an Epicurean, in the future, moving on to the chanting of Rome. empire, definitely took this path socio-political. sacralization, Ovid ended with the same, at first, exiled from Rome. In the 1st century. BC. made a famous representative of the Greek. The middle Stay - Posidonius, to-ry reformed Stoicism into religious-mythological, Platonic. direction, as a result of which the Stoic current appeared. Platonism, or the Middle Stand, in its later form, which received great distribution in Rome. Pythagorean-Platonic. it is possible to assume even in such rims. Stoics 1 century. BC as Sextius, Sotion, Nigidius Figulus. The largest representatives of R. f. in this respect Seneca, Epictetus and Aurelius appeared. Seneca's teacher was Attalus, and Epictetus's teacher was Mouzonius Rufus. Sacralization was not so strong here as to drown out other philosophies. currents. Still alive was such an unsacralized philosophy as the cynical philosophy, to a cut in the 1st century. AD should include Demetrius, Oenomai, Demonax, Peregrinus, Theagen, Dion Chrysostom. Stoicism of this time was easily combined with scientific and astronomical. research - Manilius, Germanicus, and allegorical. mythological. interpretations - Kornut, and with poetic. creativity - the pupils of Cornut Persius and Lucan, with historiography - Tacitus, and reached the preaching of honest simplicity of morals, as, for example, in Columella. Purely practical the direction of stoicism of this time was represented by Cato Utichesky, Pet Trazea and Helvidius Priscus. It is also possible to note the influence of late skepticism (Enesidem, Sextus Empiricus and his student Saturnin, an Italian), late Epicureanism (Diogenes of Enoanda), as well as the peripatetic school.

The third period (2–3 centuries) is the period of developed sacralization of philo phy and i. It remained its tool. However, now Platonism has begun to decide. the fight against stoicism, with which he recently united. To drive out the stoic. elements from Platonism, Rome. the philosophers of this time used Aristotle (replacing him with the concepts of the ancient Stoics), and also, together with which not only the mystics were introduced into philosophy. numeric operations, but also intense religion. ... This led to eclecticism, but with a strongly pronounced sacralized tendency, which prepared the next period of the R. f. Now they studied not with the Stoics, but with the Pythagorean Platonists of the Plutarch type. Plutarch's pupils were Guy (who should not be mistaken for the famous lawyer Guy) and Favorin, while Guy's students were Albin (who was listening to the Roman physician and logician Galen) and Apuleius from Madavra. Apuleius worked out the sacralization of this period not only with philosophical, but also with arts. methods. Guy's school also included the anonymous commentator on Plato's Theetetus. The Platonists include Calvisius Taurus (teacher Aulus Gellius, as well as his student and friend Herod Atticus and their contemporary Nigrin). This circle also included Nicostratus, Atticus and his student Harpocration, the famous critic of Christianity Celsus, Sever - commentator on Plato's Timaeus and the grammarians Censorinus. Neopythagoreans were Moderat, Sextus ("Florilegius"), Secund (personal acquaintance of Emperor Adrian). From christ. literature from this period includes op. Manucius Felix, Tertullian, Cecilius, Cyprian, Novatian, Commodian. Certain Gnostics (see. Gnosticism), for example. Valentine, too, were associated with Rome.

The fourth period of R. f. (3-4 centuries) is the culmination of sacralized philosophy - neoplatonism. In neo-Platonism on the absolute idealistic. based on the triumph of the synthesis of universalism and subjectivity. The founder of Neoplatonism, Plotinus, with his disciples Amelius and Porfiry, lived and worked in Rome, so that this initial Neoplatonism still carries Rome. neoplatonism. Subsequent Antich. schools of Neoplatonism developed already in Asia Minor, Athens and Alexandria. But the seal is Rome. universalism lies with them. Traditions Rome. neo-Platonism continued Christ. Augustine and Rome. imp. Julian, apostate from Christianity. In the 4th century. Arnobius and Lactantius bring the sacralization of philosophy to the complete abolition of philosophy itself, which Lactantius especially frankly declared.

The fifth period of R. f. (4th - 5th centuries, although some figures attributed to this period lived in the 6th century) is characterized by a certain weakening of the Neoplatonic. sacralization of philosophy, which is also characteristic of Athenian and Alexandrian Neoplatonism. These philosophers translated more Greeks into lat. lang., more commented on Plato and Aristotle and more engaged in the collection of historical and philosophical. and historical-religious. materials than the development of their own. concepts. These include the Neo-Platonists lat. West: Cornelius Labeon, Chalcidius, Marius Victorinus, Vettius, Agorius Pretextatus, Macrobius, Favonius, Eulogius, from Christ. thinkers, theologians and poets - Prudentius, Peacock, Firmik Matern, Jerome of Stridonsky, Ambrose of Mediolansky.

The sixth period (5th – 6th centuries) is already a transition to cf. centuries. This period includes the Neoplatonists Boethius and Marcian Capella. Sacralized R. f. was so strong that it even survived the fall of Rome. empire, and the fall of all Greco-Rome. paganism. She formed the basis of the theocratic. ideology cf. centuries, in one form or another. It appeared more than once in time. During the Renaissance and in subsequent centuries, Rome. neo-Platonism in the fight against the Middle-century. monotheism took educational forms. Rome. the thinkers Lucretius, Cicero, Seneca, Marcus Aurelius, Apuleius became masters of thoughts no less, and sometimes even more than Plato and Aristotle.

Lit .: K. Marx, Notebooks on the history of epicurean, stoic and skeptical philosophy, in the book: K. Marx and F. Engels, From early works, M., 1956; History of Philosophy, vol. 1, [M.], 1940, sec. four; History of Philosophy, vol. 1, M., 1957, ch. 2, sec. five; Ancient Rome. thinkers. Testimonies, texts, fragments, comp. A. A. Avetisyan, [K.], 1958; Harder R., Die Einbürgerung der Philosophie in Rom, in: Die Antike, Bd 5, V.-Lpz., 1929; Kaerst J., Scipio Ämilianus, die Stoa und der Prinzipat, "Neue Jahrbücher für Wissenschaft und Jugend bildung", 1929, Jg. 5, H. 6, S. 653-75; Heinemann I., Die griechische Weltanschauungslehre bei Juden und Römern, B., 1932; Seel O., Römische Denker und römischer Staat, Lpz., 1937; Heuer K. H., Comitas, facilitas, liberalitas. Studien zur gesellschaftlichen Kultur der ciceronischen Zeit, Lengerich, 1941; Bracher K. D., Verfall und Fortschritt im Denken der frühen römischen Kaiserzeit. Studien zur Zeitgefühl und Geschichtsbewußtsein des Jahrhunderts nach Augustus, Tübingen, 1949; Clarke M. L., The roman mind; studies in the history of thought from Cicero to Marcus Aurelius, Camb., 1956; , La science hellénistique et romaine, in: La science antique et médiévale, P., 1957, S. 301-413; Gigon O., Die Erneuerung der Philosophie in der Zeit Ciceros, in: Entretiens sur l "antiquité classique, t. 3, Gen., 1955, S. 23–61; Heinze R., Vom Geist des Römertums, 3 Aufl ., Darmstadt, 1960; Kro11 W., Die Kultur der ciceronischen Zeit, Bd 1–2, Lpz., 1963.

A. Losev. Moscow.

Philosophical Encyclopedia. In 5 volumes - M .: Soviet encyclopedia. Edited by F. V. Konstantinov. 1960-1970 .

See what "ROMAN PHILOSOPHY" is in other dictionaries:

- (from the Greek phileo I love, sophia wisdom, philosophia love of wisdom) a special form of social consciousness and knowledge of the world, which develops a system of knowledge about the fundamental principles and foundations of human existence, about the most general essential ... ... Philosophical Encyclopedia

The section of philosophy that gives philosophy. interpretation of the historical process. Elements of Philosophy. comprehension of history was contained in antiquity. Philos. and historiographic works. In the Middle Ages philos. the study of history was not separated in any way clearly from ... Philosophical Encyclopedia

Philos. study of the principles and general laws of culture. It can exist as a special theory or as an aspect of a broader concept. From F. to. cultural studies should be distinguished as a special humanitarian science that does not require ... ... Philosophical Encyclopedia

PHILOSOPHY OF CULTURE, a philosophical study of the principles and general laws of culture (see. CULTURE). Cultural studies should be distinguished from the philosophy of culture (see. CULTUROLOGY) as a special humanitarian science. Prehistory of the philosophy of culture ... ... encyclopedic Dictionary

I. The era of the republic 1. The most ancient period. 2. Literature III II centuries. BC e. 3. Literature of the period of civil wars. II. The era of transition to the empire ("Age of Augustus"). III. The era of the empire. Bibliography. I. THE EPOCH OF THE REPUBLIC. 1. ANCIENT PERIOD. ... ... Literary encyclopedia

Philosophy of ancient Rome

Ancient Rome did not create new philosophical systems. After the subordination of Greece to Rome, the teachings that appeared in Ancient Greece in the era of the collapse of the Athenian state were transferred to ancient Roman soil - epicureanism, stoicism, skepticism. The philosopher's prestige reaches its highest point. "The powerful of the world kept in their person a domestic philosopher, who was at the same time their closest friend, mentor, guardian of their souls ... In great sorrow, they invited the philosopher to console him." (Renan E. Marcus Aurelius ... pp. 29–30). The philosopher played the role that later confessors played in Christianity. “Thus, a real historical miracle came true, which can be called the dominion of philosophers” (Ibid. P. 32). The practical orientation of the Roman soul led to the fact that in ancient Rome they were interested not in dialectics and metaphysics, but mainly in ethics. The Romans took two main themes from Greek philosophy: how to avoid the fear of death (this was what the Epicureans strove for) and how to meet it with dignity (Stoics). In ancient Greece, opposed, in ancient Rome, the Stoics and Epicureans complemented each other (Seneca most willingly quoted Epicurus).

The popularity of Epicurus was promoted by the poem "On the Nature of Things" by Lucretius Cara, a native of Rome (c. 99 - c. 55 BC). Lucretius was not a theoretician, but a poet, rather an Epicurean than a poet, because he himself explained that he undertook to express the views of Epicure in a poetic form to facilitate their perception, following the principle that the main thing is pleasure, as, say, a patient is given a bitter medicine together with honey so that it is not unpleasant to drink it.

The problem of "God and evil" is one of the most difficult problems in ethics. Christianity responds to it with the assertion that God gave people free will; Indian philosophy - the concept of karma. The Epicureans give their answer, believing that the gods do not interfere in the lives of people, because otherwise, according to Epicure, they would have to admit that the gods who allow evil are either not omnipotent, or not all-good.

And an interesting thing: Epicurus himself, according to Lucretius, turns out to be higher than the gods, because the gods do not interfere, and Epicurus, with his teaching, saved humanity from fears. Once again we are convinced: the lower the gods are placed, the higher a person is. “I don't know anything about the gods,” says Buddha, and ... he is deified. The gods do not interfere, says Epicurus, and ... is worshiped by God. A recent example is the deification of the rulers of an atheistic state.

The poem of Lucretius ends with a description of mass death from an epidemic. So the optimistic teaching of Epicurus unexpectedly turns into a pessimistic conclusion of the Roman poet regarding the possibility of its implementation in life. Later, with the formation of the empire, there was no room for optimistic teachings at all, and we see only stoics and skeptics.

Epicureanism is more suitable for free people who can climb into the "ivory tower". And the slave? How can he live quietly and without fear to enjoy life? Every person in the era of the empire was under the thumb of a tyrant. Under these conditions, the teachings of Epicurus lose their vitality, no longer fit the social circumstances of the Roman Empire, when a person is forced to confront the authorities.

None of the many followers of Epicurus changed anything in his teaching. Either it is so complete that neither add nor subtract, or creative people did not go to the Epicureans. On the contrary, the metaphysics of the Stoics made a strong tilt towards Plato's idealism, while ethics (and for the Stoics, especially the Roman ones, it was she who was the main one) changed little.

The views of the Roman Stoics differed from the Greek in tonality - the strength of their feelings and the expressiveness of their position - and this was explained by the change in social conditions. Gradually, the dignity of people was undermined and at the same time their confidence.

The psychological reserve of strength was running out, and the motives of doom began to prevail. B. Russell wrote that in bad times, philosophers come up with consolations. “We cannot be happy, but we can be good; let’s pretend that as long as we are good, it doesn’t matter that we are unhappy. This doctrine is heroic and useful in a bad world. " (Russell B. History of Western Philosophy. M., 1959.S. 286).

Among the Roman Stoics, the leading features are not pride, dignity, self-confidence and inner steadfastness, but rather weakness, a feeling of insignificance, confusion, and brokenness. They do not have the optimism of the Greeks. The concepts of evil and death come to the fore. The Roman Stoics demonstrate the steadfastness of despair and patience through which the motive of spiritual freedom breaks through.

Cicero was a well-known Roman propagandist of Stoicism. He explained the basic stoic concepts. "But the first task of justice is not to harm anyone, unless you have been challenged to do so." (Cicero. About old age. About friendship. About responsibilities. M., 1974.S. 63). Living in harmony with nature means “to be always in harmony with virtue, and choose everything else that corresponds to nature only if it does not contradict virtue” (ie, wealth, health, etc.). More, however, Cicero became famous as an orator.

Cicero stood at the deathbed of the republic. As a senator, he speaks like a statesman to the subjects who elected him. The next famous Stoic came when the republic was destroyed. Seneca does not dream of its restoration, he resigned himself to this and his preaching, not edifying, like that of Cicero, but friendly, appeals not to the inhabitants of the state, but to an individual, a friend. The Spaniard Seneca (c. 5 BC - 65 AD) was born in Rome. Since 48 A.D. e. he is the educator of the future emperor Nero, from whom he died. This is an author for all times and peoples, and if there are several books that everyone should read in his life, this list includes "Moral Letters to Lucilius".

From an aesthetic and moral point of view, Seneca's works are impeccable. Even in Plato, highly artistic pieces of text are interspersed with quite ordinary ones. In Seneca, everything is carefully finished and combined into one whole, although we are dealing with a cycle of letters, apparently, really written to the addressee at different times. The unity of the work gives the integrity of the author's worldview. Seneca's moral preaching does not sin with edification, cheap slogans, but subtly leads and convinces. We see in the author a combination of pride, valor, nobility and mercy, which we do not find in either Christian missionaries or philosophers of the modern era.

In the work of Seneca, the motive of suffering prevails, and the confidence in the possibility of getting rid of them dies out, leaving only hope for oneself. "We are not able to change ... the order of things, but we are able to gain the greatness of the spirit, worthy of a good husband, and stoically endure all the vicissitudes of chance, without arguing with nature." (Seneca L.A. Moral letters to Lucilius. M., 1977.S. 270). Outside of himself, a person is powerless, but he can be the master of himself. Look for support in your own soul, which is God in man, advises Seneca.

Seneca opposes external pressure to individual moral self-improvement and the struggle, first of all, with his own vices. “I have not condemned anything except myself. And why would you come to me in the hope of benefit. Anyone who expects to find help here is wrong. Not a doctor, but a patient lives here ”(Ibid. P. 124). Unlike the Cynics of the heyday of philosophy, Seneca considers himself sick.

To gain independence from the despotic forces in whose power a person is, Seneca proposes to become indifferent to fate, not to follow like cattle the leaders of the herd and views that find many followers, but to live as reason and duty requires, that is, by nature. "To live happily and to live in accordance with nature is one and the same" (Anthology of World Philosophy. T. I. S. 514).

According to Seneca, death is needed not because suffering exceeds pleasure, as for Hegesia, but as a way of liberation from a life that does not correspond to human dignity. Seneca's motive for suicide becomes so strong, because in the era of the empire, this was the only way to become free, and freedom first began to be appreciated when it disappeared from real life.

The praise of death by the Roman Stoics is not a thirst for death, but an admission of human defeat. “To the one who fell into the hands of the lord, who strikes his friends with arrows, to the one whom the master forces to rip out the entrails of his own children, I will say: why are you crying, madman, what are you waiting for? For the enemy to destroy your family, so that some foreign ruler attacked you? Wherever you turn your gaze, everywhere you will find a way out of your misfortunes! Look at this steep cliff - it leads to freedom, look at this sea, this stream, this well - freedom lurks at their bottom; look at this tree - short, withered, wretched - freedom hangs from it. Your neck, your throat, your heart - they will help you escape bondage. But these paths are too difficult, they require great power, mental and physical; you ask which way to freedom is open; it is in any blood vein of your body ”(History of Roman Literature. Vol. 2. P. 81).

Death for Seneca is the criterion of a lived life. "All our former words and deeds are nothing ... death will show what I have achieved, and I will believe her." (Seneca L.A. Moral letters ... p. 50). “Death is not evil. - You ask what she is? “The only thing in which the entire human race is equal” (Ibid. P. 320). But in life, all people are equal in one thing - both free and slaves. All people are slaves to fortune. And each is in slavery to himself. “Show me who is not a slave. One is in bondage to lust, the other to avarice, the third to ambition, and everything is to fear ... There is no slavery more shameful than voluntary ”(Ibid. P. 79). Understanding slavery in its broadest sense and fighting against it, thereby reflecting the growing anti-slavery sentiments, Seneca believes that every person is potentially free in the soul.

Seneca's morality is distinguished by mercy, philanthropy, compassion, pity, reverent attitude towards other people, benevolence, gentleness. In an omnipotent empire, the life of a philosopher is unsafe, and this was fully experienced by Seneca, accused by a former student of Nero of conspiring against himself. Although no evidence was found, Seneca, without waiting for the arrest, opened his veins, remaining true to his views. It is not so important whether Seneca participated in the conspiracy, the fact that he took part in state affairs at such a time suggests that he was preparing his own death.

Seneca is the pinnacle of moral and philosophical thought. He managed to synthesize the valuable that was in ancient ethics, not excluding the opponent of the Stoics Epicurus. Seneca scoffed at sophisms and antinomies. He could agree that objective truth is impossible, but for him this question is not important, but the question of how to live? You cannot escape it by paradoxes, it must be solved here and now.

Seneca combined the fates of three great ancient Greek philosophers. He was the tutor of the future emperor, like Aristotle; wrote as artistically as Plato; and he died, like Socrates, in the conviction that, according to the establishment of nature, "he who brings evil is more wretched than the one who suffers."

Epictetus (c. 50-140) was the first of the famous philosophers who was a slave, but for the Stoics, who recognize all people as equal, this is not surprising. The owner who mocked him broke his leg and then released the cripple. Together with other philosophers, he was subsequently expelled from Rome and opened his own school in Nicopolis (Epirus). His students were aristocrats, poor people, slaves. In his school of moral development, Epictetus taught only ethics, which he called the soul of philosophy.

The first thing a student needed was to realize his own weakness and powerlessness, which Epictetus called the beginnings of philosophy. The Stoics, following the Cynics, believed that philosophy is a medicine for the soul, but for a person to want to take medicine, he must understand that he is sick. “If you want to be good, first be imbued with the conviction that you are bad” (Quoted from: Makovelsky A. Morality of Epictetus. Kazan, 1912, p. 6).

The first stage of philosophical training is the discarding of false knowledge. Having begun to study philosophy, a person experiences a state of shock when, under the influence of true knowledge, he seems to go crazy, abandoning his usual notions. After that, the new knowledge becomes a person's feeling and will.

Three things are necessary, according to Epictetus, to become virtuous: theoretical knowledge, inner self-improvement and practical exercises ("moral gymnastics"). Requires daily self-testing, constant attention to yourself, your thoughts, feelings and actions; vigilant tracking of oneself as the worst enemy. To get rid of passions, one must gradually reduce the food they eat. If you are used to getting angry every day, try to get angry every other day, etc.

Epictetus's two basic tenets are "endure and abstain." Withstand all the external difficulties that befall you, and whatever happens, take it easy. Refrain from any manifestations of your own passions, remembering that yours is only mind and soul as something single and rational, and not a body.

On earth, all are captives and equally children of God. Epictetus cried out to God so passionately that he was called the forerunner of Christianity. We find in Epictetus the golden rule of ethics. “The situation that you do not tolerate, do not create for others. If you do not want to be a slave, do not tolerate slavery around you. "

Unusually for a philosopher, but completely opposite to that of Epictetus, the social position of Marcus Aurelius (121-180) is an emperor. Yet his pessmism and courage of despair are just as expressive. Not only the position of the individual, especially the slave, but also of the empire became shaky. The period of its decline was approaching. Marcus Aurelius had tremendous power, but it did not please him. Strange as it may seem, it is during the period of the empire's maximum power that a person inside it feels most unprotected and insignificant, crushed and helpless. The stronger the state, the weaker the person. And not only a slave or a courtier, but the almighty ruler himself.

Like all Stoics, Marcus Aurelius seeks meaning. "Why should I live in a world where there is no deity, where there is no providence" (Marcus Aurelius. Reflections. II, 11). The Epicurean effort to break addiction makes life meaningless. It is the duty of man to perform a reasonable providence. “I am doing my duty. Nothing else distracts my attention. "

Duty is promoted by virtues, more precisely, one virtue as a unity, which in various situations manifests itself in the form of prudence - the knowledge of what is good, what is evil, what should be done and what is not; sanity - knowledge of what to choose, what to avoid; justice - knowledge about rewarding everyone according to their merits; courage, knowledge of the terrible and fearless; righteousness - justice to the gods.

Marcus Aurelius also speaks about the desirability of such character traits as simplicity, integrity, integrity, seriousness, modesty, piety, benevolence, love, firmness in the performance of a proper deed. “So, show yourself in that which completely depends on you: genuineness, severity of disposition, endurance, severity to yourself, non-observance, unpretentiousness, benevolence, nobility, self-restraint, lack of speech, dignity” (Ibid. IV, 5). “Perfection of character is to spend every day like the last” (Ibid. VII, 69).

Marcus Aurelius came very close to the Gospel "love your enemies", although he was an opponent of Christianity. He gives three excuses for why you shouldn't be angry with those who offended you: firstly, on this your own goodwill is tested; secondly, people cannot be corrected, and therefore there is no point in denouncing them; thirdly, “the best way to take revenge on the unkind is not to become like them” (Ibid. VI, 6).

The universal mind is everywhere, like air, and it must be thanked for everything, even for misfortune. Fate prescribes something to a person, just like a doctor prescribes a medicine. Here it is not philosophy, as with the Cynics, but fate is a doctor. The medicine can be bitter. Likewise, evil in the world is a bitter medicine that nature heals. This is close to the Christian idea that illness is given as a punishment for sins, and a person cannot and should not figure out what he is punished for. Disease would not be given by nature if it did not benefit the whole.

The obstacles themselves, like the evil, help us. "And it promotes the very obstacle to the work in the matter and leads along the path the difficulty of the path" (Ibid. V, 20). Pain and pleasure have nothing to do with ethics, since they do not make a person better or worse, and therefore are neither good nor evil. Marcus Aurelius owns the well-known expression "life is a struggle", although he was not inclined to admire it.

The main thing in life is to be worthy of God, genius, virtue, and keep your own color, like an emerald. “Roll up into yourself” (Ibid. VII, 28). Live in the present day, but do not get attached to it, and do not be offended by anyone.

An important place in the philosophy of Marcus Aurelius is occupied by the requirement to be always the same in response to the actions of external circumstances, which means constant proportionality, internal consistency of the mental make-up and all life. “To be like a cliff against which the wave beats relentlessly; he stands, and the heated wave subsides around him ”(Ibid. V, 49).

Seneca had similar thoughts. “Trust me, it's a great thing to always play one role. But no one but the sage does this; all others are multifaceted " (Seneca A.L. Moral letters ... p. 310). Lack of integrity and wholeness is the reason that people, being entangled in changing masks, find themselves split. And integrity is needed because the person himself is a part of the world whole, without which he cannot exist separately from the rest of the body like an arm or a leg. The idea of the unity of everything in the universe is constantly repeated by Marcus Aurelius.

That was the only case in world history when a philosopher ruled the state and the visible social peak of the triumph of philosophy was reached. It would seem that it was Marcus Aurelius who would try to organize the state on the principles that were developed by philosophy since Socrates and Plato. But he not only did not start cardinal transformations (although as an emperor he had all the possibilities - not like Plato), but he did not even turn to people with philosophical sermons that became fashionable at that time, but kept only a diary - for himself. This is an extreme degree of frustration in the hope of improving the situation. Plato's wish for a philosopher to rule the state came true, but Marcus Aurelius understood how difficult it is to correct people and social relations. In the self-belittling of Socrates there was irony, in the self-belittling of Seneca and Marcus Aurelius there was genuine sorrow.

The former slave Epictetus, the philosopher on the throne, Marcus Aurelius, the statesman and writer Seneca, who taught people how to live, are comparable in artistic talent to Plato, and in the piercing of their writings closer to us than Plato - these are the most significant names of Roman stoicism. All three were united by the belief that there is a reasonable need for submission to the universal higher principle, and only the mind, not the body, should be considered as their own. The difference is that, according to Seneca, everything in the external world is subordinate to fate; according to Epictetus - the will of the gods; according to Marcus Aurelius - to the world mind.

The similarities between the Roman Stoics and the Epicureans, as well as between the Greeks, were in the orientation towards life by nature, isolation and autarchy, serenity and apathy, in the idea of the materiality of the gods and the soul, the mortality of man and his return to the world whole. But the Epicureans' understanding of nature as a material universe remained, while the Stoics - as reason; justice as a social contract - by the Epicureans, and as a duty to the whole world - by the Stoics; recognition of free will by the Epicureans and a higher order and predetermination by the Stoics; the idea of the linearity of the development of the world among the Epicureans and the cyclical development of the Stoics; orientation towards personal friendship among the Epicureans and participation in public affairs among the Stoics. For the Stoics, the source of happiness is reason, and the basic concept is virtue; for the Epicureans, respectively, feelings and pleasure. The Stoics began to move away from the main line of antiquity, and the motives of mercy and obedience brought them closer to Christian ethics, as the desire to suppress all desires - to Buddhism. The late Stoics, however, lacked confidence in their own abilities, they were corroded by skepticism, and here they were inferior to religion.

Skeptics opposed the Stoics and Epicureans in Rome, as well as in Greece, and their importance increased as the creative potential of philosophy weakened. Skepticism is an inevitable companion of rational wisdom, just as atheism is a companion of religious faith, and it is only waiting for the moment of its weakening, just as atheism is for the moment of weakening of faith. Denying the idea of the common good, Sextus Empiricus (late 2nd - early 3rd century AD) casts doubt on all the achievements of philosophy, starting with Socrates. With his reasoning about the impossibility of rationally explaining the change, Sextus completes what was begun by Zeno's aporias. The difference between Sextus and the Eleatics is that they put forward aporias to prove the discrepancy between rational truths and sensory data. Sextus uses aporias to discredit both feeling and reasoning. Zeno argued that there is no movement, and Sextus, on the basis of the same aporia, concludes that nothing exists. The meaningless skepticism of Sextus Empiricus replaced the meaningless skepticism of Socrates' life, and with this philosophy signed its own verdict.

However, if everything is denied, then nothing can be said. This forces us to speak out positively. If I do not know, do I know something, then maybe I do know something? Consistent skepticism paves the way for faith. The merit of skeptics is in trying to determine the limits of rational thinking in order to find out what to expect from philosophy and what not. Dissatisfied with the framework in which the mind functions, they turned to religion. Undermining the conclusions of reason, skeptics more and more persuaded people to believe and thereby prepared the victory of Christianity, for which faith is higher than reason. They were helped by the Epicureans and Stoics. It turned out that the fear of death cannot be overcome by rational arguments. Christianity did not arise by chance, its spread was prepared by the logic of the development of ancient culture. People want not only happiness here, but also after death. Neither Epicurus, nor the Stoics, nor the skeptics promised this. Facing a dilemma: reason or faith, people preferred faith, in this case Christian. Turning away from rational wisdom, the younger and more self-confident Christianity defeated the decrepit ancient philosophy. The latter died like a wise old man giving way to a new generation.

From the end of the II century. Christianity takes over the minds of the masses. We can say that Christianity, in its struggle with philosophy, defeated the most powerful empire in the history of mankind, and the only emperor-philosopher in history suffered a crushing spiritual defeat. Why did this happen? The weakening of the creative potential of ancient philosophy, a change in the spiritual climate and social conditions of life of the then society led to the triumph of Christianity. Philosophy was first overthrown, and then used for the needs of religion, turning for fifteen hundred years into a servant of theology.

In Roman civilization, philosophy loses its theoretical power, becoming predominantly practical wisdom, which deprives it of its main advantage - an intelligent search for truth. In trying to be useful first of all, philosophy exhausts itself.

This text is an introductory fragment.