Александр Жалнин – Манифест Философии Реальности. MANIFESTO OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF REALITY (страница 3)
From the subjective side, reality as a concept is a special form of cognition that distinguishes two sides of the cognized object—the objective and the subjective—in their unity and mutual transition.
The objective side of reality discloses its natural regularities as a phenomenon (an event of the brain), while the subjective side of reality discloses its regularities as a form of cognition of any object (a universal philosophical formula of cognition).
A systematic description of the subjective side of reality is precisely the Philosophy of Reality, in which the concept of reality is the most general, a meta-concept, and its most general constituent parts are its sides—the objective and the subjective—which unfold their content as they are detailed and concretized by subordinate generic and specific concepts.
“Reality from the objective side” and “the objective side of reality” are different objects: the former is a representation (but not a concept) within the Basic Method of Philosophy of reality as a physical process; the latter is part of the definition of its meta-concept. The first follows from conceiving reality as a natural process; the second follows from conceiving reality as a component of the conceptual apparatus of consciousness.
Similarly, “reality from the subjective side” and “the subjective side of reality” are different objects: the former is a concept—a special form of cognition—while the latter is a part of that concept.
Since, on the one hand, the brain as a physical object is part of nature, and on the other hand, nature as a concept is part of consciousness, each side is both an autonomous whole and a part of the other side. Consequently, each side is both the source of development and the explanation of the other side, which, according to the Basic Method of Philosophy, is called the mutual transition of the objective and subjective sides of reality.
The most general concept of the objective side of reality is the concept of existence (of any object), and the most general concept of the subjective side of reality is the concept of essence (of any object).
In their mutual transition, the existence (of any object of cognition) is its essence as reality, and its essence is its existence as reality.
Hence, the reality of any object of cognition is the unity of its existence as essence and its essence as existence.
Приложение 2. Основной Метод Философии
The Basic Method of Philosophy
Introduction. The main problem of modern Philosophy
Modern Philosophy, unlike other disciplines, has one amazing feature: it does not know what it is. And the point here is not so much in the accuracy of the definitions of its subject matter, but in fundamental disagreements about its essence: some consider it science, others consider it art, still others consider it a special way of thinking, fourth find religion in it, fifth find mysticism, and so on, up to to those who consider it empty verbiage.
By the way, there are quite a few of the latter and their arguments are well founded: the quality of many philosophical publications is such that the difference between them and verbiage is sometimes rather arbitrary, if at all.
It should be noted that the matter of clarifying the essence of philosophy – if we talk about a common opinion – has long reached a dead end, so some suggest that philosophy should be considered what each particular philosopher thinks about it. True, this leaves open the question of how to determine who exactly is a philosopher and who is not.
Such a situation, on the one hand, attracts many people to “philosophy” who want to prove themselves in this “mysterious and incomprehensible” area, which makes it close to the people, and on the other hand, it litters it very much, as if in mathematics, along with with formulas and numbers, would use poems and music. In addition, the fuzziness of the modern understanding of philosophy attracts many individuals with fuzzy, eclectic, demagogic thinking, which in other disciplines is a sign of mental retardation.
For the same reasons, the development of philosophy itself also stopped: how can you develop something if you do not know what it is? Or, if we talk about the practical needs of understanding various life problems – what should philosophy develop to solve them, which would not be within the competence of many sciences and modern technologies? Many are looking for “wisdom” in philosophy, which is not found in the sciences and art, but if you start to understand the texts they offer for this title, it immediately becomes clear that this is a kind of fraud, only with the use of confusing terminology, which as a result does not promote solution to the problem.
Thus, we come to the question of the foundations of philosophy – and as we know, it is with the idea of wisdom that its emergence is connected. It is obvious that philosophizing is a type, a special way of thinking, or, to put it another way, it is a special way of thinking. Which, as was believed in antiquity, wise people possessed. Isn't that what Heraclitus meant when he said that much knowledge does not make the mind better?
Введение. Основная проблема современной философии
Современная философия, в отличие от иных дисциплин, имеет одну удивительную особенность: она не знает, что она есть такое. И дело здесь не столько в точности определений её предмета ведения, сколько в принципиальных разногласиях о её сущности: одни считают её наукой, другие считают её искусством, третьи – особенным способом мышления, четвёртые находят в ней религию, пятые – мистику и так далее, вплоть до тех, кто считает её пустым словоблудием.
К слову сказать, последних довольно-таки немало и их доводы имеют веские основания: качество многих философских публикаций таково, что разница между ними и словоблудием порою довольно условна, если вообще имеется.
Надо отметить, что дело с уяснением сущности философии – если говорить о едином мнении – давно зашло в тупик, так что некоторые предлагают считать философией то, что о ней думает каждый конкретный философ. Правда, при этом остаётся открытым вопрос о том, как определить кто именно является философом, а кто нет.
Подобная ситуация, с одной стороны, привлекает в “философию” множество людей, желающих проявить себя в этой “загадочной и непостижимой” области, что делает её близкой к народу, а с другой стороны очень сильно её захламляет, как если бы в математике, наряду с формулами и числами, использовали бы стихотворения и музыку. Кроме того, размытость современного понимания философии привлекает множество лиц с размытым, эклектичным, демагогическим мышлением, которое в других дисциплинах является признаком умственной отсталости.
По этим же причинам остановилось и развитие самой философии: как можно развивать нечто, если не знаешь, что оно есть? Или, если говорить о практических потребностях осмысления различных жизненных проблем – что должна развивать философия для их решения, чего не было бы в компетенции множества наук и современных технологий? Многие ищут в философии “мудрость”, которой нет в науках и искусстве, но если начать разбираться в предлагаемых ими на это звание текстах, то сразу же становится видно, что это разновидность мошенничества, только с применением запутанной терминологии, которая в результате никак не продвигает решение проблемы.
Таким образом, мы подходим к вопросу об основаниях философии – а как мы знаем, именно с представлением о мудрости связано её возникновение. Очевидно, что философствование это тип, особенный способ мышления, или, говоря по-другому, это особенный метод мышления. Которым, как считали в древности, обладали мудрые люди. Не это ли имел в виду Гераклит, говоря, что многознание ума не прибавляет?
The Place of the Philosophical Way in the System of Thinking
If philosophy is a special type of thinking, then we can define it by comparing it with other types of thinking: a) scientific and artistic in terms of the way of thinking and b) technological and personal in terms of the object of thinking.
The scientific type of thinking is characterized by the predominance of formalized and depersonalized content, a few axiomatic foundations, logic as a way of organizing content elements, and as a result, obtaining equally understood (formalized and unified) results, verified by evidence. The subject of scientific thinking is the search for patterns, that is, actions and relations of nature common to all people.
Artistic thinking is characterized by the predominance of figurativeness, emotionality of content, individual skill (talent) and personal attitude of the author as a way of organizing content elements, not strictly defined and numerous cultural grounds, and as a result, obtaining emotionally oriented results. The subject of artistic thinking is the identification and display of various states of human consciousness.