The new Russian philosophy of consciousness was born in 1977 - at the very peak of the Brezhnev stagnation. She was born in a short article by a philosopher Merab Konstantinovich Mamardashvili (1930-1990) and psychologist Vladimir Petrovich Zinchenko (b. 1931).

In 2003, Zinchenko wrote about Mamardashvili in the “Big Psychological Dictionary”:

“Mamardashvili’s ideas about transformed forms of consciousness, about human freedom, free action, about culture, about expanding the sphere of the objective by including the subjective, about the ontology of consciousness and psyche, about the ethics of thinking, the nature of thought and creativity, about the non-verbal inner word, about reflection, about the chronotope and discreteness of life, psychology has yet to be mastered.”

It was the expansion of the sphere of the objective by including the subjective that was devoted to their joint article, placed in the most popular

Main - Sea of ​​Consciousness- Layers of Philosophy - Layer 9 - Part 1

Those of communist ideology - the journal “Questions of Philosophy”. You already understood that the article did not fit into the Marxist worldview by the way Dubrovsky perceives it in the previous chapter. But what was really different about her?

Externally, the article is written as it should be. The authors quote Marx and use many scientific terms. In other words, the editors recognized it as Marxist and faithfully scientific. Moreover, it was called so that any editor instantly fell asleep: "The problem of the objective method in psychology." TO Moreover, the first third and conclusion of the article are generally impossible for a mentally healthy person to read. This is such a piece of science that it hurts your cheekbones.

By the way, why is it not considered spatially? So, after all, we are intellectuals, and an intellectual is a person who brings light from the West to Russia. And in the West, Descartes said: consciousness is non-spatial! Descartes was not talking about consciousness at all, but since the scientific tradition understands it this way, it means that all true sectarians of Psychology will faithfully serve to promote Descartes’ ideas.

Zinchenko and Mamardashvili begin by destroying this self-deception.

“But the main difficulty relates to the possible spatiality of mental processes and their products. Indeed, in the case of art, it is clear that as soon as we mentally deprive, for example, its visual genres of space, we thereby destroy it.

But why do we carry out such a barbaric procedure with psychic reality with extraordinary ease? We will be reminded that it is not at all customary to talk about the spatiality of the psyche in accordance with the Cartesian opposition of soul and body.

So, we get the following picture. The mental has an objective-semantic reality, which, existing in time (and even then transferred to the competence of art), does not exist in space. This is where the banal idea usually arises of placing this strange reality, that is, the psychic, in the space of the brain, just as it was previously placed in the space of the heart, liver, and the like.”(Zinchenko, Mamardashvili, p. BUT).

I do not completely agree with the authors here and believe that modern psychophysiologists, who have long forgotten Descartes, cling to the brain solely for the sake of its materiality, so as not to slide into idealism. The fact that in this case it is necessary to fulfill one condition - in order for consciousness

(Zinchenko and Mamardashvili use the word “psyche”, but this is only for the initial conversation) was placed in the brain, it needs to fit there, that is, it was non-spatial, which means it was precisely Cartesian consciousness - this is probably a revelation for psychophysiologists. Look, they themselves didn’t know that they were Cartesians!

And then it becomes clear that Zinchenko and Mamardashvili, in fact, are at war not only with the Marxist understanding of consciousness, but also with that understanding that I call simple scientific. They call it ordinary, but for scientists.

“After all, it is easier for ordinary consciousness to attribute the properties of objectivity to the neuronal mechanisms of the brain, to look for information-content relations in them and to declare the brain the subject of psychology, than to recognize the reality of the subjective, mental, and even more so to recognize its spatio-temporal characteristics.

It must be said that a similar line of thought can be found not only among physiologists, but also among psychologists. Its consequence is that in psychology the term "objective description" is used as a synonym for the term "physiological description", and "psychological"- as a synonym for "subjective""(Ibid.).

For some reason, psychologists are very comfortable being second-class citizens. And, by the way, not only ours. European and American psychologists already in the early 80s began to subtly squeak that “their approach to the problem of consciousness is fundamentally wrong,” since it defies understanding, but at the same time they spin and spin around the I-Brain connection. It’s as if their leg is nailed to the floor in this place. The essence of their squeaking is no different from the indignant shouting of Soviet Science. It is impossible to move away from the brain - it won’t be long before we lose the last stronghold and support of Materialism in this world!

At the same time, the thoughts of Zinchenko and Mamardashvili that the subjective is real, and this means, in some sense, “substantial,” simply went unnoticed. And it didn’t help that by this time they were already recognized masters of their craft and wrote in the main magazine of the country. They were not noticed abroad, much less recognized in their own country. Only a few friends smiled hesitantly, saying that they were very, very curious...

Mamardashvili and Zinchenko go even further - they see in the “psychic,” that is, in consciousness, the possibility of entering some other reality. Obviously, this opportunity was important to them, but in this article they had to hide more than tell, and I will skip this topic. I will also omit the very interesting but complex topics of the language of description of consciousness and the objective observer. The authors talk about this from the point of view of scientific creativity, that is, the requirements for creating a science of consciousness, and thereby complicate understanding. In any case, the concept of a language for describing consciousness turns out to be associated with a “special reality.”

“The idea that subjectivity is a reality, independent of its knowledge, of where, when and by whom it is known, is also brought about by the experience of the history of culture, the observation of major eras in the history of human consciousness.

Basics- - Part 1

For example, already excursions of Freud's psychoanalysis into ancient mythological cultural systems showed that for thousands of years the picture of objects and beings of an imaginary supersensible reality, ritually staged on human material and behavior, could be translated by analysis into the terms of metapsychology. More precisely, it can be translated into terms of knowledge of the mechanisms of reproduction and regulation of conscious life, mediated in this case by the forced action of special, sensory-supersensible objects, as Marx would call them, for a person.

And hence the possibility of considering the latter, on the contrary, as an objectified projection of the former, as the transformation of their mental functioning brought into reality.”(Ibid., pp. 115-116).

“Sensory-supersensible objects” means that the word “reality” is used here in its original “material” meaning. Although these "things" are special.

“...the independence of mental processes from intracultural hypotheses and theories again indicates their objectivity. And this alone opens up a field for the scientific method of studying them, a field completely independent both from the obligatory search for their material carriers in the brain, and from any a priori established norms, ideals, values, “human nature,” etc.”(Ibid., p. 116).

“This essential opposition is now known to everyone, but its consequences for psychology are not always realized: that it destroys the primitive distinction between soul and body.

Its consistent implementation in psychological research presupposes the acceptance of the fact that subjectivity itself enters into the objective reality given to science, is an element of its definition, and is not located somewhere above it as a soaring phantom of physical events, eliminated by science, or behind it in the form mysterious soul.

When we say that subjectivity “enters reality,” we mean that it enters that reality that is objective, causally organized in relation to the world of consciousness, which is also given to us in the “language of the internal.” Only by asking it at the very beginning (just like in biology, the phenomenon of life), in a part transcendental in relation to the “language of the internal”, can we then highlight objective processes (going on independently of observation and introspection), highlight the aspects of the subject of psychological research, amenable to objective description in cases where the use of the terms “consciousness”, “volition”, etc. is inevitable and, moreover, necessary.

Then it is too late to connect consciousness with natural phenomena and the terms that describe them, and we will never, within the framework of one logically homogeneous study, reach a place where something is thought, seen, remembered, imagined, recognized, emotionally experienced, and motivated by someone. But it is remembered, and imagined, and thought, and recognized...”(Ibid., pp. 116-117).

Chapter 4. New Russian science of consciousness. Mamardashvili, Zinchenko

In other words, our self-knowledge, knowledge of that self, that Self that thinks, imagines, remembers, is impossible if consciousness is initially understood incorrectly. Psychology begins to connect consciousness with natural phenomena like the brain artificially, mechanically, missing the obvious connection that exists between them.

Indeed, it is stupid to come up with some artificial explanations if there is a real one. And if this present has been overlooked, then not only are all other explanations incorrect - all the Sciences that have built themselves on this are complete rubbish! Why do you think thousands of scientists around the world did not notice this article?

In fact, I am not at all sure that Zinchenko and Mamardashvili had built a complete and complete understanding of consciousness by the time this article was published. Their game of scientificity constantly leads to the fact that the concepts of “consciousness,” “mental,” and “subjectivity” replace each other, and their meanings seem to be strung together. For example, the expression “world of consciousness” comes into conflict with the understanding of consciousness as “mental intentional processes” in the definition:

“In the light of such a construction of consciousness, mental intentional processes are brought into analysis from the very beginning not as a relation to reality, but as a relation in reality.”(Ibid., p. 117).

The vagueness of scientific language, using words from different languages ​​without relating them to each other, was, of course, necessary to hide from those who could punish. And the purpose of this article was largely to ensure that it was not understood. Those who don't need it didn't understand. Because of this, many of those who needed it did not understand it.

But if it is possible to correlate “mental processes” with consciousness, then it would be possible to correlate “subjective reality” with some Russian concept. After all, if it is “reality”, then it exists and has always been. And what, before the scientists, no one noticed it in themselves and gave it a name? Personally, I assume that everything that Zinchenko and Mamardashvili talk about is consciousness, but the desire to look scientific plays a cruel joke on them, and they confuse themselves. However, maybe they are captured by some higher idea, and I just don’t understand it yet.

However, I will follow the development of the thought, although it is not a simple exercise. The first thing you should pay attention to is the “pushing back in time” of actions:

"In the activities of conscious beings<...>We are talking, first of all, about the postponement in time of decisive acts in relation to the surrounding world, including the satisfaction of one’s own organic needs. There is a kind of doubling and repetition of phenomena in the gap of ongoing experience, which allows these creatures to learn, self-educate and evolve.”(Ibid.).

Basics- Sea of ​​Consciousness - Layers of Philosophy - Layer 9- Part 1

Despite all the artificiality of language, all this is a description of consciousness. This is indicated by both the concept of “phenomenon” and the concept of “doubling of phenomena,” that is, reflection or creation of images of deferred actions.

“For a psychologist, regardless of the search for biological, evolutionary-genetic foundations for such behavior of living systems, it is enough that such a system of delayed action represents a space where - long before the results of the processes<... > - “symbolizing material transformations of objective circumstances invade, giving at the same time completely bodily, and not subjectively active formations, deployed in introspective reality”(Ibid.).

Of course, the “delayed action system” sounds nice, but where is it and what is it? Generally speaking, this is consciousness, although we can say that it is part of consciousness or one of its abilities. And it is a space deployed outside of “introspective reality,” that is, outside of me, outside of what I look into when I look into myself. And it contains “symbolizing material transformations of objective circumstances.” I understand why they were not understood. But if they had said that there were images, their article would not have been published.

There, outside of me, there are quite “corporal” images.

“These materialized transformations, these mental substitutions, together with what physically happened or is happening -<...> are the naturally developing basis of perceptions, experiences, content of intentions, simultaneous gestalt wholes, characterological personal formations, etc., found at the other pole of the world.”(Ibid.).

The classic enumeration of the phenomena or contents of consciousness once again confirms that we are talking about consciousness and only consciousness, even if the authors did not intentionally obscure the meaning, but were in fact frightened by what was revealed to them and could not fully accept their own discovery. By and large, it is in this case that it would be worth applying Occam’s Razor, that is, the rule not to multiply entities unnecessarily. Instead of coming up with new abstruse terms, it was worth looking around to see if the described phenomena fit into some already known thing. Why build what already exists, over and over again?

Oddly enough, the same Descartes worked, whom they seemed to have rejected at the very beginning. At the mathematical point, which I am, consciousness can only be action, direction, but not space. This is the most important foundation of all Science. Hence her brutal desire to expel from discussion any attempts to see consciousness as spatial.

However, even if Zinchenko and Mamardashvili believe that there is no better name for what they saw than “subjective reality” or “psychic,” this in no way coincides with “psychic” in the generally accepted meaning in Science. This means that they are not describing what Science described when it said

Chapter 4. New Russian science of consciousness. Mamardashvshsh, Zinchenko

About the psyche. What? The next unexpected name on this topic is "sensual fabric" which turns out to be a memory carrier.

“Such carriers are those outside the individual developed by the activities of education,- sensory tissue, woven by quasi-material transformations of reality and becoming an organ for erasing information and stimuli from it. Considering it as a bodily organ, we can, therefore, consider conscious-psychic manifestations as departures And functions this organ.

Only the corresponding terms no longer refer to the sense organs, anatomical and physiological receptors, analyzers, etc., but to the biodynamic and sensory tissue of the objective body of the subjects of cognition and action.”(Ibid., p. 118).

I don’t know what “biodynamic” is, but the “sensory tissue” that makes up my body of knowledge is again consciousness. Although “...and actions” may be confusing, if we remember about images of action, it becomes clear that we act by moving the body, making it move, and this requires complex images that must be stored somewhere.

However, consciousness as a repository of images of action may not be in direct contact with the body. To do this, we need some other medium that transmits the image created by consciousness to the muscles, for example, if the muscles contract due to electrical discharges of the nerves, this medium should be close to electromagnetic. Then it is that external organ that continues the body outward. But the authors talk about sensitivity and the storage medium. This means that in the concept of sensory tissue they combine consciousness and the transmitting medium.

So oh "body of consciousness":

“It may be thought to extend into a special dimension, or “fourth state,” of being, which at least can be said to be non-Euclidean-Cartesian and clearly requires the application of concepts of complex hyperspaces, apparatus of modern technologies and, possibly, phase and even more complex non-metrized representations of space-time.

Within the framework of this article, we do not have the opportunity to delve into this extremely important issue about the non-Euclidean nature of objective mental reality, fields, spaces, and therefore we leave it for further research and reflection. For now, it is important for us to emphasize the idea that these multidimensional superstructures of a person’s natural capabilities are the framework that fits a person into the natural-historical, causal world.

Therefore, we have to state that organs, that is, what we are talking about in real physical terms, grow and unfold in extracerebral and transindividual reality.”(Ibid., p. 118).

In other words, outside the brain and between people in general.

“Mental events do not occur in the head,as neurophysiological events, and even more so they do not occur where the life of the contents reflected in them takes place.

Main - Sea of ​​Consciousness- Layers of Philosophy - Layer 9- Part 1

The mental-subjective is a certain field on which a certain objective content is jointly presented, which has become such for consciousness depending on the formation of the above functional organs.”(Ibid., p. 118).

First, they introduce an additional definition of their “subjective reality or reality” - quasi-objectivity. Quasi is Latin for “as if.” So quasi-objectivity is other-objectivity. Objects, but different, as if from a different substance.

“...research of the last century, converging, as it were, at one point, shows that the constitutive, primary form of this theoretically constructed special reality of the subjective is the quasi-objectivity of the latter”(Ibid., p. 120).

And already in the next paragraph:

“Let us explain what has been said regarding the quasi-objectivity of consciousness.”

This means that my understanding of “sensory tissue” as consciousness does not contradict this understanding of its authors. And I’m very glad, because I didn’t understand all the other scientific names, and the authors were confused about them. But this understanding of consciousness can at least be explored and tested. Well, in order to remove doubts, I’ll say right away that in subsequent works all this will definitely be linked by the authors with consciousness.

Further, Zinchenko and Mamardashvili develop the idea that in this tissue of consciousness, not only and not just images are born and exist, but very complex formations that can be called “functional organs”, additional to the body.

Based on the work of Ukhtomsky “Parabiosis and Dominant” they give them the following definition:

"Functional body- This is any “temporary combination of forces capable of achieving a certain achievement.”(Ibid., p. 125).

Question 48. Psychology as the science of consciousness. The works of R. Descartes, F. Bacon and their significance for psychology. W. Wund and his ideas about psychology.

Psychology as the science of consciousness

The emerging concept of consciousness was used by idealistic philosophy. Augustine ( IV - V century AD) gave consciousness an idealistic tint. This knowledge of the soul about itself is an internal experience, fundamentally different from the experience that the external senses give a person. For the theologian Augustine, knowing the soul meant knowing God - an activity not for every person, but only for the enlightened, close to God. Ideas about the soul and its functions in ancient times were replaced in the Middle Ages by the almost complete dominance of Christian philosophy and ideology, and all surviving psychological ideas acquired a religious overtones. Faith becomes higher than knowledge; any knowledge of nature and the soul based on experience is now out of the question.

Question 49. Psychology as a science of behavior. Behaviorism. Contribution b. Skinner, J. Watson in the development of psychology. Works of domestic physiologists.

1. Psychology as the science of behavior

Psychology should be given a very special place in the system of sciences, and for these reasons. Firstly, this is the science of the most complex thing so far known to mankind. After all, the psyche is “a property of highly organized matter.” If we mean the human psyche, then to the words “highly organized matter” we need to add the word “most”: after all, the human brain is the most highly organized matter known to us. Secondly, psychology is in a special position because in it the object and subject of knowledge seem to merge. The tasks of psychology are incomparably more complex than the tasks of any other science, for only in it does thought make a turn towards itself. Only in it does the scientific consciousness of man become his scientific self-awareness. Finally, Thirdly, the peculiarity of psychology lies in its unique practical consequences. Practical results from the development of psychology should become not only incommensurably more significant than the results of any other science, but also qualitatively different. After all, to know something means to master this “something”, to learn to control it. Learning to control your mental processes, functions, and abilities is, of course, a more ambitious task than, for example, space exploration. At the same time, it must be especially emphasized that, getting to know yourself, Human will change himself. Psychology has already accumulated many facts showing how a person’s new knowledge about himself makes him different: it changes his relationships, goals, his states and experiences. If we move again to the scale of all humanity, then we can say that psychology is a science that not only cognizes, but also designing, creating person. And although this opinion is not now generally accepted, recently voices have become louder and louder, calling to comprehend this feature of psychology, which makes it a science special type. Psychology is a very young science. This is more or less understandable: we can say that, like the above-mentioned teenager, a period of formation of the spiritual powers of humanity had to go through in order for them to become the subject of scientific reflection. Scientific psychology received official registration a little more than 100 years ago, namely in 1879: this year the German psychologist W. Wundt opened the first laboratory of experimental psychology in Leipzig. In the second decade of our century, a very important event occurred in psychology, called the “revolution in psychology.” It was commensurate with the beginning of that very new psychology of V. Wundt. The American psychologist J. Watson spoke in the scientific press and said that the question of the subject of psychology needs to be reconsidered. Psychology should deal not with the phenomena of consciousness, but with behavior. The direction was called "behaviorism" (from the English behavior - behavior). J. Watson's publication “Psychology from a Behaviorist's Point of View” dates back to 1913, which marks the beginning of a new era in psychology. What grounds did J. Watson have for his statement? First the basis is common sense considerations, the same ones that led us to the conclusion that a psychologist should deal with human behavior. Second basis - requests from practice. By this time, the psychology of consciousness had discredited itself. Laboratory psychology dealt with problems that were of no use or interest to anyone except the psychologists themselves. At the same time, life was making itself known, especially in the USA. It was an era of rapid economic development. "The urban population is growing every year<...>- wrote J. Watson. - Life is getting more and more difficult<...>If we ever want to learn to live together<...>then we should<...>engage in the study of modern psychology." And third basis: Watson believed that psychology should become a natural science discipline and should introduce scientific objective method. The question of the method was one of the main ones for the new direction, I would say even the main one: it was precisely because of the inconsistency of the introspection method that the idea of ​​studying consciousness in general was rejected. The subject of science can only be that which is accessible to external observation, i.e., facts of behavior. They can be observed from an external position, and several observers can agree on them. At the same time, the facts of consciousness are accessible only to the experiencing subject himself, and it is impossible to prove their reliability. So, the third reason for changing the orientation of psychology was the requirement for a natural scientific, objective method. What was it like attitude behaviorists to consciousness? In practice, this is already clear, although this question can be answered in the words of J. Watson: “The behaviorist... does not find evidence in anything for the existence of the stream of consciousness, so convincingly described by James, he considers only the existence of an ever-expanding stream of behavior to be proven.” You can answer this way: J. Watson denied the existence of consciousness as a representative scientific psychology. He argued that consciousness does not exist for psychology. As a psychological scientist, he did not allow himself to think otherwise. What psychology is supposed to do requires evidence of existence, and only that which is accessible to external observation receives such evidence. New ideas often appear in science in a tense and somewhat crude form. This is natural, as they should make your way through the ideas that dominate the moment. J. Watson's denial of the existence of consciousness expressed the “brute force” of the ideas that he defended. It should be noted that the denial of consciousness was the main meaning of behaviorism, and at this point it did not stand up to criticism in the future. So, so far we have talked about statements and denials. What was the positive theoretical program behaviorists and how did they implement it? After all, they were supposed to show how behavior should be studied. The point is that the natural scientific materialist tradition, which behaviorism introduced into psychology, demanded causal explanations. What does it mean to causally explain any human action? For J. Watson, the answer was clear: it means finding the external influence that caused it. There is not a single human action that does not have a reason behind it in the form of an external agent. To denote the latter, he uses the concept incentive and offers the following famous formula: S-R(stimulus - response). “...The behaviorist cannot for one moment admit that any of the human reactions cannot be described in these terms,” writes J. Watson. Then it takes the next step: it declares the relation S-R unit of behavior and sets the following immediate tasks for psychology: · identify and describe types of reactions; · explore the process of their formation; · study the laws of their combinations, i.e. the formation of complex behavior. As general final problems of psychology he outlines the following two: to come to the point that predict behavior based on situation (stimulus)(reaction) of a person and, conversely, based on a reaction, infer the stimulus that caused it, i.e. predict by 5 R, and by R conclude about S. By the way, a parallel with W. Wundt suggests itself here. After all, he also began by identifying units(consciousness), set the task to describe properties these units, give their classification, study laws of their binding and education into complexes. J. Watson follows the same path. Only he singles out units of behavior, not consciousness, and intends to collect from these units the whole picture of a person’s behavior, and not his inner world. As examples, J. Watson first gives truly elementary reactions: quickly bring your hand to your eyes and you will get a blinking reaction; sprinkle crushed pepper in the air and sneezing will follow. But then he takes a bold step and suggests imagining as an incentive a new law that is introduced by the government and which, let's say, prohibits something. And so, the behaviorist, according to Watson, should be able to answer what the public reaction to this law will be. He admits that behaviorists will have to work for many, many years to be able to answer such questions. It must be said that each theory has different components. For example, there are postulates - something like axioms; there are more or less proven provisions; finally, there are statements based on faith alone. The latter usually includes the belief that a given theory can extend to a wide sphere of reality. Just such elements of faith are contained in J. Watson's statement that behaviorists can explain with the help of the copula S-R all human behavior and even society. J. Watson believed that a psychologist should be able to trace a person’s life from cradle to death. Apparently, not a single person’s life has been traced “until death” by behaviorists, but J. Watson turned to the “cradle”. He set up his laboratory in an orphanage and studied newborn children and infants. One of the questions that interested him was the following: which emotional reactions are innate in humans and which are not? For example, what causes fear in a newborn child? This question was of particular interest to J. Watson, since, according to his remark, the lives of adults are full of fears. Important merits behaviorism were the following. Firstly, he introduced a strong materialistic spirit into psychology, thanks to him psychology was turned towards the natural-scientific path of development. Secondly, he introduced an objective method - a method based on the registration and analysis of externally observable facts, processes, and events. Thanks to this innovation, instrumental methods for studying mental processes have rapidly developed in psychology. Further, the class of objects under study has expanded enormously; the behavior of animals, pre-verbal infants, etc. began to be intensively studied. Finally, in the work of the behaviorist direction, certain sections of psychology were significantly advanced, in particular the problems of learning, the formation of skills, etc. But the main flaw behaviorism, as I have already emphasized, consisted of underestimating the complexity of human mental activity, bringing the psyche of animals and humans closer together, ignoring the processes of consciousness, higher forms of learning, creativity, personal self-determination, etc.

Psychophysical problem and its solutions

Dualism. Formulation of the problem

Rene Descartes, founder of the modern European philosophy of consciousness, who formulated the psychophysical problem, the main representative of dualism

In its classical form, the psychophysical problem was formulated by the 17th century French thinker Rene Descartes. Descartes believed that the world consists of two kinds of substances: material and spiritual. In this case, the main attribute of matter is extension, and the main attribute of spirit is Thinking. From this point of view, man is a combination of an extended body and a thinking spirit. This position became known as psychophysical dualism. The psychophysical problem as formulated by Descartes is formulated as follows:

How do body and spirit correlate in a person, how do they correlate with each other?

Current state of the problem

In modern philosophy, a psychophysical problem is defined as a question about the relationship between mental states (our thoughts, desires, feelings, etc.) and physical states of the brain.

There are 2 main directions for solving the psychophysical problem - dualism and monism. The first, as we saw in the example of Descartes, proceeds from the assumption that consciousness has a special nature that is fundamentally irreducible to physical material reality. There are several variants of dualism.

Monism historically has three varieties:

• idealistic
• materialistic,
• as well as “neutral”.

In modern philosophy, the idealistic variety of monism, which asserts that material reality is generated by the activity of certain ideal forms (human consciousness or God), is poorly represented. It is mainly shared by some representatives of the so-called religious philosophy.

Monism

Unlike dualism, monism states that there is only one fundamental substance. Most modern monistic theories are materialistic or naturalistic. Naturalistic monism (or simply scientific naturalism) assumes that the only reality that exists is the one described by modern natural science. In other words, modern science describes the world in a complete and comprehensive way. There are several different approaches to solving the problem of consciousness within this general framework.

Another possible position is that there is some primary substance that is neither physical nor mental. From this point of view, both mental and physical are properties of such a neutral substance. A similar point of view in the history of philosophy was first formulated by Benedict Spinoza; in the 20th century it was also developed by Bertrand Russell, thanks to whom it became known as neutral monism.

Only the main varieties of naturalistic monism will be discussed below.

Epiphenomenalism

Anomalous monism

Anomalous monism was developed by the American philosopher Donald Davidson in the 70s of the 20th century. This theory suggests that although there is only one kind of reality - material, and, accordingly, only one kind of events - physical (including events in the brain), there are many ways to describe and interpret these facts. One of the interpretations is the mentalistic dictionary, which describes human behavior in psychological terms.

Criticism of the psychophysical problem from the perspective of linguistic philosophy

To date, there is no generally accepted solution to the psychophysical problem. Some philosophers believe that this is not accidental, since the very question of the relationship between consciousness and body contains an error. Such philosophers say that the psychophysical problem is a pseudo-problem. Within the framework of analytical philosophy, a similar position is occupied mainly by the followers of Ludwig Wittgenstein, who believed that all philosophical problems are in fact just linguistic puzzles.

Critics of the psychophysical problem point out that it is misleading to ask how mental and biological states relate to each other. You just need to recognize that people can be described in different ways - for example, within the framework of mental (psychological) or biological dictionaries. Pseudo-problems arise when we try to describe one vocabulary in terms of another, or when a mental vocabulary is used in the wrong context. Something similar happens, for example, when someone tries to look for mental states in the brain. The brain is simply the wrong context for using a mentalist vocabulary, so looking for mental states in the brain is a category mistake.

A similar point of view on the psychophysical problem is shared by many representatives of logical behaviorism (for example, Gilbert Ryle), as well as functionalism (Hilary Putnam).

Skepticism regarding the psychophysical problem

Other thinkers believe that although the problem of the relationship between body and consciousness is formulated correctly, we are fundamentally unable to give a satisfactory answer to it. For example, Colin McGinn believes that the question of the nature of consciousness in general lies beyond our cognitive abilities. Each biological species has certain limitations. For example, dogs are unable to prove the Pythagorean Theorem. In the same way, people are unable to create a satisfactory theory of consciousness.

Intentionality

Neurobiology

Biology, like all modern natural sciences, is based on a materialistic picture of the world. The object of study of neurobiology as a branch of biology is physical processes, which are considered as the basis of mental activity and behavior. The progress of biology in the study and explanation of mental phenomena is recorded, in particular, in the absence of empirical refutations of its fundamental premise: “changes in the mental states of a subject are impossible without changes in the states of his brain.”

Within neuroscience, there are a large number of branches that study the relationships between mental and physical states and processes.

• Sensory neurophysiology studies the relationship between the process of perception and stimulation.
• Cognitive neuroscience studies correlations between mental and neural processes.
• Neurophysiology describes the dependence of mental abilities on the anatomical parts of the brain.
• Finally, evolutionary biology studies the genesis of the human nervous system, and, to the extent that it is the basis of consciousness, also describes the ontogenetic and phylogenetic development of mental phenomena from their most primitive stages.

Methodological discoveries in neuroscience, in particular the introduction of high-tech procedures for creating neural maps, are pushing scientists to develop increasingly ambitious research programs. One of them is the most complete description of neural processes that would correlate with mental functions. However, many neuroscientists, including Karl Popper's co-author John Eccles, deny the possibility of “reduction” of mental phenomena to processes in the central nervous system. Even if this reduction is carried out, the problem of giving a person’s personal, subjective world to an outside researcher does not yet have a solution, even theoretically.

Computer science

Computer science studies the automated processing of information using computers. For as long as computers have existed, programmers have been able to create programs that allow computers to perform tasks that would require sentient consciousness to be performed by biological beings. The simplest example is performing arithmetic operations. However, it is clear that computers do not use consciousness when multiplying numbers. Could they one day have something we might call consciousness? This question is at the forefront of many philosophical debates surrounding artificial intelligence research today.

On the other hand, many philosophers believe that the thesis that determinism and freedom are compatible is false because people are free in some stronger sense. Such philosophers are convinced that the world cannot completely obey physical laws (at least our consciousness cannot obey them) and, thus, we can potentially be free. The most famous thinker who shared this view was Immanuel Kant. His critics pointed out that he was using an incorrect concept of freedom. They reasoned as follows. If our will is not determined by anything, then we want what we want due to pure chance. And if our desires are random, we are not free. So if our will is not determined by anything, we are not free. To this, Kant's supporters objected that such criticism is based on an incorrect interpretation of Kantian ethics, in which true freedom is the result of the fulfillment of duty prescribed by practical reason.

Self or I

Philosophy of mind also has important implications for the concept of the self. If by “self” or “I” we mean something essential, inseparable from a given subject, then many modern philosophers will argue that such a thing does not exist. The idea of ​​the self as an inalienable unique entity originates from the Christian idea of ​​the immortal soul. Since most modern philosophers of mind are physicalists, this idea is unacceptable to them. David Hume, the first consistent skeptic in the philosophy of mind, was enormously influential in criticizing the concept of the self.

It is in this context that some philosophers argue that we should abandon the idea of ​​selfhood. They often speak of the Self as an illusion, which has unexpected parallels in some Eastern religious traditions, particularly Buddhism. However, a more common position is that we must reformulate the concept of selfhood, abandoning the idea of ​​​​its inalienability and self-identity. Rather, the self is something constantly changing over time and constructed by our language and culture. Dennett takes a similar position today.

Philosophy of consciousness beyond analytical philosophy

The main contribution to modern philosophy of mind has been made by the tradition of analytical philosophy, widespread mainly in English-speaking countries. However, philosophy of mind has also been developed within other areas of philosophy.

Their characteristic feature was the rejection of the psychophysical problem as the main direction of research. Most of these traditions, such as phenomenology or existentialism, involved a direct analysis of consciousness as it is given to us in experience. In contrast to analytic philosophy of mind, these traditions generally did not place much emphasis on scientific methods of inquiry and the logical analysis of language.

In his work “Phenomenology of Spirit,” Hegel distinguishes three types of spirit: the subjective spirit or human consciousness, the objective spirit, that is, the spirit of society and the state, and the absolute idea as the totality of all concepts.

Phenomenology and existentialism

In the 20th century, two main schools emerged, which are a kind of response to Hegel. These are phenomenology and existentialism. The founder of phenomenology, Edmund Husserl, believed that every science should begin with the study of the structure of the experience of human consciousness. Existentialism, one of the main representatives of which was the French philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre, focused on the unique experiences in which the human personality is immersed and on how consciousness operates with these experiences.

In recent decades, theories have emerged that postulate the need for convergence of all major traditions in the study of philosophy of mind.

Russian philosophy of consciousness

Philosophy of consciousness in pre-revolutionary Russia

Philosophy of consciousness in the USSR

Unlike analytical philosophy, as well as phenomenology and existentialism, Soviet philosophy of consciousness was focused primarily not on solving a psychophysical problem or describing the structures of consciousness, but on analyzing the process of cognition and creative change in reality. The theory of consciousness was thus integrated into the methodology of science and social philosophy.

The development of philosophy of consciousness in the USSR was characterized by two contradictory trends. On the one hand, there was the official Marxist orthodoxy, which proposed the concept of reflection formulated by Lenin as the only correct theoretical model of consciousness. On the other hand, the post-war development of science and the tradition of domestic psychology made it possible to create a rather original domestic tradition of studying consciousness at the intersection of science and philosophy.

Bibliography

1. Vasiliev V.V. The difficult problem of consciousness. - M.: Progress-Tradition, 2009. - 272 p. ISBN 978-5-89826-316-0
2. Dubrovsky D.I. A new discovery of consciousness? (Regarding John Searle’s book “Rediscovering Consciousness”) // Questions of Philosophy. - 2003. - No. 7. - P.92-111.
   • It's him. The Problem of Consciousness: An Experience in Reviewing Basic Issues and Theoretical Difficulties
3. Dennett, D. Types of the psyche: towards an understanding of consciousness. - Translation from English. A. Veretennikova. Under general ed. L. B. Makeeva. - M.: Idea-Press, 2004. - 184 p. ISBN 5-7333-0059-0
4. Putnam, H. Reason, truth and history. - M.: Praxis, 2002. - 296 p. - ISBN 5-901574-09-5
   • It's him. Philosophy of consciousness. - M.: House of Intellectual Books, 1999. - 240 p. ISBN 5-733-0004-3 ISBN 5-7333-0004-3 (There was a typo in the paper edition: the ISBN contains 9 digits instead of 10, that is, 733 instead of 7333. You should search for the book on the Internet using both indicated ISBNs)

We are moving to a new major stage in the development of psychology. Its beginning dates back to the last quarter of the 19th century, when scientific psychology took shape. At the origins of this new psychology is the French philosopher Rene Descartes(1596-1650). The Latin version of his name is Renatus Cartesius, hence the terms: “Cartesian philosophy”, “Cartesian intuition”, etc.

Descartes graduated from the Jesuit school, where he showed brilliant abilities. He was especially interested in mathematics. She attracted him because she rested on clear foundations and was strict in her conclusions. He decided that the mathematical way of thinking should be the basis of any science. By the way, Descartes made outstanding contributions to mathematics. He introduced algebraic notation, negative numbers, and invented analytical geometry.

Descartes is considered the founder of rationalist philosophy. According to his opinion, knowledge should be built on directly obvious data, on direct intuition. From it it must be deduced by logical reasoning.

In one of his works, R. Descartes discusses how best to get to the truth. He believes that a person from childhood absorbs many misconceptions, taking various statements and ideas on faith. So if you want to find the truth, then first you need to question everything. Then a person can easily doubt the testimony of his senses, the correctness of logical reasoning and even mathematical proof, because if God made a person imperfect, then his reasoning may contain errors.

So, having questioned everything, we can come to the conclusion that there is no earth, no sky, no God, no our own body. But something will definitely remain. What will remain? It will remain ours doubt- a sure sign that we we think. And then we can claim that we exist, because “... when thinking, it is absurd to assume that something that thinks does not exist.” And then follows the famous Cartesian phrase: “I think, therefore I exist” (“cogito ergo sum”).

“What is thought?” - Descartes asks himself further. And he answers that by thinking he means “everything that happens in us,” everything that we “perceive directly by ourselves.” And therefore, thinking means not only understand, but also " want», « imagine», « feel» .

These statements of Descartes contain the basic postulate from which the psychology of the late 19th century began to proceed - a postulate that states that the first thing a person discovers in himself is his own consciousness. The existence of consciousness is the main and unconditional fact, and the main task psychology is to subject the state and content of consciousness to analysis. Thus, the “new psychology”, having adopted the spirit of Descartes’ ideas, made its subject consciousness.

What do they mean when they talk about states and contents of consciousness? Although they are assumed to be directly known to each of us, let us take as an example a few specific descriptions taken from psychological and literary texts.

Here is one excerpt from the book of the famous German psychologist W. Köhler “Gestalt Psychology”, in which he tries to illustrate those contents of consciousness that, in his opinion, psychology should deal with. In general, they form a certain “picture of the world.”

"In my case<...>this picture is a blue lake surrounded by a dark forest, a gray cold rock against which I leaned, the paper on which I write, the muted sound of leaves barely swayed by the wind, and this strong smell coming from the boats and the catch. But the world contains much more than this picture.

I don’t know why, but suddenly a completely different blue lake, which I admired several years ago, flashed in front of me. Illinois. For a long time, it has become common for me to have such memories appear when I am alone.

And this world contains many other things, for example, my hand and my fingers, which fit on paper.

Now that I have stopped writing and look around me again, I feel a sense of strength and well-being. But a moment later I feel a strange tension in myself, turning almost into a feeling of being trapped: I promised to deliver this manuscript finished in a few months.”

In this passage we are introduced to the content of consciousness, which W. Köhler once found in himself and described. We see that this description includes images of the immediate surrounding world, and memory images, and fleeting feelings about oneself, one’s strength and well-being, and an acute negative emotional experience.

I will give another excerpt, this time taken from the text of a famous natural scientist G. Helmholtz, in which he describes the process of thinking.

“...A thought dawns on us suddenly, without effort, like inspiration<...>Each time I first had to turn my problem around in every possible way, so that all its twists and tangles lay firmly in my head and could be learned again by heart, without the help of writing.

It is usually impossible to get to this point without a lot of continuous work. Then, when the fatigue passed, an hour of complete bodily freshness and a feeling of calm well-being was required - and only then did good ideas come.”

Of course, there is no shortage of descriptions of “states of consciousness,” especially emotional states, in fiction. Here is an excerpt from the novel “Anna Karenina” by L.N. Tolstoy, which describes the experiences of Anna’s son, Seryozha:

“He did not believe in death in general, and especially in her death... and therefore, even after he was told that she died, he looked for her during the walk. Every woman, plump, graceful, with dark hair, was his mother. At the sight of such a woman, a feeling of tenderness rose in his soul, such that he gasped and tears came to his eyes. And he was just waiting for her to come up to him and lift her veil. Her whole face will be visible, she will smile, hug him, he will hear her smell, feel the tenderness of her hand and cry happily... Today, stronger than ever, Seryozha felt a surge of love for her and now, having forgotten himself<...>cut the entire edge of the table with a knife, looking ahead with shining eyes and thinking about her.”

It is unnecessary to remind that all the world's lyrics are filled with descriptions of emotional states, the subtlest “movements of the soul.” Here is at least this excerpt from the famous poem by A. S. Pushkin:

And the heart beats in ecstasy,
And for him they rose again
And deity and inspiration,
And life, and tears, and love.

Or from a poem by M. Yu. Lermontov:

Like a burden will roll off your soul,
Doubt is far away -
And I believe and cry,
And so easy, easy...

So, this is the complex reality that psychologists ventured to explore at the end of the last century.

How to conduct such a study? First of all, they believed, it is necessary to describe properties of consciousness.

The first thing we discover when looking at the “field of consciousness” is the extraordinary diversity of its contents, which we have already noted. One psychologist compared the picture of consciousness to a flowering meadow: visual images, auditory impressions, emotional states and thoughts, memories, desires - all this can be there at the same time.

However, this is not all that can be said about consciousness. Its field is heterogeneous in another sense: a central region clearly stands out in it, especially clear and distinct; This - " field of attention", or " focus of consciousness"; outside it there is a region whose contents are indistinct, vague, undifferentiated; This - " periphery of consciousness».

Further, the contents of consciousness that fill both described areas are in continuous movement. , who has a vivid description of various phenomena of consciousness, distinguishes two types of its state: stable and changeable, quickly passing. When we, for example, think, our thoughts dwell on the images in which the subject of our reflection is clothed. Along with this, there are subtle transitions from one thought to another. The whole process is generally similar to the flight of a bird: periods of calm soaring (stable states) are interspersed with flapping wings (variable states). Transitional moments from one state to another are very difficult to catch by self-observation, because if we try to stop them, then the movement itself disappears, and if we try to remember them after they are over, then the bright sensory image that accompanies stable states overshadows the moments of movement.

The movement of consciousness, the continuous change of its contents and states, V. James reflected in the concept “ mindflow" The flow of consciousness cannot be stopped; not a single past state of consciousness is repeated. Only the object of attention can be identical, and not the impression of it. By the way, attention is maintained on an object only if more and more new aspects are revealed in it.

Further, it can be found that the processes of consciousness are divided into two large classes. Some of them occur as if by themselves, others are organized and directed by the subject. The first processes are called involuntary, second - arbitrary.

Both types of processes, as well as a number of other remarkable properties of consciousness, are well demonstrated using the device that W. Wundt used in his experiments. This is a metronome; its direct purpose is to set the rhythm when playing musical instruments. In W. Wundt's laboratory, it became practically the first psychological device.

V. Wundt suggests listening to a series of monotonous clicks of the metronome. You can notice that the sound series in our perception involuntarily becomes rhythmic. For example, we can hear it as a series of paired clicks with an accent on every second sound (“tick-tock”, “tick-tock”...). The second click sounds so much louder and clearer that we can attribute this to an objective property of the metronome. However, this assumption is easily refuted by the fact that, as it turns out, it is possible to arbitrarily change the rhythmic organization of sounds. For example, begin to hear an accent on the first sound of each pair (“tak-tik”, “tak-tik”...) or even organize sounds into a more complex four-click beat.

So consciousness by its nature rhythmically, concludes W. Wundt, and the organization of rhythm can be either voluntary or involuntary.

With the help of a metronome, W. Wundt studied another very important characteristic of consciousness - its “ volume" He asked himself the question: how many separate impressions can consciousness accommodate at the same time?

Wundt's experiment consisted of presenting a series of sounds to the subject, then interrupting him and giving a second series of the same sounds. The subject was asked: were the rows the same length or different? At the same time, it was forbidden to count sounds; you just had to listen to them and form a holistic impression of each row. It turned out that if the sounds were organized into simple measures of two (with emphasis on the first or second sound of the pair), then the subject was able to compare rows consisting of 8 pairs. If the number of pairs exceeded this figure, then the rows disintegrated, that is, they could no longer be perceived as a whole. Wundt concludes that a series of eight double beats (or 16 separate sounds) is a measure volume of consciousness.

Then he puts on the following interesting and important experiment. He again asks the subject to listen to sounds, but randomly organizes them into complex bars of eight sounds each. And then repeats the procedure for measuring the volume of consciousness. It turns out that this time the subject can hear five such measures of 8 sounds as a complete series, i.e. 40 sounds in total!

With these experiments, W. Wundt discovered a very important fact, namely, that human consciousness is capable of being almost infinitely saturated with some content if it is actively united into larger and larger units. At the same time, he emphasized that the ability to enlarge units is found not only in the simplest perceptual processes, but also in thinking. Understanding that a phrase consisting of many words and an even larger number of individual sounds is nothing more than an organization of a higher order unit. Wundt called the processes of such organization “ acts of apperception».

So, a lot of painstaking work has been done in psychology to describe big picture And properties consciousness: the diversity of its contents, dynamics, rhythm, heterogeneity of its zero, volume measurement, etc. Questions arose: how to explore it further? What are the next tasks of psychology?

And here a turn was made that eventually led the psychology of consciousness to a dead end. Psychologists decided that they should follow the example of the natural sciences, such as physics or chemistry. The first task of science, scientists of that time believed, was to find the simplest elements. This means that psychology must find the elements of consciousness, decompose the complex dynamic picture of consciousness into simple, then indivisible, parts. This is the first thing. The second task is to find the laws of connection of the simplest elements. So, first decompose consciousness into its component parts, and then reassemble it from these parts.

This is how psychologists began to act. V. Wundt declared individual impressions to be the simplest elements of consciousness, or Feel.

For example, in experiments with a metronome these were individual sounds. But he called pairs of sounds, i.e. those very units that were formed due to the subjective organization of a series, complex elements, or perceptions.

Each sensation, according to Wundt, has a number of properties or attributes. It is characterized primarily by quality (sensations can be visual, auditory, olfactory, etc.), intensity, extent (i.e. duration) and, finally, spatial extent (the last property is not inherent in all sensations, for example, it is present in visual sensations and absent from auditory ones).

Sensations with their properties described are objective elements consciousness. But they and their combinations do not exhaust the contents of consciousness. Is there some more subjective elements, or feelings. V. Wundt proposed three pairs of subjective elements - elementary feelings: pleasure-displeasure, excitement-calm, tension-release. These pairs are independent axes of three-dimensional space of the entire emotional sphere.

He again demonstrates the subjective elements he has highlighted on his favorite metronome. Suppose the subject organized sounds into certain beats. As the sound series is repeated, he constantly finds confirmation of this organization and each time experiences a feeling of pleasure. Now, suppose the experimenter greatly slowed down the rhythm of the metronome. The subject hears a sound and waits for the next one; he feels a growing sense of tension. Finally, the click of the metronome comes - and a feeling of release arises. The experimenter increases the clicks of the metronome - and the subject has some additional internal sensation: this is excitement, which is associated with the accelerated rate of clicks. If the pace slows down, then calmness occurs.

Just as the pictures of the external world that we perceive consist of complex combinations of objective elements, i.e., sensations, our internal experiences consist of complex combinations of the listed subjective elements, i.e., elementary feelings. For example, joy is pleasure and excitement; hope - pleasure and tension; fear is displeasure and tension. So, any emotional state can be “decomposed” along the described axes or assembled from three simple elements.

I will not continue the constructions that the psychology of consciousness dealt with. We can say that she did not achieve success on this path: she was not able to assemble living, full-blooded states of consciousness from simple elements. By the end of the first quarter of our century, this psychology practically ceased to exist.

There were at least three reasons for this: 1) it was limited to such a narrow range of phenomena as the content and state of consciousness; 2) the idea of ​​​​decomposing the psyche into its simplest elements was false; 3) the method that the psychology of consciousness considered the only possible - the method of introspection - was very limited in its capabilities.

However, the following should be noted: the psychology of that period described many important properties and phenomena of consciousness and thereby posed many problems that have been discussed to this day. We will consider in detail one of these problems raised by the psychology of consciousness in connection with the question of its method in the next lecture.

1. Reflection, its essence and forms of manifestation
2. Consciousness is a social phenomenon, the highest form of reflection of the world
3. Consciousness and matter. The concepts of “ideal” and “consciousness”

List of used sources (literature)

1. Gorbachev V.G. Fundamentals of philosophy: Course of lectures. – M.: Humanitarian Publishing Center VLADOS, 1998. – 352 p.

1. Dubrovsky D.I. The problem of the ideal. – M.: Mysl, 1983.
2. Clix F. Awakening Thinking. At the origins of human intelligence. – M.: Progress, 1983.
3. Leontyev A.N. Selected psychological works: V. 2 volumes - M.: Pedagogika, 1983.
4. Mamardashvili M.K. Consciousness as a philosophical problem // Questions of philosophy. – 1990. – No. 10.
5. Freud Z. Psychology of the unconscious: Collection of works // Comp., scientific, author's entry. M.G. Yaroshevsky. – M.: Education, 1989.

1. Reflection, its essence and forms of manifestation

Russian philosopher I.A. Ilyin emphasizes that the most important purpose of philosophy is the study of spirit and spirituality. Otherwise, it groans, in his words, as a “dead, unnecessary” burden in the culture of society. N.A. Berdyaev also believed that philosophy is nothing more than the science of the spirit.

The concept of consciousness is one of the most ancient and most important in philosophy. With its help, a person’s ability to reflect in his head both the world around him and himself in it is revealed. Consciousness is the original philosophical concept for designation and research all forms and manifestations of the spiritual that take place in human activities. Due to its complexity and versatility, it is an object of study for a whole complex of sciences - philosophy and psychology, pedagogy, physiology, sociology. Consciousness is specific(invisible, intangible, weightless) and super complex object of scientific research.

From the point of view of philosophical idealism (“Plato’s line”), consciousness (spirit) is a certain primordial given, present in the world and being substance(the basis) of all things and processes. The spirit is primary, says philosophical idealism. On the contrary, philosophical materialism (“the line of Democritus”) and the natural sciences proceed from the thesis that consciousness is not a gift of God or any other supernatural forces. It was completely natural a consequence of evolution, constant complication of the material world, improvement of living nature. Consciousness is secondary, as supporters of the “Democritus line” claim.

However, in the history of philosophy there were also slightly different points of view. Thus, a number of thinkers have expressed the idea that supposedly all matter has the ability to feel and think, i.e. animated. Such teachings are called hylozoism(the first Greek materialists, D. Bruno, F.I. Tyutchev, etc.). Some thinkers believed that a person’s ability to think was supposedly inherent in him initially, from birth. This point of view was developed, in particular, by R. Descartes in his doctrine of “innate ideas.”

Summarizing the data of the natural sciences of his time, V.I. Lenin expressed the idea in 1908 that “in the foundation of the very building of matter one can ... assume the existence of an ability similar to sensation,” and therefore “it is logical to assume that all matter has the property , essentially related to sensation, the property of reflection.” So where is the prerequisite on the basis of which consciousness, this most complex phenomenon of the world, arose and developed?

To resolve the question of the essence of consciousness, natural science philosophy introduced the concept of reflection. It allows us to explain how non-sensing and inanimate (non-spiritual) matter became, over time, sentient and animate (spiritualized) matter. The concept of reflection is key to solving the problem of the origin of consciousness and revealing its essence and content, forms of manifestation and functions. Science believes that reflection is a universal (universal) property of matter and it consists of the following.

Reflection- this is a property of material objects, which consists in their ability to reproduce (copy) in the process of interaction the external features and internal structure of other objects, to retain these imprints (copies). Reflection is the reproduction of other objects in itself. It only appears during interactions(mutual influence on each other) objects. As the material world evolved, a whole range forms of reflection, which differ in their medium, degree of complexity and specific features.

Reflection takes place in inanimate nature. Here it wears passive character and manifests itself in the form of changes in the mechanical, physical, chemical properties and states of objects as a result of their interaction. On the contrary, the reflection in alive nature acquires active character. This allows organisms not only to receive information about the outside world, but also to adapt to its influences and even change their habitat. Let's arrange the forms reflections in order of their complexity and give them a description.

Elementary(mechanical, physical and chemical) reflection takes place in the inorganic world. These are, for example, animal tracks in the snow, heating of an electrical conductor and its glow, changing the color of leaves due to the onset of autumn.

Irritability arose with the emergence of life in its simple forms at the level of plants and single-celled animals. It is known, for example, that the head of a sunflower is always oriented towards the Sun, flowers fold their petals when darkness falls, etc. Some algae react to external influences with protective reactions in the form of an electrical discharge. In the above cases, the simplest activity, internal excitation as a reaction to an external stimulus. Based on these premises, it developed sensitivity as the ability to sense the external world. We can say that irritability is an approach and transition to the psyche as a qualitatively different form of reflection of the world.

Psychic reflection(psyche) arose along with the emergence of the central nervous system and the brain as its department, with the help of which this reflection is carried out. This is where feeling, which allows you to record separate aspects and properties of objects that are vital for the existence of animals - color, temperature, shape, smell, etc. Sensations are formed with the help of special senses - vision, hearing, touch, smell and taste. Based on sensations in higher animals, more complex forms of mental reflection arise - perception And performance. With their help, the psyche is able to form a holistic image of an object and retain this image in memory for a long time.

Within the framework of mental reflection, the so-called “advanced” reflection also appears, i.e. the ability to anticipate and predict the future based on a reflection of the present, the logic and trends of its development. Thus, animals are able to anticipate future events - the onset of cold weather, the approach of an earthquake, etc. In humans, this manifests itself in the form of fortune telling and forecasts, fantasies, “prophetic” (prophetic) dreams, etc. Advanced reflection makes it possible to carry out goal setting, develop programs for your activities and see what is still, as it were, closed by time.

The psyche of animals is their, in the words of I.P. Pavlov, “the first signal system.” It is the basis of the so-called "elementary thinking". Of course, the word “elementary” does not mean something simple in this case. On the contrary, some higher animals (for example, dolphins) have large brains, their own language, and very “thoughtful” reactions to specific situations. F. Engels noted that animals, like people, have inherent All forms of rational activity - induction, deduction, etc. This thinking (“lower mind”) is genetic(the word “genesis” means “origin”) is a prerequisite for the emergence of human consciousness. After all, already in higher animals ideal images of the world are formed and thus the external world, as it were, bifurcates into the world of things and the world of “spirit”. However, this truly becomes possible only for a person as a “thinking thing” (R. Descartes), who leads an active lifestyle and relates to the world in an objective and practical way.

Reflection value lies primarily in the fact that it is a method, a mechanism For transfer of information and information, as well as energy from one object to another. Thus, reflection at the level of the living world is an important prerequisite For adaptation to a changing external environment with the help of information and information received from outside. This information is one of the conditions for the possibility of leaving the power of the world and gaining freedom of action in it.

1. Consciousness is a social phenomenon, the highest form of reflection of the world

In ancient philosophy, consciousness was understood as a certain inner world of a person (“soul”), playing a special role in his life. It was believed that the body is mortal, but the soul is immortal. Democritus viewed the soul as a combination of special, sensory atoms. Plato was the first to divide everything that exists into two worlds - the world of things (the “inauthentic” world) and the world of ideas (the “genuine” world). According to Plato, ideas are the source (“demiurge”) of all things and their diversity.

In the Middle Ages, consciousness and reason were considered the most important attributes (properties) of God. And since man was supposedly created by God as his likeness, then human consciousness is a gift and a spark of God, a speck of dust from the eternal divine flame. It was believed that the soul is incomparably higher than the body; it personifies the high and perfect, coming from God. A. Augustine emphasized that the radiance of the spirit is brighter than the moon, stars and even the Sun itself.

During the Renaissance, philosophy was dominated by pantheism, and consciousness was interpreted as a property of all nature (D. Bruno, N. Kuzansky, etc.). It was believed that nature also has a soul and all other manifestations of the high divine principle are inherent.

In modern times arose dualism, from the point of view of which the world of Nature and the world of Spirit are two completely equal and independently existing substances (foundations) of the world - material and spiritual.

French materialism of the 18th century. proceeded from the thesis that consciousness is a special function the human brain, with the help of which a person reflects the outside world. The brain is the bearer of this function, and with its death the soul itself dies. “To say that the soul will feel, think, and suffer after the death of the body is the same as saying that a clock broken into a thousand pieces will be able to continue ringing and marking time,” this is how P. Holbach reasoned about this.

In the philosophy of G. Hegel, consciousness appeared as a certain eternal principle (“absolute idea”), which underlies everything that exists. creates the world from himself. Hegel applied the principles historicism And activities in the study of consciousness. He considered it as a product of active human activity within a specific historical era and its culture.

In the second half of the 19th century. in the wake of the surge in natural sciences, the so-called vulgar(crude, simplified) materialism (L. Büchner, K. Vogt, etc.). In it, consciousness was identified with the physiological processes occurring in the human brain. It is supposedly the movement of “brain matter” as a special fluid, the quality of which depends on the composition of food. Accordingly, the thesis was put forward: “Man is what he eats.”

In Russian philosophy and natural science, the greatest contribution to the theory of consciousness and psyche was made by I.M. Sechenov, V.M. Bekhterev, I.P. Pavlov. They explored the physiological basis of human mental activity. Later, S.L. Rubinstein, A.N. Leontiev, L.S. Vygotsky and other scientists actively worked in this direction. They considered consciousness as a social phenomenon, an active reflection of social relations in the course of human activity.

From the point of view of modern science, consciousness is the highest form (way) of reflection of the external world, inherent only to man.

We can also say that consciousness is property of a functioning brain, consisting in an emotional-volitional and sensory-rational reflection of objective reality. It appears as endless flow images of the external world that exist in the inner spiritual world of man and are a necessary condition for his practical activity.

Consciousness is subjective image of the objective world. It always presupposes a certain attitude person to the surrounding world and to other people. Consciousness is always self-awareness, those. a person’s separation of himself from the rest of the world, understanding the meaning of his life, setting goals for his own activities. The core of consciousness is knowledge, including a variety of scientific and non-scientific information about the outside world.

What we have stated above can be represented in the form Formulas of consciousness. Consciousness = knowledge about the world + self-awareness + a person’s attitude to the world. Consciousness is human a way of reflecting the world, based on the purposeful and systematic acquisition and application of diverse knowledge about the world. What characteristics does it have? In answering this question, we will highlight the following.

According to science and natural philosophy, consciousness is secondary. This means, firstly, that it is the result of a long evolution of nature and the improvement of forms of reflection. Secondly, the content of consciousness (feelings and thoughts, images and ideas, etc.) is determined by the influence of the external world, “taken” from it during the active practice of a person. In this sense, consciousness, being a world of feelings and ideas, does not seem to have its own history, since it is “woven” into the flow of historical time. It is always concretely historical, i.e. directly depends on the nature and content of the era. Speaking of this, you can For For example, compare the consciousness of a primitive savage and the consciousness of modern man. The secondary nature of consciousness gives rise to a variety of its types in different eras of human history. In philosophy, this is manifested in the presence of many types of worldview (cosmocentrism, pantheism, etc.) as ways of theoretical thinking and pictures (images) of the world and man in it.

Consciousness is social, those. is formed and manifests itself only in the joint activities of people. According to K. Marx, consciousness “from the very beginning is a social product and remains so as long as people exist at all.” The story of the famous literary character Robinson Crusoe confirms the correctness of this thesis. To preserve his human (in the social and spiritual sense) appearance, Robinson needed Friday like comrade-in-arms in his life. The fact of the social nature of consciousness was also confirmed by the famous experiments with deaf-blind children, which were carried out in the 70s at Moscow University under the leadership of Soviet scientists A.I. Meshcheryakov, S.I. Sokolyansky, E.V. Ilyenkov and other researchers.

Consciousness is subjective those. its characteristics are largely determined by the individual qualities of a person as a subject of spiritual life (age, gender, social status, property status, etc.). All this actively influences the style of thinking, the peculiarities of perception of the world (for example, temperament), the relationship between the emotional and the rational in the emerging images. Consciousness is the reality that exists only in us only with us, and not independently of us. It is always a generalization of the individual’s own experience, his joys and sufferings. In this regard, F.M. Dostoevsky expressed a very deep thought that suffering is the only cause of consciousness and human spirituality. Suffering, as a rule, passes, but what has been suffered in life remains with a person forever and is present in his spiritual experience.

Consciousness has an objective-practical nature. It is known that human thought cannot be seen with any microscope, even the most perfect one. According to F. Engels, there is “not a grain of substance” in it. However, consciousness still constantly manifests itself in the acts and products of human activity. It reveals itself in the process objectification, those. transformation of subjective reality into objective, material reality. Objectification is a person’s embodiment of his “I” by creating a new, objective world in the course of practice in its various forms. In this “non-existent” world, consciousness fades away, passing into another - material form. This is how man creates another world - the world of culture. Against, deobjectification is the extraction by a person of that experience that is, as it were, “hidden” in objects (for example, in books), imprinted in them.

Concerning origin consciousness, then science has convincingly proven the fact of its origin as the social form of the movement of matter becomes established. The emergence of consciousness was prepared by the evolution of life forms on Earth. But, apparently, factors of a cosmic nature cannot be ignored. This idea is carried out, in particular, in the work of Teilhard de Chardin “The Phenomenon of Man”. In it, the philosopher expressed the idea of ​​how, within the framework of the so-called “cosmic highway,” elements of consciousness arose, life and psyche were formed, a certain Spirit of the Earth appeared, etc. In this sense, matter is, according to Teilhard, the “mother of the spirit,” and the spirit itself is the “highest state of matter.”

An attempt to explain the emergence of consciousness by natural causes was made by Democritus. He believed that this happened under the influence, first of all, of the collective way of life of people, the use of tools and fire. Consciousness was formed under the influence social needs, those. people's needs for survival and further improvement of society.

French materialists of the 18th century. focused on understanding consciousness as in the end evolution of nature. In their opinion, a person is like a perfect clock, and the brain is its most important mechanism. But the brain is polished not only by nature, but also by the social experience of people, their social upbringing. Thanks to language and the accumulation of knowledge, man became capable of social life and turned into the most perfect living being.

One of the first who tried to explain the very process of formation of consciousness was G. Hegel. In his opinion, it arises during activities people by their appropriation of the “absolute idea” as a kind of universal Spirit. The German philosopher revealed this thesis using the example of the relationship between a slave and his master. The slave makes things, and the master only consumes them. As a result, the slave is formed and gains power over things and even... over the master. After all, the master’s consumer lifestyle leads to his spiritual degradation. As a result, the master loses his human qualities, and the slave gains them, including developing his spiritual world.

F. Engels in his work “The Role of Labor in the Process of Transformation of Ape into Man” developed the so-called labor theory of anthropogenesis and the origin of consciousness. He identified the following points in this process as the most important.

First of all, in the course of the natural evolution of man, biological preconditions of consciousness. Among these, Engels included, first of all, upright walking, freeing up the hand to manipulate objects, sufficient brain volume, and the presence of visual-figurative (“elementary”) thinking.

Under the influence of need, man learned to work, those. make tools and purposefully use them to change nature. In the course of work, a person began to receive information and knowledge about the outside world. According to Engels, the human mind developed as a person “learned” to work. Moreover, all the senses and the entire human psychology are indebted to work as their “father.” In fact, labor created man.

With the evolution and joint activity of the first people, speech(initially in the form of facial expressions and gestures) as a process of communication between people. Formed language as a complex set of signs, a “second signal system” (I.P. Pavlov), a carrier and keeper of information about the outside world. Language is a way of expressing human thought and preserving it, or, in the words of G. Hegel, “the body of thinking.” Language is as ancient as consciousness itself.

In his work, F. Engels concluded that the collective work and articulate speech were the main factors and driving forces in the emergence and development of human consciousness. He also noted the significant role of other factors - the taming of fire, the consumption of meat, and the simplest moral norms in human behavior.

As for religion, in it the question of the origin of consciousness is resolved in the context of a general explanation of the process of the emergence of the world and man in it.

The social nature of consciousness, which we mentioned above, manifests itself primarily in its functions. These include, first of all, educational function. With its help, a person forms ideal images of the world around him, a picture of this world is created. In fact, this is the main function of consciousness. It is most developed in modern man.

Goal-setting the function involves a person developing goals for his own activities and ideals, predicting the future, creating its images and pictures (including sometimes illusory, utopian ones). The goal, like the law, determines the actions and actions of people and allows them to be planned.

Regulatory function means that consciousness and its “products” (feelings, ideas, ideals, etc.) actively influence relations between people and social groups. Thus, consciousness seems to invade social life and is present in it. Ideas become, in the words of K. Marx, “material force” if they master the masses of people and reflect their interests.

Consciousness is also a way broadcasts(transfer) of social experience as part of joint activities. This occurs in the form of knowledge and ways of thinking, techniques and rules of human activity.

The social nature of consciousness is also manifested in the fact that it subject is a person acting not alone, but collectively as a social being. A person acquires his consciousness only as he is included in the world of culture, which is the embodiment and custodian of the total experience of humanity.

The direct bearer of consciousness is a separate person (individual). Thinking always exists only as the individual thinking of many billions of past, present and future people. The spiritual world of an individual is usually unique, and often completely incomprehensible. “The human skull,” wrote K. Marx, is “an impregnable fortress.” In this regard, one cannot help but mention the special role of education and its complexity, since it is necessary to apply an individual approach to each student, taking into account his life experience, state of mind and other circumstances.

However, the consciousness of individual people, thanks to language, still becomes the property of the entire society. As a result, it is formed public consciousness as a kind of collective Mind in its various forms - religion, morality, art, etc. Social consciousness has a very complex structure and forms of manifestation and is a very active factor in the historical process.

Revealing features of consciousness as a human way of reflection, we highlight the following.

Human consciousness presupposes the presence conceptual thinking. It is an indirect and generalized reflection of the world, giving a person knowledge about the essential aspects and properties of objects in this world. Thinking is the operation of concepts. The concept is understood as a thought that reflects the general and main (essential) characteristics of objects and phenomena of the world with the help of words, for example, “table”, “tree”, “person”, etc. In humans, the thinking process is a relatively independent activity and even a profession (scientists, writers, etc.). The human mind is, according to E. Fromm,“the ability to penetrate through the surface of phenomena given to us in sensations and comprehend the essence behind it.” It is thanks to reason that a person sees, of course, further than the most vigilant eagle. He sees because he can even think about invisible worlds and processes. He sees because he reveals what is hidden from observation and does not lie on the surface - internal processes, laws and patterns of things, etc. A person also sees very far because advanced technical devices help him in this, for example, an electron microscope, a telescope and other devices.

The process of reflection in a person always carries, as we noted above, goal-setting character. This is expressed in the ability to create goals as ideal images of the objects of one’s practical activity. Thanks to the presence of consciousness, a person achieves his goals “consciously”, i.e. with the help of knowledge about objects and phenomena. In his head, a person can have not only an image of the present, but also a picture of the future, which to some extent helps him protect himself from acting blindly, using the “trial and error” method. K. Marx wrote the following about this: “The spider performs operations reminiscent of the operations of a weaver, and the bee, with the construction of its wax cells, puts some human architects to shame. But even the worst architect differs from the best bee from the very beginning in that, before building a cell of wax, he has already built it in his head. At the end of the labor process, a result is obtained that was already in the person’s mind at the beginning of this process, i.e. perfect."

In humans, unlike animals, the character reflections. It is obvious that the psyche of animals is focused on providing adaptive activities in relation to the external environment. On the contrary, human consciousness is aimed primarily at service transformative activities. The nature of the activity determines the nature of reflection. Therefore, it is generally accepted that human consciousness is active And creative character. It is directly involved in the processes of human transformation of the world. In this sense, in the words of V.I. Lenin, “human consciousness not only reflects the objective world, but also creates it.”

The property of activity and creativity that we have named also means that with the help of consciousness a person creates not only a world of artificial things. He also creates a world of ideas and images, including those to which nothing really corresponds, for example, the idea and image of the sphinx. Consciousness, being active and creative (creative), can sometimes seem to “fly away” from reality. As a result, it gives rise to fantastic, illusory images, for example, the image of a centaur, delusions and mass illusions such as the communist idea, etc. All of this is, as it were, collective hallucinations, distortions of the reflective process. Of course, they all have natural and varied causes.

The specificity of consciousness as a special “world of Spirit” does not at all mean its absolute (complete) opposition to matter as the world of things. Such a opposition is possible only mentally, within the framework of an important philosophical question about the relationship between consciousness and matter. In reality itself and in the course of human activity, such a contrast is hardly justified. Consciousness and matter constantly transform into each other (for example, when creating works of art), there are no sharp boundaries between them. These boundaries are conditional and fluid, not as clearly expressed as was emphasized in some philosophical teachings (Plato, G. Hegel, etc.).

1. Consciousness and matter. The concepts of “ideal” and “consciousness”

Revealing the relationship between consciousness and being, it should be said about the role of the brain in reflecting the external world. The appearance of the brain was one of the most important prerequisites for the emergence of consciousness. The human brain is a very complex structure that controls the mental activity of an individual. Brain activity is the physiological basis of consciousness. The brain itself is a product of long-term biological and social evolution of man. Each of its two hemispheres is responsible for certain mental functions: the left - for rational thinking, the right - for imaginative perception of the world. What else does modern brain science know?

The brain of a newborn weighed about 350 g, in adults - about 1300-1400 g, in some - up to 2000. This complex structure of matter contains about 40 - 50 billion cells (neurons), each of which has contacts with about 10 thousands of their neighbors. In normal life, only about 15 percent of cells function, and the rest constitute a kind of reserve. A normal brain is capable of storing information equal to approximately five hundred Encyclopedia Britannica, which consists of 33 volumes. The network of neurons in the human brain is approximately 1,500 times more complex than the entire telephone network on the globe.

However, it should certainly be emphasized that it is not the brain that thinks, but a person with the help of the brain. The brain is just tool for thinking. In the history of philosophy and science, ideas have sometimes been expressed about the supposed independence of consciousness from the brain, the mental from the physiological, and their seemingly isolated existence. In this case we are talking about the concept of “psychophysical parallelism”, which had some distribution in the 18th - 19th centuries. On the contrary, Russian scientists - I.M. Sechenov, I.P. Pavlov and others developed the doctrine of the physiological foundations of the human psyche, its reflexive (reflective) nature. It was revealed and convincingly shown that the mental and physiological are two levels (higher and lower) in brain activity. The human psyche directly depends on both his physiology (for example, his hereditary data) and the social environment (for example, the availability of free time, standard of living, etc.).

In the 20th century, in the wake of amazing achievements in scientific and technological progress, computers were created that perform a number of complex human mental functions. The question of whether so-called “artificial intelligence” is possible has begun to be discussed. Can a machine think? These questions can be answered as follows briefly.

Of course, a computer is capable of performing many operations, much faster than a human. But still, a machine can never replace a person, and this is the point. Firstly, The machine always works according to the program put into it by man. A machine is, in the words of F. Engels, a kind of “template diagram”, and it is not characterized by creativity, i.e. creation of fundamental novelty. Secondly, A machine, unlike a person, does not have a sensory-emotional attitude towards the world. She does not know imagination and fantasy, love or anger, she does not know how to worry. A machine, even a very advanced one, only copies and imitates the process of human thinking, but does not perform it completely. She only exists weapon person, and therefore she below him, she is in the power of her creator.

The concept “ideal” is often used to describe consciousness. In philosophy it has a slightly different meaning than in everyday life and art, Where Ideal is usually understood as the degree of perfection (elegance) of an object.

The problem of the ideal was first identified by Plato in his doctrine of the “world of ideas.” This topic was thoroughly thought through in the works of G. Hegel. In philosophical idealism, the ideal is usually seen as the basis and creator of all reality.

From the standpoint of modern scientific philosophy, the ideal is perceived as subjective reality created by a person with the help of his consciousness as a property of the brain. This concept reveals the unique creative nature of man, his ability to create new world, as opposed to the "world of things". The ideal exists, as it were another being(another, new being) of matter, its “transformed” (changed) form, created with the help of consciousness. Briefly speaking, the ideal is a “double” (“substitute”) of matter, its immaterial copy.

The world of the ideal includes sensations and emotions, imagination and fantasy, concepts and ideas, ideas, ideal, etc. The ideal is the world of sensory and mental images created by man and reflecting the external world. This world contains not only images of what There is. It also includes images of what need to to a person. It is not surprising that in the structure of the ideal, a special role is played by ideal as a kind of example, the highest goal of man.

According to K. Marx’s definition, “... the ideal is nothing more than the material, transplanted into the human head and transformed in it.” The term “transplanted” here should be understood as “reflected”, and “transformed” - as represented in the human head in the form of images, concepts, etc.

The ideal is a product of the natural and social organization of man. The works of the psychologists A.I. Meshcheryakov and S.I. Sokolyansky mentioned above showed that the ideal is formed only in society and through activity, and is not an innate property of a person. The main condition for its formation can only be the active involvement of a person in objective and practical activities, in the world of culture as the embodiment of the total experience of mankind. Without all this, a person will remain just a “candidate” for people, i.e. an undeveloped being, an appendage of the natural world.

The ideal is a very important element of the essential forces of man. With the advent of the “world of the Spirit”, fundamentally different sources of development of the world arose, which had not previously existed in nature. As a result, the further evolution of the world gradually began to acquire controlled character and high dynamism, and man has turned from a slave of circumstances into the creator of a new - artificial - world.

The concept of the ideal characterizes human consciousness from the point of view of the results of the reflective process, which are cast in one form or another - ideas, images, ideas, etc. As for the concept of “consciousness,” it characterizes a person and his activity from the other side. Namely, from the point of view of his ability to act practically and create peace with knowledge of the matter. In other words, Consciousness is synonymous with the rationality of human actions. This concept is also used to characterize the overall historical process. It indicates the presence of a high spiritual component in people’s actions, for example, awareness of the political process, attitude towards nature, etc. On the contrary, the lack of consciousness indicates spontaneity in people's activities, its unreasonableness. Conscientiousness is an indicator of how much people are able to control their activities with the help of knowledge about the world around them. The problem of consciousness is the problem of transforming human consciousness into a real and active force in the total historical process.

So, the presence of consciousness characterizes a person as a being capable of acting intelligently and creatively in this world. Consciousness creates the necessary prerequisites for the establishment of a person in this world as a knowing and self-knowing being.