Despite the prevalence of the term «education» its understanding and interpretation by thinkers ambiguous and even contradictory. And the reason for this, firstly, the depth of the problem, rooted under this concept, and secondly, the consequent complexity of its definitions. Even within classical philosophy permeated by pathos in honor of the celebration of the human and scientific mind, among outstanding educators of his age were thinkers, who noticed the presence of acute contradictions between education and spirituality, knowledge and faith, culture and civilization, the human and the natural, human and divine, human and interpersonal. How to get out of this to «light»? Which light? Where is the path to the light?
What is the Enlightenment? What is meant by this familiar to everybody term that have given the name of an era in the history of European culture? If it is interpreted literally, then it is probably search light, output of the light, the desire to light. If it is interpreted rationally, then we find in dictionaries: «Enlightenment — transmission, dissemination of knowledge and culture, and also the system of upbringing and educational activities and institutions in a State». Or: «Enlightenment and ideological trend of 18–19 cc., based on the belief about the decisive role of reason and science in the knowledge of the «natural order», corresponding to the true nature of man and society. Ignorance, obscurantism, religious are the things that fanaticism of the Enlightenment believed to cause human disasters» [1; 48]. It would seems that the nature, meaning, content, enlightenment are caught up in these definitions, are fully disclosed and understood.
But we find in Kant’s proceedings: «Enlightenment — is a way out of the human condition of his minority, where he is because of his own fault. Minority is inability of using of the own intellect without guidance from someone else. Minority fault of their own — it is act the cause of which is not a lack of mind, but in lack of resolve and courage to use it without guidance from someone else. Sapere aude! — that means «Have the courage to use their own minds!» — This is therefore the motto of the Enlightenment» [2; 14].
At first glance, as the spokesman of the brightest ideas of its enlightenmented era (and philosopher lived in XVIII century just in the Enlightenmented era) to the understanding of the Enlightenment Kant essentially got nothing new to add, except that he emphasizes the aspect of boldness and courage of educated people. But if you think about it and it was, probably, a very principal for the true educators of that time, that a correlate of Enlightenment was the human mind.
Philosophical tradition to share intelligence and reason in man there is no coincidence, and for a long time in both the western and eastern philosophy. The issue is how the discovery in human mental abilities of different levels of penetration, reflection of the world. With regard to the understanding of the Enlightenment mind defines it as a synonym for education, scientific progress with its steadfast rationalism, while it opens the mind as true enlightenment, not tearing ambivalent link between education and spirituality, knowledge and belief.
Such a dialectical idea was not immediately apparent. She suffered classical linear paradigm of social research. Therefore, it is in this context with acute pain sounded Rousseau's famous slogan: «Back to nature!» And his words: «Enlightenment is harmful and culture itself — lies and crime» [3; 182].
From here a long time there was general consensus that education necessarily engenders lack of spirituality, any disbelief and primarily religious. Is this true?
In his «Introduction to Philosophy» Karl Jaspers wrote about it: «Requirements of Enlightenment directed against blindly and thoughtlessly take for granted anything for the truth; against acts which can not affect the fact that they have in mind — such as magic action — because they are based on false premises; against the ban on unlimited questioning and investigation; against inherited prejudices. Enlightenment requires boundless efforts related to the discretion and critical awareness of the process and the boundaries of any understanding ... This is the claim of the person: it should be clear what he thinks, what he wants and what he does. Enlightenment must be understood as the way in which a man comes to himself» [4; 35].
In this regard, Enlightenment is treated as the attribution of unlimited freedom, understood as arbitrary as the starting point of anarchy and confusion, as the destruction of tradition, and in this regard, as nihilism, as a result of making people unhappy, deprived of the soil under your feet, a strong core. However, these accusations are false education that far this sense, true enlightenment. Based on false education is always a rationality that is used everywhere, but not in its own borders, and it is an absolute sing hymns (by the way, about the limited field of activity rational Kant reasoned, when introduced the concept of the antinomies of reason, certainly arise in the solution of transcendental issues first of all the question of the existence of God). False education, thus misleading the man himself, causing him to rely only on their knowledge, instead of appealing to the life-giving power of holistic knowledge associated with the eternal questioning. It craves only know and ignores any faith (Kant again, we find that rationally comprehensible only the phenomenal world).
True Enlightenment, according to Jaspers, never mind the content likened content of human existence, which, on the one hand, reveals a wise reason, but on the other, is not confined to them. In addition there is a sense of reason, intuition, faith, especially religious and philosophical belief.
A deep sense of living of any religion is comprehensible only within the boundaries of the true genuine enlightenment and brings to life the philosophy to explain the content and maintenance of native human existence in the scientific and technological modernized world. Religious canons, which seems to be designed to be taken on faith, is an endless food for thought that feed the spiritual foundations of human life and thereby further cementing religious belief.
The Bible and the Koran there are certain provisions that a person should not do image and likeness, and the more the image of God as God, first of all, is not representable, invisible, inconceivable due to the infinite God and limited human capabilities. Within the philosophical outlook as thought Jaspers, a silence before being. Before lost to man pauses language, there is a silence of being. And this silence speaks louder than the voice of the most skillful speaker.
In the world's religions is the main canon that there is only one God. Its meaning is that the life of a person who believes in one God, rests on a radically new basis as opposed to the life of many gods. It lacks definitely elevated, it is scattered, confused.
In the dogma of the fall of the basic idea is that a person has sinned, pluck the fruit from the tree of knowledge. Hence the relevance of existential Taoism: excessive knowledge devastates the human soul.
Attempting to clarify the faith, we think through God. Faith it is impossible to contemplate. Faith is always at a distance from us, and called into question. Life with faith in God does not mean to rely on costed knowledge and means to venture on the existence of God.
Faith in God is based on the life of deep meaning, which is not given explicitly, and encrypted in the language phenomena. It arouses interest in life, inspiration, creativity, imagination, aesthetics of life, without which man is empty, dead. In faith there is no possession. It is no shred of confidence inherent knowledge. But there is a strong belief in the practice, however, the value of life.
Even in a period of deep dominance of religious ideas about the world, when the relationship between reason and faith seemed to be able to be resolved unambiguously, faith in God and knowledge of the world (especially philosophical knowledge) is not broken.
Christian theologian Tertullian said: «I believe because it is absurd», because the world defies the laws of human logic (in in the modern world, in the era of scientific and technological revolution, this idea is increasingly being reborn in different variations not only in philosophy, but and in science). If the mind affirms the senselessness of faith, the faith refers to this it does not matter.
Less rigid position allowed for a specific public sphere of faith and reason. Some early Christian theologians considered so. According to them, the faith has the advantage. If there is a conflict between faith and reason, the right faith. This attitude was typical of the majority of Christian theologians — from Augustine to Aquinas. But within it there some approaches. Thinking is not without belief: «I believe in order to understand» (Augustine). This means that without the testimony of faith and people would be blind to the important aspects of life.
Another approach is that faith has priority, but only with respect to the basic Christian truths. Basically, as belief (on the basis of revelation) and intelligence (based on experience) are independent and have equal status. Partly they go about their specific problems, partly common to both. In the joint area for them between faith and reason, there is harmony. For example, this area is the question of the existence of God, while the question of its essence belongs to the realm of faith based on revelation.
In medieval Arabic philosophy relationship between faith and reason can be traced to creation its representatives — Ibn Sina, Ibn Rushd, al-Farabi — the great scientists. Ibn Rushd (Averroes) introduces the principle of interpretation. He says that not all in the Quran must be understood literally. If a literal interpretation of the verses of the Qur'an seems to contradict the truths of reason, the surah should be interpreted metaphorically or allegorically.
Philosophy and religion, knowledge and faith — two wings of the human development of the world.
Philosophy — a bridge between science and religion.
God is not available in thinking. God is available in the faith. Nevertheless, there is a philosophical thesis that we know about God, because its existence can be proved. Existing for a long time proving the existence of God in their totality are an excellent testament to that. But if the evidence is understood as forced, like the scientific evidence that they are false. In his forced significance of these proofs were the most radical rejected Kant.
Now, in the modern enlightened, civilized era, it would seem, everything had to be brought opposite: a refutation of all the evidence of God's existence means that there is no God. However, the non-existence of God can be proved in the same small extent, as its existence (remember Kant's antinomy). If the existence of God would be proved, it would mean that God is proven — it is not God, he would have been a simple thing in the world.
All existing arguments, proving the existence of God — does not have evidence in the scientific sense of the word. Hence Voltaire: If God does not exist, it should come up. The variety of variations of the arguments in favor of God has special routes thoughts that lead us to overcome in jumping borders, then detected the presence of God in the natural world. The process of knowing the world is infinite, incomprehensible. By the way, modern science is increasingly recognized principle of uncertainty in knowledge.
In search of absolute knowledge, of the impossibility which is increasingly say even in the field of natural science, rational, and God is trying to turn in the world of reality, at the border of the human world as the second world. However, the usefulness of such arguments that all specific phenomena are considered in the light of the lumen or higher world. And this gives rise to an understanding of the physical world as the only one.
In the history of Enlightenmented traditions in philosophy and history was no atheists. And it means to enlightenment of the mind has always been characterized by the harmony of the idea of God, the world, a man of knowledge.
True education setting makes itself felt more and more. It does not declare God's knowledge of the subject, which must comprehend the force-convincing. In God can and must only believe, because it is not a visual, sensual and empirical object.
Attribute deep philosophizing as limiting access to the grounds of being always think of God, devoid of inherent knowledge of the reliability and therefore the conjugate with the freedom of reflection necessary for comprehension of love and secrets of the universe, perceptible only at the level of the mind, with its attempt to a holistic vision of a multi-faceted space, rather than reason.
«The fact that the attacks on education yet again justified, based on a distorted understanding of education, in relation to which attacks actually justified. Distortion may occur due to the difficulty of the problem. Keeping up with Enlightenment enthusiasm marches of the freer person who because of his freedom feels more open to deity — this enthusiasm again and again is renewed by every person who starts to become on his own feet. But in this case education very soon may become misleading. Indeed, on the basis of the very freedom we are not able to clearly hear God — it can be heard in the course of life through the hassle moment in which a person is granted the fact that he could never come up by himself. At this moment, he is not always ready to attentive listening. He claims on absolute knowledge» [5; 68].
When a person rejects faith, it is completely subordinated to reason, which is expected truthfulness around in all that plays a decisive role in life. But since this way of thinking can not provide, such claims can be enforced only through deception. One or another thought-formsform accepted as the only cognitive. Permanent self-test loses its continuity, which are exempt from visibility due to absolute certainty. Any accidental tied to a particular situation opinion claim to truth, however, having an apparent clarity, turns blindness. Since such education argues that human can know everything, relying on their own discretion, it turns into tyranny. It wasp-mented this impossible claim by a half thinking.
Against such distortion does not help the lack of thinking, and thinking only with with all the features, with a critical awareness of the frontiers of knowledge. Only this development intellection, which is carried out together with the self-education of mankind, prevents any thinking turned into a number of misconceptions.
The necessity of faith becomes clear only education in its pure form. The faith it is impossible to rationally neither by science nor by philosophy.
This is a fallacy of false education that reason can know the truth and being, relying only on himself. Reason is dependent on something else. As scientific cognition it depends on the inherent experience of contemplation. Speaking as a philosophy, it depends on content of the faith.
Whence premises from which is dependent on our thinking, it does not raise no doubt. According to Karl Jaspers, they are rooted in the ambient, based on which we live. If the force is not the ambient emerges in us, then we have a tendency to disbelief.
Prerequisites visual experience come from the world, they are palpable from the outside, the prerequisites of faith — from historical tradition. With such external form, these prerequisites are only manuals, with which you can reach the true premises. External background means consistency check and reason appears here not as a judge, but as a means. Sanity checks on the experience of other experiences and translate faith tradition, he also checks based on a different faith and deeper — and the whole tradition. In the sciences needed to awaken views realm of experience, which could not be avoided for those who enter the corresponding path; in philosophy by understanding and introducing the tradition in modernity becomes possible very inner awareness. However, it is impossible to defend against disbelief, trying to overcome it directly. Defend against unbelief can only reflect the false claims on the part of the imaginary and false knowledge rationalized claims by faith.
The philosophy is as old as religion and ancient than any religion. Philosophy has grown thanks to the height and the purity of its individual manifestations, demonstrating or otherwise specific man and thanks to the veracity of her spiritual relationship to the religious world, to which it, though not always, however, for the most part, treated favorably. And yet, in comparison with religious world philosophy is impotent due to her lack of its own form. The philosophy lives in a situation of accidental protection from the authorities in the world, including the religious. It needs a favorable social situation in order to objectively find himself in what he does. However, in reality it is open at any time, each person; in one form or another it is always present where a person lives.
In pursuit of certainty of those matters which are significant for the person he always rejects faith. Not finding the answers that thinking in principle way is not able to give, people unwittingly falls into deception and self-deception, and then there creates the appearance of that confidence. As a consequence there are blindness, bias, arbitrariness, half-thinking. Get out of this false position is possible only if there is another thought that is able to critically understand the possible limits of human knowledge. Get out of the misconceptions is only capability of developed thinking, generated in the process of self-education.
Only true enlightenment needs to have faith that you can’t get in rational and philosophy and science way. Intelligence, which relies only on itself can’t know the truth, because it is always depending on something else — in the sciences it depends on empiricism, in philosophy it depends on the content of the faith. But what makes our thinking depended? According to Jaspers, they are rooted in the ambient, based on which we live. If the force is not comprehensive emerges in us, then we have a tendency of disbelief. In the tradition of the Arab-Islamic philosophy the most comprehensive is called as activity of the mind.
Medieval Arabic-speaking educators asked the high level for a man who is worthy of the Enlightenment. They differentiated the mental ability of a person, highlighting four of its level in the order of its growth, in order of depth of the comprehension, and hence the possibility of changing the world the potential mind, actual mind, Acquired mind and active mind. And only in this light upward to the Divine difficult path possible human happiness and progress, which is the highest spirituality.
True spirituality — is the true goal of the Enlightenment. True spirituality defines as religion, philosophy and science, and there are organic and harmonious. They can add value aspects of folk wisdom, and even myth-making. Dividing the people thinking in the scientific world, which is based on rational arguments, knowledge of laws of the being, and unscientific, based on the life, empirical wisdom emerging n by identifying patterns of man of the world, we can’t unequivocally think about the benefits of one part in comparison with others ones. Recall that the law — it is the law inserted into the frame precious chance, and his highness «the case» is a manifestation of life.
Ancient people did not know the laws of existence. The level of scientific knowledge did not allow this. But the ancient man knew about the patterns inherent in the world around them. And these observations were brilliant. Probably the lack of rational comprehension of being was compensated by thin intuition, colorful images, religions faith. Because of this the developed mythmaking appeared. There is the thought of the loss of life as a mythological reflection on simplification, depletion of world humanity in modern philosophy.
With regard to the scientific world, there are many so-called «white spots» in her mass in the modern era of the cult of scientific and technical intelligence, which represent not so much a lack of knowledge about the world science and dialectical process of cognition. Therefore, the Socratic «I know that I know nothing"» more relevant than ever right now.
And just for the person in the «Middle Kingdom» is always room for secrets, then religion and science, faith and knowledge, faith and reason — inseparable attributes of human existence, coexisting dialectically. In addition, within the rational reflection of the world there is the problem of correlation between scientific and philosophical truth, which particularly was exposed at the moment and has a tendency for their resolution in favor of the latter.
As for philosophical knowledge, the real philosophy has always been associated with pure thoughts, truthfulness and approving attitude toward religious world. It is open for person, it is riddled with people, all philosophical problems are the problems of men. In other words, the world by itself is not interested in philosophy way at all — the main object of philosophy are people in the world. This is the most humanitarian of all rational knowledge. However, philosophy can also lead to self-deception, if it is deprived of liberty, if it strives to blur the line with science.
If philosophy is focused on the individual person, if it is subjective, then religion is a mass phenomenon, focused on more on big amount of people. «Church acts in the world as the visible structures of power, organizing human mass. Philosophy is an expression of the kingdom of spiritual beings who through the ages and people related to each other without any court in the world that would excludes or accepts in their ranks» [5; 89]. Religion is directly linked with the idea of eternity, eternal spirituality, but if you suddenly forget about it, eliminated the distinction between good and evil. This means you must always Golden Rule, or rather the rule of the golden mean.
Religion is for everyone — it is a mass phenomenon, philosophy — for an individual, single person.
«Church acts in the world as the visible structures of power, organizing human mass. Philosophy is an expression of the kingdom of spiritual beings who through the ages and people related to each other without any court in the world that would exclude or accept in its ranks.
Since religion is associated with the Eternal, its power is exercised, based on the deep bowels of soul. The more the places she was always at the service of its power in the world (through mosques, churches), the more monstrous is then that power, which, like any other power, begins to act evil. As long as philosophy yearns for eternal truth, she inspires without compulsion, is the soul of the order of the innermost primary source. However, the more it puts its truth in the service of temporal power, the more it leads to selfdeception, topped interests determinate being, and to the anarchy of the soul. The stronger eventually philosophy wants to be nothing more than a science, the more empty it is, becomes a simple indulgence, game which is neither science nor philosophy.
And then the paradox of the modern world is no longer a paradox: in an era of scientific and technological revolution, the era of the victory of scientific technical mind going deep crisis of rationalism. But it is at first glance. Perhaps it is the natural result of spiritual development of mankind, which, like a child, finally wiser. The key rule of true Enlightenment: through education to Wisdom.
Education bleached many words and concepts (conscience, love, patriotism). We live in a time of bleached and not bright. And Enlightenment is a bright light.
References
- Современная энциклопедия / Сост.: М.Г.Котик, А.М.Мурашкевич. — М.: Академия, 2000. — 615 с.
- Кант И. Ответ на вопрос: что такое Просвещение? // Собр. соч.: В 6 т. — М.: Мысль, 1966. — Т. 6. — 742 с.
- Руссо Ж. Избранное. — М.: Терра, 1996. — 659 с.
- Ясперс К. Введение в философию. — Минск: Экономпресс, 2001. — 187 с.
- История философии: Учебник для вузов / Под ред. В.В.Васильева, А.А.Кротова. — М.: Академ. проспект, — 254 с.