Modern humanism and the Renaissance. Renaissance humanism - abstract. Questions for self-control

Basic concepts and terms on the topic: Proto-Renaissance, Ducento, Trecento, Cinquecento, Humanism.

Topic study plan:

1. Periodization of the era. Aesthetic ideals of the Renaissance. Leading genres of art.

2. The principles of humanism in the art of the Italian and Northern Renaissance.

Brief summary of theoretical questions:

Humanism as a characteristic feature of Renaissance art in Italy. Secular freethinking, anti-clerical nature of works, appeal to antiquity, humanistic worldview, the cult of beauty are the ethical, philosophical and aesthetic foundations of creativity.

periodization of the era. Proto-Renaissance, Early, High and Late Renaissance. Golden Age of the Renaissance. Characteristic features of artistic culture.

The Renaissance is a cultural epoch in the process of transition from the Middle Ages to the New Age. The cultural meaning of the era is the flourishing of culture, a revolution in culture, a transitional cultural stage, the restoration of the ideals of antiquity. The complex of these features forms a qualitatively new stage of culture. The special intensity of cultural life, the existence of many of its centers; variety of creative manifestations, creative freedom; combination of vitality and aesthetics; excess spiritual energy; an amazing concentration on a small space-time interval of great and universally gifted people.

The birth of Renaissance culture in Italy. Man becomes the main theme of art. The role of the Middle Ages, the Christian religion, a new worldview that gave rise to new aesthetic ideals, enriched art with new plots and new style. Humanistic culture of the Renaissance and the dream of a new man and his new spiritual development. The perception of antiquity is already as a distant past and therefore - as "an ideal that one can yearn for", and not as "a reality that can be used."

The chronological framework of the Italian Renaissance: the time from the second half of the 13th to the first half of the 16th centuries (the end of the 12th-14th centuries - the Proto-Renaissance (pre-revival), or trecento; the 15th century - the early Renaissance (quattrocento); the end of the 15th-first third of the 16th centuries - the High Renaissance ( cinquecento)). The year 1530 can rightfully be considered the final date for the development of the Renaissance.

Leading genres of art. The growing role of painting. Masters of the early Renaissance in the fine arts.

The origins of humanism (Italy, XIV century). The essence of humanism is the focus of a person on himself - self-creation and self-worth.

The new secular nature of thinking and the spiritual atmosphere of society. A new set of humanitarian knowledge - grammar, philology, rhetoric, history, pedagogy, ethics.

The humanistic worldview of the Renaissance and real social changes: the fall of the authority of the church in the daily life of people, the desire for the liberation of the human person, for the beauty of not only artistic images, but also clothes, food, life in general. Pride and self-affirmation, awareness of one's own strength and talent become the hallmarks of society. The main humanistic ideas of philosophers: a person has creative independence, he is beautiful and exalted both spiritually and bodily; man has dignity, his mind and thoughts are free. There was no absolute difference between man and God for the Renaissance humanists. Humanists saw the unity of man and God in the fact that God, like man, is a master, only one of them created the world, while creative efforts are still ahead of man.

In ancient times, humanism was assessed as the quality of a well-mannered and educated person, elevating him above the uneducated. In the medieval era, humanism was understood as the qualities of the sinful, vicious nature of man, placing him much lower than the angels and God. During the Renaissance, human nature began to be evaluated optimistically; a person is endowed with a divine mind, is able to act autonomously, without the guardianship of the church; sins and vices began to be perceived positively, as an inevitable consequence of life experimentation.

The task of educating the "new man" in the Renaissance is recognized as the main task of the era. The Greek word ("education") is the clearest analogue of the Latin humanitas (where "humanism" originates). Humanitas in the Renaissance conception implies not only the mastery of ancient wisdom, which was of great importance, but also self-knowledge and self-improvement. Humanitarian and scientific and human, scholarship and worldly experience must be combined in a state of ideal virtu (in Italian, both “virtue” and “valor” - due to which the word carries a medieval chivalrous connotation).

Certain standards of upbringing and education during the Renaissance became the norm; knowledge of classical languages, awareness of the history and literature of Hellas and Rome, the ability to write poetry and play music became a condition for occupying a worthy position in society. It was then that the leading importance began to be given to reason, its ennobling through upbringing and education. There was a conviction that it was possible to improve through the studia humanitas (humanities) the whole of society. It was then that Thomas More (1478-1535) and Tommaso Campanella (1568-1639) came up with projects to build an ideal society.

Some researchers talk about a new type of human dignity, established in the Renaissance. It was conveyed by the concept of virtu and was determined by the personal qualities of a person, his talents, intellectual abilities. In previous eras, the dignity of a person did not depend on himself, but on belonging to a class-corporate organization, to a clan or a civil community. The rethinking of the virtu idea brought to life a new human desire to demonstrate their talents and abilities, the desire for fame and material success as a public recognition of their talents. It was then that competitions of sculptors, artists, musicians, public debates of intellectuals, weddings with laurel wreaths of the first poets began to be held. The sculptor Lorenzo Ghiberti (1381–1455), the architect Filippo Brunelleschi (1377–1446), the artists Giotto (1266–1337) and Masaccio (1401–1428), the poets Dante Alighieri (1265–1321) and Francesco Petrarca were recognized as the first in their fields of creativity. (1304–1374). Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519) managed to excel in music, and in painting, and in invention, and in engineering. Michelangelo (1475-1564) was recognized as the best in sculpture, but also in painting, architecture and poetry.

The ideal of life has changed. If earlier the ideal of contemplative life (vita contemplativa) dominated, then in the Renaissance the ideal of active life (vita activa) was established. If earlier innovation and experiment were condemned as a sin and heresy, the change of the natural world seemed unacceptable, but now they have been encouraged; passivity, monastic contemplation began to seem like a crime; the idea was established that God created nature for the sake of serving man, discovering his talents. Hence the intolerant attitude towards inactivity and idleness. It was during the Renaissance that the principle was formulated: “time is money”, the author of which is called Alberti (1404–1472), but to which every figure of the 15th–16th centuries could subscribe. Then a decisive transformation of nature began, artificial landscapes began to be created, to which Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo were involved. Interest in earthly life, its joys, thirst for pleasures became the leading motives for the artistic work of Francesco Petrarca, Giovanni Boccaccio (1313–1375), Ariosto (1474–1533), Francois Rabelais (1494–1553) and other writers of the Renaissance. The same pathos distinguished the work of Renaissance artists - Raphael (1483-1520), Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo, Titian (1490-1576), Veronese (1528-1588), Tintoretto (1518-1594), Brueghel (1525-1569), Rubens (1577-1640), Durer (1471-1528) and other painters.

The criticism of the medieval type of thinking, its dogmatism, and oppression by authorities contributed a lot to the assertion of intellectual autonomy. The main argument against scholasticism and dogma was drawn from the ancient ideological heritage. A special role in this was played by Lorenzo Valla, Niccolo Machiavelli, Erasmus of Rotterdam, Michel Montaigne and others.

In the Renaissance, the leading role of the urban population was determined: not only the intellectual elite, but also merchants, artisans, who were the most dynamic groups of the Renaissance society. By the end of the 15th century, the level of urbanization in northern Italy and northern France had reached fifty percent. The cities of these regions of Europe had the largest monetary savings, which were invested in the development of the arts and education.

Literature Renaissance and the main philosophical provisions of this period. Based on samples of ancient literature. The principle of the free development of the human personality in artistic creativity. Themes of man and the struggle against everything that hinders his free development and happiness; love is a wonderful human feeling.

Proto-Renaissance in Literature. "Sublime" and "Earthly" in Proto-Renaissance Literature.

Humanistic motifs in the work of Dante Alighieri - the last poet of the Middle Ages and the first poet of the New Age (facets of the old, church-feudal, and the new - humanistic). "Divine Comedy": characteristic features of the spiritual life of the Middle Ages and features of a new cultural era - the Renaissance. Cycles of poems by Dante dedicated to Beatrice.

Francesco Petrarca is the creator of the Italian literary language. Petrarch is the first European humanist. Appeal to the work of Cicero, Seneca, Plato. Love for Laura is a symbol of devoted and sublime love. Petrarch is the symbol of the poet of love. Cycles of Petrarch's sonnets.

The secular character of the Renaissance theater. The main features of the theater are the folk spirit, knowledge and consideration of national traditions. Division of the theater into folk and professional. The struggle between the new and the old. The emergence of the comedy of masks , where the plot was the main one, and the characters, circumstances, speech of the actors were improvisation. This theatrical form stood at the junction of the old and the new, since it is improvisation that gives rise to ideas and thoughts. Creative fantasy, high acting skills, the general culture and horizons of the artists formed theatrical art, in which it was possible to distinguish its principles, methods and techniques, where the viewer was also a participant in the performance.

The revival of the importance of theater in public life, in the formation of ideas and morals. The theater as a kind of carrier and exponent of the thoughts, desires of the people, as an elementary school of art, history, culture. The appearance of the court (aristocratic) theater (a large magnificent spectacle, with scenery, dances, music).

Great playwrights: Lope de Vega and William Shakespeare.

The tragedies of W. Shakespeare are the pinnacle of artistic generalization of characters and situations.

Music of the Italian Renaissance: folk origins, genre diversity (barcarolle, ballad, madrigal).

The development and improvement of various musical styles of the era is the foundation for a deeper understanding, a creative approach to musical culture. Invention of musical notation. Improvisation and music-making as a separate type of spiritual, cultural activity of people.

Development of instrumental music. Improvement of dance forms. New instrumental works - variations, preludes, fantasies.

The development of performance on the lute, organ, wind instruments. Music-making is becoming widespread - the performance of pieces not only by famous composers, but also personal compositions.

Prerequisites for the flourishing of everyday and professional secular musical creativity, revealing the joys of life, the ideas of humanism and bright images.

Secular and church music (the church school gives the society composers, singers, musicians). The emergence of the concept composers.

Portrait in painting.

Features of the spiritual life of the Renaissance:

Development of urban secular culture, its democratization;

A fundamental change in the worldview, the approval of a new look at the structure of the Universe, society, man;

The emergence of a progressive ideology - humanism;

Increased interest in the culture of antiquity;

The high role of aesthetic consciousness.

Art of the Northern Renaissance. The predominance of the portrait genre in painting. The appearance of the first printed books. "Praise of stupidity" by E. Rotterdam is the pinnacle of German humanism. Tragedies of Shakespeare.

French Renaissance: Fontainebleau school - a fusion of literary and pictorial images (P. Ronsard, Rosso Fiorentino, F. Primaticcio, J. Goujon).

Features of the Renaissance in the Netherlands: J. Van Eyck's Ghent Altarpiece; P. Bruegel the Elder.

Renaissance in Germany: master engravings by A. Dürer.

Comparative characteristics of the Italian and northern Renaissance.

Comparative analysis of various art schools (according to the formal signs of creativity).

Laboratory works- not provided.

Workshops- not provided.

Tasks for self-fulfillment:

1. Prepare a message and presentation "Renaissance".

Form of control of independent work:

- oral survey,

Checking the abstract.

Questions for self-control

THE PHILOSOPHY OF HUMANISM OF THE RENAISSANCE

PLAN:

1. Anthropocentrism and humanism of the worldview in the Renaissance

2. The problem of human individuality. The ideal of man

3. Socio-political ideals of the Renaissance

1. ANTHROPOCENTRISM AND HUMANISM OF THE WORLD VIEW IN THE AGE OF THE RENAISSANCE

Chronologically, the Renaissance covers the 14th-16th centuries, although the first signs of the Renaissance appeared in the cities of Northern Italy as early as the end of the 12th-13th centuries. (Proto-Renaissance). To a large number of different periodizations of the Renaissance, we can add one more - philosophical:

ö humanistic period (XIV-mid-XV centuries) - Dante, Petrarch, Valla;

ö Neoplatonic period (mid-XV-XVI centuries) - Nicholas of Cusa, Pico della Mirandola, Paracelsus;

ö natural-philosophical period (the end of the 16th - the middle of the 17th centuries) - N. Copernicus, G. Galileo, J. Bruno.

The attention of the Renaissance philosophers was directed primarily to the person, it is he who becomes the addressee of philosophical interest.

Thinkers are no longer interested so much in transcendental religious distances as in man himself, his nature, his independence, his creativity, his self-affirmation, and finally, beauty. The origins of such philosophical interest were largely determined by the transition from the feudal-rural to the bourgeois-urban way of life and industrial economy. The very course of history revealed the special role of human creativity and activity.

And although formally the philosophers of that time still put God at the center of the universe, they paid primary attention not to him, but to man. Thus, the fundamental principle of the philosophical thought of the Renaissance was anthropocentrism - the view that man is the center and the highest goal of the universe.

This approach has contributed to the development humanism - a view based on the inherent value of a person as a person, his right to freedom, happiness, well-being.

Humanism had a long prehistory in antiquity and the Middle Ages, but as a broad social movement that has the most important political, social and moral applications, it takes shape for the first time precisely in the Renaissance. The dispute was fundamental - about a new worldview, moral and political ideal. Scholasticism was subjected to criticism and reflection, i.e., fruitless thinking divorced from life. In an effort to achieve a just social and state structure in Italy, parliamentary government was introduced. There was also a search for ways to harmonize people's interests. The humanists believed that the basis of human relations is love, friendship, mutual respect, which does not contradict the protection of private interest and individualism. Humanism (in this regard, the work of Dante is indicative) raises the question of the true nobility of man.

The founder of humanism is unanimously considered a poet and philosopher Francesca Petrarch. In his work - the beginning of many ways in which the development of the Renaissance culture in Italy went. In his treatise “On the Ignorance of His Own and Many Others,” he resolutely rejects the scholastic learning inherent in the Middle Ages, in relation to which he defiantly proclaims his alleged ignorance, since he considers such learning to be completely useless for a person of his time.

In the mentioned treatise, a fundamentally new approach to the assessment of the ancient heritage is manifested. According to Petrarch, it is not blind imitation of the thoughts of remarkable predecessors that will allow to come to a new flowering of literature, art, science, but the desire to rise to the heights of ancient culture and at the same time rethink and surpass it in some way. This line, outlined by Petrarch, became the leading one in the relation of humanism to the ancient heritage.

The humanists of this period, who constituted a very small creative elite, which included representatives of various social groups, along with God exalt man as the creator of the world of culture, deify him as a subject of creative activity, bringing him closer to God. Man in the Renaissance is not considered a passive "image and likeness of God", he becomes a "godlike" being. Equalizing a person with God are two main qualities inherent in him - reason and free will, according to humanists, allowing a person to sort out an infinite number of opportunities for creative self-realization. The life and work of many humanists, for example, Leonardo da Vinci, who was at the same time an artist, the author of the famous Gioconda, and an engineer, whose creative genius anticipated many discoveries of the future (tank, parachute, helicopter), and scientists, serves as an excellent illustration of the words of F Engels, who called the Renaissance an era "which needed titans and which gave birth to titans in strength of thought and character, in versatility and scholarship."

Exalting man, humanists at the same time sharply criticized scholastic philosophy, insisted on the need to go beyond the limits of "scholastic science" to informal, vital, humanistic knowledge.

So, the Middle Ages end with the XIV century and the two-century Renaissance begins, after which, in the XVII century, the New Age begins. If in the Middle Ages theocentrism dominated, now the hour of anthropocentrism is coming. In the era of modern times, a person is placed at the center of philosophical research. In the philosophy of the Renaissance, there are two centers - God and man. This corresponds to the fact that the Renaissance is the transition from the Middle Ages to the New Age.

Humanism occupies an important place in the system of spiritual values. Its decisive role in the ideological consciousness of European humanity (at least since the Renaissance) can be judged by the fact that not a single philosophical, political, artistic direction or doctrine that claims to be the spiritual and practical leader of European civilization could do without to declare himself a model of humanism. The humanistic ideals that "took root" in the Renaissance, established in the spiritual culture in the form of tradition, have withstood the test of time, proving their significance, enduring value.

2. THE PROBLEM OF HUMAN INDIVIDUALITY. IDEAL MAN

The Renaissance is a revolution, first of all, in the system of values, in the assessment of everything that exists and in relation to it. There is a conviction that a person is the highest value. Such a view of a person determined the most important feature of the culture of the Renaissance - the development of individualism in the sphere of worldview, a comprehensive manifestation of individuality in public life.

The main task of the works of philosophers of that time was the task of determining the place of man in the world and the ethical and social problems arising from this task. The collapse of the medieval hierarchy, the liberation of the essential forces of man from all the restrictions and constraints that the church and the class organization of society imposed on him, the unusually rapid growth of cultural achievements, especially in the field of art, were considered by Renaissance philosophers as proof of the central position of man in the universe. In their view, a person became a titan who could handle any transformation of natural and social forces. Hence the humanistic orientation of the entire European Renaissance. The philosophers of the Renaissance placed man much higher than the thinkers of classical Greece, who never tried to place man at the center of being.

Glorifying the power of man and his greatness, admiring his amazing creations, the thinkers of the Renaissance inevitably came to the rapprochement of man with God. In such reasonings of Giannozzo Manetti, Marsilio Ficino, Tommaso Campanella, Pico and others, the most important characteristic of humanistic anthropocentrism appeared - the tendency to deify a person. However, the humanists were neither heretics nor atheists. On the contrary, the overwhelming majority of them remained believers. But if the Christian worldview asserted that God should come first, and then man, then the humanists brought man to the fore, and then talked about God.

The presence of God in the philosophy of even the most radical thinkers of the Renaissance implied at the same time a critical attitude towards the church as a social institution. The humanistic worldview, therefore, also includes anti-clerical views, i.e., views directed against the claims of the church and the clergy to dominance in society.

The writings of Lorenzo Valla, Leonardo Bruni, Poggio Bracciolini, Erasmus of Rotterdam and others contain speeches against the secular power of the Roman popes, exposing the vices of the ministers of the church and the moral depravity of monasticism. However, this did not prevent many humanists from becoming ministers of the church, and two of them - Tommaso Parentucelli and - were even erected in the 15th century. to the papal throne.

Francesca Petrarch believed that the science of man should become the content of true philosophy, and in all his work there is a call to reorient philosophy to this worthy object of knowledge.

With his reasoning, Petrarch laid the foundation for the formation of personal self-awareness of the Renaissance. In different eras, a person realizes himself in different ways. A medieval person was perceived as more valuable as a person, the more his behavior corresponded to the norms adopted in the corporation. He asserted himself through the most active inclusion in a social group, in a corporation, in a God-established order - such is the social prowess required of an individual. The Renaissance man gradually abandons the universal medieval concepts, turning to the concrete, individual.

Humanists are developing a new approach to understanding a person, in which the concept of activity plays a huge role. The value of the human personality for them is determined not by origin or social affiliation, but by personal merits and the fruitfulness of its activity.

A vivid embodiment of this approach can be, for example, the versatile activities of the famous humanist Leon Battista Alberta. He was an architect, painter, author of treatises on art. According to Albert, a person is able to overcome the vicissitudes of fate only by his own activity.

For the head of the school of Florentine Platonists Marsilio Ficino man is the connecting link of the entire cosmic hierarchy. He can embrace with his knowledge all being, for his soul is involved in the world soul - the source of all movement and all life. The boundlessness of man's knowledge makes him related to God. Ficino essentially deifies man, endowing him with absolute freedom and unlimited creative power.

The most famous work in which the humanistic doctrine of the high purpose of man and the exclusivity of human nature has found a complete expression and philosophical justification, of course, should be considered "Speech on the Dignity of Man" Giovanni Pico della Mirandola. In his opinion, a person, not having his fixed place in the hierarchy of the cosmos, is free to form his human essence. Its highest purpose is to be the connecting link of the universe. Endowed with free will and boundless creative power, man is god-like: "... A man is rightly called and considered a great miracle, a living being, truly worthy of admiration."

Maybe not so colorful, but just as definitely, other thinkers of the Renaissance, especially its early period, spoke about the high place of man in the world.

However, it would be wrong to idealize humanism, not to notice its individualistic tendencies. Creativity can be considered a true hymn to individualism. Lorenzo Valla. In his main philosophical work "On Pleasure", Valla proclaimed the desire for pleasure as an inalienable property of a person. The measure of morality for him is the personal good. Lorenzo Valla considered death for the fatherland and homeland a dangerous prejudice and argued that the personal life of an individual is a greater good than the life of all people. Such a worldview position looks like an asocial one.

A well-known politician and the largest theorist of Renaissance politics Nicolo Machiavelli argued that in order to achieve the political goals that the sovereign sets himself, all means are acceptable. Unbridled egoism, the absence of any restraining norms in political activity, which the Renaissance demonstrated at every step, lead the French philosopher Michel Montaigne to skepticism about the conviction of Ficino and Mirandolla about the exceptional position of man in the system of the universe. Man, according to Montaigne, is part of nature, and his activity must be subject to the natural laws that govern the universe.

So, considering man as the crown of the universe and so highly appreciating his capabilities and abilities, the philosophers of the Renaissance as a whole correctly reflected the real processes that developed the social and creative activity of the individual. But this was only one side of the Titanism of the Renaissance. Its second side is that individual activity, not bound by any framework and restrictions, gave rise to unbridled egoism, disregard for all moral norms, moral principles in order to achieve the goal. Even the most brilliant figures of this era constantly demonstrated the unattractive properties of the reverse side of renaissance titanism.

3. SOCIO-POLITICAL IDEALS OF THE RENAISSANCE

One of the main conditions for the possibility of realizing the humanistic ideal of man was considered the transformation of society. It was during the Renaissance that the literary genre of utopia received further development and even its own name (translated from Greek - "a place that doesn't exist").

Most notable during this period were the activities of two so-called "utopian socialists": Thomas More and Tommaso Campanella. They are the forerunners of scientific socialism and their work is similar. Both of them, but each in their own way, tried to create a society in which people are equal among themselves, there is no private and even personal property, labor is the duty of all, and division occurs according to need.

According to the opinion, the social utopias of Thomas More and Tommaso Campanella were a reaction to the selfish desire for wealth and power at any cost, which characterized the period of primitive accumulation of capital that coincided with the Renaissance.

The most famous work in which the socio-political ideal of the Renaissance is revealed is the novel "Utopia" by Thomas More. It describes a fictitious state located on the island of Utopia that never existed: “The island of the Utopians in its middle part (for it extends the widest) extends for two hundred miles, over a long distance the island does not narrow very much, but gradually thins towards both ends .. There are fifty-four cities on Utopia; they are all large and magnificent... The nearest ones are twenty-four miles apart. And again, none of them is far enough away that it was impossible to walk from it to another city on foot in one day ... From each city, three old and wise citizens converge annually in Amaurot to discuss the general affairs of the island. For this city is considered the first and main ... "

The concept of "Utopia" has become a household name for various descriptions of a fictional country, designed to serve as a model of the social system, as well as in the expanded sense of all works and treatises containing unrealistic plans for social transformation.

In the history of mankind, Utopia, as one of the peculiar forms of social consciousness, embodied such features as the creation of a social ideal, criticism of the existing system, the desire to escape from the gloomy reality, as well as attempts to imagine the future of society. Initially, Utopia was closely intertwined with legends about the "golden age", about the "islands of the blessed." During the Renaissance, Utopia acquired primarily the form of a description of perfect states, supposedly existing somewhere on earth, or existing in the past; in the XVII-XVIII centuries. various utopian treatises and projects of social and political reforms became widespread.

So, the ideal society in the eyes of the humanists had to be built:

ö in the economic sphere - on the rejection of private property, universal labor service and the centralized distribution of manufactured products;

ö in the political sphere – on democratic principles, the election of all officials;

ö in the social sphere - on the replacement of the estate system, which determined the value of a person by his origin, with such a social hierarchy in which a person's place was determined by the degree of education and social significance of the duties performed by him;

ö in the field of culture - on the creation of a universal and compulsory system of education and upbringing, state support for the development of sciences.

It is difficult to give an unambiguous assessment of such a socio-political ideal: it was characterized by both those elements that were subsequently implemented and are now successfully functioning in many modern countries, and those that have not yet stood the test of time. However, it is obvious that the utopias of the Renaissance offered a system much more perfect than the one that existed at the time of their creation in the states of Western Europe.

On the means of achieving socio-political ideals in the Renaissance, political philosophy gives a vivid idea. Nicolo Machiavelli- Italian politician and historian. He was convinced that "fortune controls half of our actions, but still allows us to control the other half or so." The management of this "half" Machiavelli attributed to a special sphere - the sphere of politics, which is separated from morality. In politics, in his opinion, instead of the 10 commandments serving as the basis of universal morality, a different principle operates - “the end justifies the means”: “... A sovereign, especially a new one, cannot do only what people are considered good for, because for the sake of preserving the state he often you have to break your promises, go contrary to mercy, kindness and piety. So in his heart he must always be ready to change direction if circumstances change or the wind of fortune starts to blow in the other direction, that is, as we said, if possible, do not deviate from good, but if necessary, do not avoid evil. .

In conclusion, it is necessary to note the most important feature of the philosophy of the Renaissance - its non-professional character. For the humanists and thinkers of the Renaissance, philosophy was neither a profession, nor an occupation, nor even a creative hobby. Perhaps that is why, despite the general recognition of the uniqueness of the Renaissance culture as a whole, this period was not considered original in the development of philosophy for a long time and, therefore, worthy of being singled out as an independent stage of philosophical thought.

However, the duality and inconsistency of the philosophical thinking of this time should not belittle its significance for the subsequent development of philosophy, cast doubt on the merits of Renaissance thinkers in overcoming medieval scholasticism and creating the foundations of the philosophy of the New Age.

LIST OF USED LITERATURE:

1. Sovereign. - Mn., 1999

3. Utopia. - M., 1998

4. Fundamentals of Philosophy: Textbook for universities / Ed. E.V. Popov. - M., 1997

5. Monuments of world aesthetic thought: Antiquity. Middle Ages. Renaissance. - M., 1962. - T.1

6., Kislyuk on philosophy. - Kharkov, 2001

7. Anti-Dühring// Works. – T. 20

Kislyuk in philosophy. - Kharkov, 2001, p.249

Fundamentals of Philosophy: Textbook for High Schools / Ed. E.V. Popov. - M., 1997, p.136

Kislyuk in philosophy. - Kharkov, 2001, p.258

Fundamentals of Philosophy: Textbook for High Schools / Ed. E.V. Popov. - M., 1997, p.144

Anti-Dühring// Works. - T. 20, p.346

Fundamentals of Philosophy: Textbook for High Schools / Ed. E.V. Popov. - M., 1997, p.142

Monuments of world aesthetic thought: Antiquity. Middle Ages. Renaissance. – M.,

1962. - V.1, p.506

Martynov: Teaching aid for university students. - Mn.,

Martynov: Teaching aid for university students. - Mn.,

Utopia. - M., 1998, p.53-54

Kislyuk in philosophy. - Kharkov, 2001, p.262

Sovereign. - Mn., 1999, p.76

The term "Renaissance" or "Renaissance" is known to every person. We are familiar with the heritage of this time - picturesque, literary, musical, we also know about the philosophical heritage. The Renaissance is a rather complex phenomenon of Western European culture of the mid-14th - late 16th centuries.

In the Western Renaissance, it is customary to divide three periods:

1st period (humanistic, or anthropocentric): ser. XIV - ser. 15th century

2nd period (Neoplatonic): ser. XV - beginning. 16th century 3rd period (natural-philosophical): late XVI - early. 17th century

The philosophy of the Renaissance is a rather motley picture, a set of various philosophical schools, often incompatible with each other, and is not something whole, although it is united by many common ideas. This philosophy is all the more complex if we look back centuries and see that many of the ideas of the Renaissance were born much earlier than the countdown of the era began - in the 13th century, when disputes were still raging in medieval universities, the main ideas were Thomas Aquinas and the ideas of the later nominalists were just emerging. But at the same time, ideas were born in Italy that were opposed to the scholastic worldview that prevailed at that time.

Causes of the Renaissance

In Soviet literature, the main reason for the emergence of the Renaissance was considered to be an economic one, since it was a time of rapid development of crafts, the emergence and strengthening of cities (it is not without reason that the Renaissance begins in Italy, where there were such city-states as Rome, Naples, Venice, Florence, the most developed from an economic point of view). Economically free people, in order to justify and substantiate their activities, demanded a new worldview, different from that given by the scholastic constructions of the Thomists and late nominalists, cut off from life practice, or the ascetic treatises of Catholic clergymen, monks and early Church Fathers. Another philosophy, more active and oriented towards earthly goals, was required, which was not slow to appear. Obviously, in addition to purely economic reasons, which undoubtedly really existed, there were other reasons, otherwise it would be difficult to explain why the Renaissance arises precisely in Western, and not in Eastern Europe, precisely among the Western, and not the Eastern Christian denomination.

It can be assumed that the specific form of Christianity that existed in Western Europe played an important role in the emergence of the Renaissance. It is no coincidence that Italy served as the center of the original Renaissance. Firstly, the purely external side of Catholic life served as a considerable impetus for the emergence of freethinking of the Renaissance philosophers. The famous Avignon captivity of the popes, the emergence of various kinds of antipopes (when the popes argued for power and this dispute occurred in violation of not only the norms of Christian morality, but also the boundaries of what was permitted by jurisprudence) gave rise to doubts in the minds of people about the validity of the existing moral principles and even withdrawal into freethinking and denial Catholic and Christian ideals in general.

On the other hand, the Catholic worldview itself in many respects contributed to the departure from scholastic philosophy. It is in Catholicism, as we know, that philosophy developed to a greater degree than in Byzantine or Russian Orthodoxy. Therefore, the outlook of the Western Catholic person was more rational, more directed towards solving ontological and especially epistemological issues. With this approach, the concept of God was often separated from man, and God became not the center of the world, not the meaning and purpose of life, but an object of purely theoretical knowledge, allowing all sorts of doubts. And such doubts were not slow to appear; later they moved into a sweeping denial of God. The scholastic worldview itself thus, as it were, prepared for the phenomenon that we call the Renaissance.

Dante Alighieri

The first thinker of the Renaissance is traditionally called Dante Alighieri, although he lived from 1265 to 1321, during the heyday of scholastic philosophy. It was Dante who first had ideas that did not fit into the mainstream of traditional scholastic philosophizing. For these ideas, Dante was expelled from his native city (for speaking out against the papacy). His main work is known - "The Divine Comedy"; less well-known treatises - "The Feast" and "On the Monarchy".

Even from the plot of the Divine Comedy, it is clear that for Dante, the guide through hell, purgatory and paradise is not some angel, saint or father of the Church, as it would be logical to assume, but Virgil - an ancient sage, orator, poet. It is he who for Dante is the person who knows best what is happening in the earthly and unearthly world. This alone already indicates that for Dante the main values ​​are not only Christian ones. His very picture of the world fits perfectly into the framework of the Catholic worldview, but some of its strokes do not fit into the mainstream of the traditional understanding: for example, Siger of Brabant, the famous heretic, the head of the Averroists, Dante places in paradise next to Thomas Aquinas, who fought all his life against Averroism. Dante also places the ancient philosophers (Democritus, Socrates, Plato) not in hell itself, despite the generally accepted opinion, but in limbo - the very first circle of hell. The picture of the world in this work is medieval, purely Catholic, but the very hierarchy of the heavens of paradise in many ways resembles a Neoplatonic construction. Dante does not oppose earthly nature to the Divine world, but, on the contrary, points out that nature itself is also divine, and man, as a being with a body and a soul, is involved in two natures - earthly and heavenly, and therefore predetermined for two purposes. Therefore, man strives for two kinds of bliss. As Dante points out, the path to earthly bliss leads to philosophical instructions, which are known by the mind, and to heavenly pleasure leads the path of spiritual instructions, consistent with the teachings of the Holy Spirit.

Philosophy, therefore, turns out to be much more necessary for the organization of earthly life than theology, and this also did not fit into the framework of the Catholic and generally Christian world outlook. Philosophy is needed to govern the state, and the church is needed in order to lead people to the Kingdom of Heaven. Therefore, the monarch must be independent of the church. (One can imagine the reaction of the pope to such a conclusion.) Therefore, Dante sees the meaning of life on earth not in asceticism, not in flight from earthly goods, but, on the contrary, in life in accordance with nature, human, earthly goals and in the improvement of earthly conditions of life .

Francesco Petrarca

Dante Alighieri is considered the forerunner of Renaissance philosophy. Actually, the first Renaissance philosopher is Francesco Petrarca (1304-1374), perhaps better known as a remarkable poet, but nevertheless he founded the humanistic direction in Renaissance philosophy - the very one that is the first stage in its generally accepted classification.

He expressed his main ideas in two treatises: "On his own and others' ignorance" and "My secret" ("On contempt for the world"). At the beginning of the first treatise, Petrarch says that he knows nothing, that he is ignorant of philosophy. These words are both irony and truth, since Petrarch really did not have a philosophical education. And then he concludes: let the celestials talk about Divine affairs, and man, as an earthly being, should talk about earthly, human affairs. Petrarch ironically remarks: we live in a happy time, because before there were one, two, at most seven wise men, now there are literally crowds of them, herds that filled all the universities.

He denounces university education and apparent wisdom, which in the mouth of Petrarch appears as pseudo-wisdom, which operates with various terms and words, but has nothing to do with the knowledge of God or the knowledge of man. The scholastics took the philosophy of Aristotle as a model for themselves, but Aristotelianism in the treatises of the scholastics is largely distorted. Therefore, Petrarch stipulates that, speaking against modern philosophy, he does not oppose Aristotle as a philosopher who lived in Ancient Greece, but against the Aristotelians. To know Aristotle, one must study Aristotle himself and the entire ancient culture. Petrarch for the first time again raises interest in such a genius of ancient philosophy as Plato. It is from Petrarch that the Platonic line in the philosophy of the Renaissance originates. Petrarch objects to the "barbarian Latin" in which treatises are written and disputes are conducted in universities. To this Latin, in which there is nothing alive, he contrasts the Latin in which Virgil, Cicero and other ancient Greek poets and philosophers wrote. The main problem for Petrarch is the knowledge not of God, but of man, because the celestials should be engaged in the knowledge of God. Along the way, he notices that if not all the celestials succeeded in knowing God, and some, the most prominent of them, even fell away from Him, then what can be said about man? Man, moreover, cannot cognize God and therefore must study only himself. Therefore, the emphasis in the philosophy of Petrarch puts on a person's knowledge of himself, the whole variety of all his feelings as they are. It is in this that the pathos of all the work of Petrarch and his philosophical treatises, letters, poems. In the treatise On Contempt for the World, Petrarch discusses the meaning of human life. This work is built in the form of a conversation between three characters - Augustine, Francis and Truth. However, the Truth, although indicated by the participant in the conversation, never enters into an argument. Therefore, the treatise is, in fact, a dialogue between Francis and Augustine. It is sometimes said that there is an analogy between Francis and Francesco, that Francesco Petrarch himself is arguing with the Christian worldview, which he represents under the name of Augustine. But most likely here is Petrarch's conversation with himself, and it is no coincidence that he is silent all the time. Petrarch is looking for the truth, trying to understand himself, this is precisely the meaning of the dialogue. Augustine preaches the truths of the Christian faith, talks about how one should live, with which Francis agrees, but at the same time says that a person also has earthly affairs to which he should pay attention, and these affairs are so fascinating that they are followed by lengthy praises .

Augustine does not object to such an understanding of the values ​​of earthly life and does not condemn it, so in the dialogue itself we see that Petrarch is trying to deal with himself and solve questions about the meaning of life and the integrity of earthly human existence within the framework of the Christian worldview. It is difficult to say how successful he is: he is silent, and Petrarch himself does not give a final answer. Naturally, Petrarch himself considers himself a Christian, although he points out the need for the humanization of existing Christianity, its focus on man. It was Petrarch who first introduced the term "humanism" and was the founder of the humanistic trend in Renaissance philosophy and, in a broader sense, the founder of humanism in general.

Renaissance humanism

Renaissance humanism is not quite what is usually meant. Humanism is not the defense of human rights, but the study of man as he is. Humanism, from the point of view of Petrarch and other philosophers, meant the transfer of man to the center of the world, the study of man in the first place. The term "humanism" in this regard is somewhat synonymous with the word "anthropocentrism" and is opposed to the term "theocentrism". In contrast to the religious philosophy of Western Europe, humanistic philosophy sets as its task the study of man with all his earthly and non-earthly needs. Instead of ontological questions, ethical questions come to the fore. The humanists were mostly non-professionals and saw their merit in this. The centers of humanism were located not in universities, but in private houses, at the palaces of nobles; these were free circles (often called academies). The humanists considered themselves to be true philosophers, in contrast to the scholastics who taught in university departments. Their second feature (apart from unprofessionalism) is their attention to antiquity. It is in her that they see an ideal that needs to be revived. The Middle Ages for humanists seem to be a kind of "dark kingdom" that came after ancient culture. According to the humanists, it is in the imitation of ancient culture, in the revival of the ancient worldview that the task of true philosophers lies. To do this, they translate from ancient Greek into Latin and modern languages ​​almost all ancient Greek works; and everything that we now know about ancient Greece, with a few exceptions, was discovered precisely in the Renaissance. These works are not just translated, but commented on, and the comments are not written from a theological point of view, but are textological, philological, so that many sciences arise, in particular, philology in our modern understanding. This commentary was free from any dogmatic notion, and openness, freedom also characterized the humanists. Renaissance Platonists, Stoics, Epicureans, Aristotelians - all were united by one idea - the humanistic idea of ​​interest in man. In artistic forms, humanists also tried to find something new, they abandoned the "Sums" common in the Middle Ages. Poems are being composed, the epistolary genre is being revived, fiction and philosophical treatises are appearing as opposed to scholastic pseudo-knowledge. The social views of the humanists also differed from the generally accepted feudal ones; they considered equal all strata of the population, for each person is the image of God and therefore all people - both feudal lords and vassals - are equal. Humanists have always resorted primarily to Christian arguments, since they never opposed themselves to the Church. Moreover, opposing themselves to scholastic philosophizing, the humanists believed that they were reviving the true Church, the true faith in God. In the fact that this belief can be combined with ancient philosophy, humanists did not see anything reprehensible or strange.

As already mentioned, the humanists showed their main interest in ethical issues, therefore, ontological and epistemological problems are not typical for humanistic philosophy. The humanists were first and foremost ethical, not philosophers in the sense we are used to.

The philosophy of Epicureanism is also reviving, promoting pleasure, primarily spiritual, and not sensual. Many artistic works of humanist philosophers and other representatives of the culture of the Renaissance served to achieve this pleasure. Praising the mind of man, the humanists saw in rational human nature the image of God, that which God endowed man with so that man would perfect and improve his earthly life. As a rational being, man is a creator and it is in this that he is similar to God. Therefore, the duty of a person is to participate in the world, and not to leave it, to improve the world, and not ascetically detached from looking at it as something unnecessary for salvation. Man and the world are beautiful, because they were created by God, and the task of man is to improve the world, making it even more beautiful, in this man is a co-worker with God. These are, in brief, the main features of the humanistic worldview. Let's try to trace how humanism developed, using the example of individual representatives of this philosophical trend.

Lorenzo Valla

The most significant humanist philosopher after Petrarch can be called Lorenzo Valla (1407-1457). His main work is "On Pleasure". Already from the name it is clear that Valla was a philosopher who revived the Epicurean worldview. The second part of the title of this work is "... or About true and false good." In addition, he has treatises “On the beauties of the Latin language” (against the contemporary barbarous Latin language), “On free will”, “On the monastic vow”, “Comparison of the New Testament”, as well as the famous work “Discourse on the falsity of the so-called Deed of deed of Constantine. According to the generally accepted view in the Catholic world, in the IV century. Emperor Constantine presented Patriarch Sylvester I as a gift in gratitude for his miraculous healing and for the victory in the famous battle, a letter, which refers to the transfer to the pope of all power over the western regions of Europe, primarily over Italy. It was on this document that the popes based the priority of papal authority over imperial authority. Lorenzo Valla, using philological analysis, proved that this letter could not have been written in the 4th century, but is a much later forgery. Since then, skepticism about the priority of papal authority has become more and more strengthened. Lorenzo Valla was an outstanding linguist, which follows from the title and another work - "On the beauties of the Latin language", in which he acted as a critic of barbaric Latin. He objects to the terms introduced by the supporters of John Duns Scotus ("what-ness", "beingness", "thisness", etc.), and calls to return to the living Latin language, not to disfigure it with innovations. Valla also concludes that realistic philosophizing cannot be true either, since it cannot correspond to normal human language. All those universals that need to be expressed in words so incomprehensible to the human ear are nothing more than an invention of pseudoscientists.

The philosophy of Lorenzo Valla sees his ideal in the figure of Epicurus, but it does not revive his atomism, but his attitude to life, the interpretation of the concept of "pleasure". Valla understands pleasure differently from the historical Epicurus, who was not an Epicurean in the modern sense of the word. Walla, on the other hand, understands Epicureanism precisely as a preference for enjoyment over all other human values, and sometimes even regrets that a person has only five senses, and not 50 or 500, in order to receive pleasure in a much larger volume.

In addition to this kind of exaggeration, Valla also gives more serious arguments, proving that the senses, in addition to giving us the ability to experience pleasure, also serve to cognize the world. Through the senses, a living being maintains its life, and pleasure is the criterion by which it can avoid danger or seek that which helps it survive. It is no coincidence that food is pleasant and therefore useful for life, while poison is bitter and, like any danger, does not give pleasure. Therefore, Valla draws a fundamental conclusion: it is impossible to live without pleasure (which cannot be said about virtue), therefore pleasure is a true good, a true value, and Catholics (and Christians in general) are cunning when they say that pleasure is not a true good. For what does a Christian fear after death? Torment in hell. And what does he expect from paradise? Eternal pleasure. Valla believes that his view of pleasure is not contrary to Christianity, but is more honest and consistent.

A person exists for pleasure, and Valla calls all statements like “it is better to die for the homeland than disgrace” stupidity, because together with a person, his homeland dies for him. Therefore, it is better to betray the motherland (or anyone), but stay alive. Virtue can only be understood as usefulness to a person, and the criterion of usefulness for Valla is pleasure or non-pleasure.

Florence Platonic Academy

Such an interpretation of Christianity was not widespread, in contrast to Platonic views. It was Platonism that was destined to play the most decisive role in the philosophy of the Renaissance and in the influence that this philosophy had on subsequent philosophy and science. In this aspect, we should first of all mention the so-called Florentine Platonic Academy, among whose representatives three thinkers stand out: George Gemist Plifon, Marsilio Ficino and Pico della Mirandola.

Georgy Gemist Plifon

Pliphon (1355-1452) - an Orthodox priest from Constantinople, participated in the famous Florentine Uniate Council and after it remained in Rome, where he preached his views, which were not shared by Constantinople. The treatise "Laws" by Plethon was burned by order of the patriarch, only some excerpts from it have come down to us. Plethon was distinguished by free-thinking, despite the fact that he was an Orthodox priest and belonged to the highest strata of the clergy. He was interested in other religions, ancient culture (the title of the treatise "Laws" is clearly inspired by Plato's "Laws"). In his writings, Pliphon abandons many Christian positions in favor of Platonic and Neoplatonic ones. Thus, he prefers creationism to the emanation vision of the world (timeless, eternal generation of the world from some source through the mystical outflow of the energy of the Divine). Pliphon calls his teaching Hellenic theology. The universe cannot be created, for it is divine, therefore, like God, it is eternal; God always produces the universe according to the principle described by Plotinus, and the transition from Divine unity to the diversity of the earthly world occurs through pagan gods. Plithon's "Laws" often mention the names of these gods, although he himself did not believe in them and considered them just convenient names: he often calls the highest god Zeus (it is he who is the timeless creator of nature and absolute being).

Marsilio Ficino

Plethon found followers, among whom Marsilio Ficino (1433–1499) is usually singled out. He is considered a unique figure not only in the history of the Renaissance, but in general in world culture. He was a small man, almost a hunchback, very ugly. But the influential Florentine Cosimo Medici was imbued with extraordinary sympathy for Marsilio for his mind and ability to work. Seeing his interest in Platonic philosophy, the Medici bought a villa next to his house and gave it to Ficino, so that he would always have the pleasure of talking with the wise philosopher. And in order for Ficino to better understand Plato's philosophy, the Medici gave him a complete code of all the works of Plato in Greek (a gift no less valuable than a villa, because it existed in a single copy).

It was in this villa that Ficino created many of his masterpieces. He translated into Latin all of Plato, all of Plotinus, Porphyry, Proclus, Iamblichus, Dionysius the Areopagite, Hermes Trismegistus (Thrice Majestic; the legendary Greek philosopher-anonymous). And he translated it in such a way that until now these translations are considered classic and are revered on a par with the originals themselves. By the way, there is still no complete translation of Plotinus in Russian, although many philosophers and philologists have undertaken this work. Ficino translated, besides Plotinus, all the Neoplatonists, who were much more prolific than Plotinus. He also writes his own works: “On the Christian Religion”, “Plato’s Theology on the Immortality of the Soul”, “On Life”, an interpretation of Plato’s “Feast”, etc. In particular, in the first work, Ficino expresses the idea that there is some kind of universal religion, all other religions are involved in it in one way or another, and Christianity is its highest and best manifestation. Thanks to the patronage of the Medici, Marsilio Ficino became a Catholic priest, which, however, did not prevent him from preaching about the divine Plato and lighting candles in the temple in front of his bust, his love for this Greek philosopher was so great.

Philosophy Ficino considered as the sister of religion, and the world - on the model of the Platonists, considering it hierarchically ordered. The hierarchy of the world, according to Ficino, has five levels: God, angels, soul, qualities and matter. The soul is in the middle of this hierarchy and connects all its links. Thus, the center of the hierarchy is not God, but man. This picture is not pantheistic, but rather penentheistic, for everything comes from God and God embraces everything with Himself. Qualities are a certain stage of transition to the plurality of the world, something that gives a qualitative diversity to the objects of the world. The world is in constant motion, which is inherent only to animate beings, therefore the world is the movement of the soul, which is the connecting element of the world. The soul is everywhere in nature, everything is connected by the soul. The world is in unity due to that which originates from God. Since the world originates from God, it is embraced by beauty; since the world is bound by God, it is bound by love; since the world will eventually unite with God, it is bound by enjoyment. Ficino often compared such an unusual interpretation of the Divine Trinity with the three hypostases of Plotinus, believing that the justification of the three hypostases by Plotinus is the justification of the Christian Trinity. Thus, in Ficino we see a complete fusion of ancient, primarily Neoplatonic, philosophy with Christianity.

Pico della Mirandola

The name "academy" for the Florentine Platonists was strengthened by virtue of their free character; it was not an official institution, but a circle of humanists united around their leaders, one of whom was Marsilio Ficino, and around the great ancient philosopher Plato, revered by them. In addition to Ficino, Pico della Mirandola (1463–1494) was also the leader of the Florentine Platonic Academy. Unlike Ficino, who had an unsightly appearance and lived a reclusive life in a villa given to him by Cosimo Medici, Pico della Mirandola was a stately, handsome man whose biography matched his appearance: legends describe his passionate romantic love, the kidnapping of his beloved, flight, prison and etc. Pico della Mirandola lived a stormy and short life. By origin, he was a rich man - the Count of Mirandola and the Signor of Concordia. He inherited great wealth and showed his talent very early. He disposed of wealth with his characteristic disinterestedness. Mirandola early became interested in ancient and Eastern philosophy (including Jewish Kabbalah), studied languages, both ancient and Eastern, studied at the University of Padua, visited Paris; for his book he ordered translations from those languages ​​that he did not know (he paid for translations from Arabic with Arabian horses). In 1486, Mirandola wrote the famous "900 Theses", sent them to all the most prominent thinkers of that time and invited them to gather in Rome to arrange a debate on the theses proposed by him. Subsequently, these theses were published in a work entitled "Speech on the Dignity of Man". In his theses, Pico della Mirandola collected everything he knew about all philosophies and created his own philosophical system, which claimed to unite various philosophies on the basis of ancient Platonism. However, the Pope found out about the upcoming dispute, and the dispute was banned, and the theses were condemned. Mirandola is threatened with arrest and flees to Florence, where he befriends Marsilio Ficino. Here Mirandola writes other works, in particular "Hektapl" (an interpretation of the six days of creation), "On Being and the One", "Reasoning against Astrology", etc.

Mirandola's philosophy is based on Neoplatonism. Mirandola proposes a hierarchical construction of the world, but unlike Plotinus and other Neoplatonists, Pico speaks the Christian language and claims that the world has three levels: angelic, celestial and elemental. These worlds are subordinate, they are eternal (including the material world), for God, who creates it (and He does not create from nothing, but emanately, by virtue of His necessary essence, as Plotinus believed), is eternal. The world itself is beautiful. Here Pico echoes many of his humanist contemporaries, but paradoxically rejects and denies the presence of beauty in God, for beauty, according to him, implies a certain asymmetry, an element of the ugly. There is no asymmetry in God, there is nothing ugly in Him, therefore there is no beauty in Him either. Pico della Mirandola does not deny the biblical picture of the world, however, he believes that the Bible contains only some images that the philosopher must interpret in an allegorical way. The Bible gives a rough, popular description of the creation of the world. The hierarchy of levels is bound by God, Who is not above the hierarchy, but pervades all of it with Himself. The whole world is that in which God is, i.e. God is all in all; God is the perfection of things, their essence. Therefore, Pico concludes: a thing freed from imperfection is God. If we affirm that God is everything in everything and that there is God in every individual thing, then, since God is the essence, the basis of the being of this thing, we can say that every thing, deprived of its individuality, its imperfection, represents God.

Mirandola made a great contribution to the understanding of nature in the scientific sense, for he was perhaps the first of the philosophers who began to assert that God, understood in the Neoplatonic sense, creates the world in accordance with certain mathematical laws. God, creating the world, had before Himself geometry, arithmetic, algebra and other sciences, and therefore the world around us is built according to the same mathematical laws. Subsequently, on the basis of this idea, Galileo Galilei, Isaac Newton, Johannes Kepler and other outstanding scientists of modern times developed the concept of mathematical natural science, i.e. actually created modern science. And one of the first philosophers who expressed this idea was Pico della Mirandola - a thought that Galileo would later aphoristically express: "The Book of Nature is written in the language of mathematics." Pico didn't say it, but it's the first time the idea comes to him. Pico expressed the idea of ​​the mathematical arrangement of the universe in a polemic against astrologers, about whom he wrote a whole book ("Reasoning against astrologers"). Astrologers, according to Mirandola, are wrong in looking for some fictitious causes of all phenomena. Pico speaks out against various kinds of errors in the interpretation of natural phenomena, both on the part of astrologers, who are looking for the causes of everything in combinations of stars, and on the part of ordinary religious consciousness, which tries to see the action of angelic or demonic forces in everything. Everything has its own reason, the world is a chain of interacting causes - it was in this aspect that Mirandola objected both to his contemporary religious consciousness and to astrological views that had appeared by that time in great variety. Nature has a causal (causal) structure that can be described in the language of mathematics. In addition, astrology belittles a person, showing his complete lack of any freedom. If everything depends on the location of the stars and planets, then a person does not have freedom, so why talk then about sin, about punishment for? Man, according to Pico, is a fourth world - not angelic, not heavenly and not elementary. This fourth world is not on any of these levels, a person is absolutely free and therefore can place himself on any of the levels of this world. He can become higher than the angels and lower than the animals. Man permeates all worlds and occupies a place in this hierarchy of his own free will. He must define himself, because the Creator created him this way – completely and absolutely free. A person forms himself, and what he will be depends not on the combination of stars, not on the will of God, but only on his own free will. That is why a person is the image of God, but in order to truly become the image of God, a person must direct his free will towards God and achieve this image, become it.

Thus, in the thoughts of Pico della Mirandola, we see the desire to preserve Christianity, to understand it from the point of view of modern interest in man in new, humanistic positions, to place man, and not God, in the center of the world, and to bring into Christianity all the truths from different philosophical systems. However, Pico did not deny the presence of truth in other religions, although he considered Christianity the highest, most perfect form of religion.

Nicholas of Cusa

A younger contemporary of the humanist philosophers was Nicholas of Cusa (Nicholas of Cusa, a town in southern Germany near Trier). He differs from other philosophers of the Renaissance in the power of the mind and the depth of the problems that he posed. As we have seen, the nature of the philosophical systems of those thinkers about which we have already spoken and which we will study in the future was distinguished by eclecticism, superficiality, and ignoring certain philosophical problems. Basically, Renaissance philosophers are interested in ethical issues, and ontological and epistemological problems recede into the background (if they appear at all) or are not included in the circle of philosophical problems, as was the case with Niccolo Machiavelli, Erasmus of Rotterdam, and some Italian humanists (for example, Petrarch). If they had ontology, it was borrowed from ancient philosophy.

Nicholas of Cusa is strikingly different from all these philosophers. This is a truly original, brilliant thinker. He is more a philosopher than a theologian, although he considered himself a theologian. Nicholas of Cusa (1401-1464) was born into a Christian family, studied at the so-called school of "brothers of common life." It was a semi-monastic organization that opposed itself to the official Catholic Church, but did not break with it and did not go into the heresy of mysticism and irrationalism. The brethren of common life tried to revive the spirit of primitive Christianity by placing themselves in a certain opposition to Roman Catholicism; they wanted to get away from scholastic disputes and return to the individual religious experience of God. It is clear that upbringing and education were appropriate in this community, and this will clearly manifest itself in its pupil Nicholas of Cusa (later Erasmus of Rotterdam will study with the "brothers of the common life"). After leaving school, Nicholas of Cusa enters the University of Heidelberg, and then studies at the University of Padua. He studies mathematics, medicine, astronomy, geography, law.

In 1423, Nicholas of Cusa became a doctor of economic law, then entered the University of Cologne, where he studied theology. In 1426, Kuzansky was ordained a priest, from that time his rapid ascent along the steps of the hierarchical ladder of the Catholic Church began. He goes to serve in the papal curia; in 1437 he was sent to Byzantium to negotiate the unification of the Churches. There he meets George Gemist Plifon. In 1448, Nicholas of Cusa becomes a cardinal, but an active life within the Catholic Church does not interfere with his philosophical, theological and natural science studies. He is interested in geography and for the first time offers a map of Europe, studies the calendar (largely on his initiative, a reform of calendar calculus is being prepared), mathematics (makes a great contribution to the calculus of infinitesimal quantities). In 1450, Nicholas of Cusa was appointed papal legate in Germany, and in 1458 he returned to Rome and became vicar general. While still young (in 1440), Nicholas of Cusa writes his main work, On Scientific Ignorance. He has a number of other works: "On Assumptions"; dialogues united by the participation in them of a character under the name Simpleton (written clearly under the influence of Plato), - “The simpleton about wisdom”, “The simpleton about the mind”, “The simpleton about experiments with weights”; some theological works - "On the Hidden God", "On the Search for God", "On the Sonship of God", "On the Gift of the Father of Lights".

After the publication of the work “On learned ignorance”, various accusations rained down on Nicholas of Cusa. His opponent was the Catholic priest Wenck, whose work was called Ignorant Learning. After its publication, Nikolai Kuzansky releases the "Apology of Scientific Ignorance", where he tries to defend his views. Attacks on Nicholas by many clergy did not at all interfere with his successful advancement in the hierarchical ladder of the Roman Catholic Church, which testifies to the specifics of the time when free thinking penetrated even the circles of high-ranking and influential people.

The main position of the book "On learned ignorance" and the entire work of Cusa is a return to the theology of the early Church Fathers (earlier in comparison with Thomas Aquinas and other pillars of the Catholic Church). Nicholas of Cusa tries to return to the spirit of Origen and especially Dionysius the Areopagite. In their philosophy, says the cardinal, lies the understanding of truth and God.

Nothing can be said about God; God can be known only on the paths of apophatic (ie, negative) theology. Therefore, the more we know God, the more we become convinced that we cannot know Him. Only a complete ignoramus can assert that he knows God, but a true sage and theologian, knowing God, becomes more and more convinced of his own ignorance. Therefore, we cannot know the truth (and God is the Truth). The more we know it, the more we are convinced of our own ignorance - this is precisely the main idea of ​​the treatise. The treatise begins with this idea and ends with it. At the beginning of the book, Nicholas of Cusa gives a definition of what is the maximum: it is that which absolutely nothing can be greater than. But if the maximum is such, then it cannot be less than itself. If the maximum becomes less than the maximum, it is no longer a maximum. Therefore, the maximum is also that, less than which nothing can be, - therefore, the maximum coincides with the minimum. But the smallest number is one; hence the maximum is unity. The maximum is the all-encompassing, which rises above everything; it is beyond all assertion, it cannot be said that it is, it is no more than it is not. The existence of this supreme single maximum is proclaimed by Nicholas of Cusa as the highest truth. This maximum is God. Exploring the maximum, Kuzansky discovers that the maximum also includes equality with oneself and connection with oneself. This is the meaning of the Christian Trinity. Kuzansky even dares to assert that the words "Unity", "Equality" and "Connection" better show the nature of God than the words "God the Father", "God the Son" and "God the Holy Spirit". True, he adds in brackets that it would be better if the inspired authors included this idea in the Holy Scriptures. It is possible to know God only on the paths of analogies. Analogies with sensible objects cannot be reliable, since the sensible itself is rather shaky. The most reliable and undoubted are the more abstract entities (the influence of the Platonic tradition is clearly visible here), but abstract analogies should not be deprived of material support, otherwise they cannot be imagined. Such entities are mathematical objects, so it is best to start knowing God through mathematical symbols (i.e. signs). Since God is Unity, Equality and Connection, it is best to imagine God as a triangle, and since God is a maximum, then God is an infinite absolute triangle. An infinite triangle is a triangle whose sides tend to infinity, i.e. It is a triangle with three right angles. In addition, God is also an infinite straight line, an infinite circle, and all this, in fact, coincides, for the circle, tending to infinity, becomes less and less curved. Its curvature approaches zero, and the infinite circle coincides with a straight line. Since the circle is infinite, its center cannot be in one place. The center of such a circle is everywhere, and the boundary is nowhere. Since God is an infinite circle, the center of which is everywhere, then God is everywhere, in every part of the world He is present in its entirety. Being infinity, God transcends all opposites and includes them in Himself. But besides the absolute maximum, there is a relative maximum - this is the world. Being infinite, God is infinitely contained in every particular thing, and therefore the world is infinite. The world, like God, is a circle, the center of which is everywhere and the boundary nowhere. Nicholas of Cusa rejects the Aristotelian-Ptolemaic picture of the world of a closed universe that was widespread at that time, on the border of which there is a sphere of fixed stars, and argues that the universe has a uniform structure. The earth has no privileged place in this world; The earth is the same point in the universe as all its other points.

The arguments of Cusa come from the nature of God and His connection with the world. Since the connection of God with the world is conceived in exactly this way, as mentioned above, Nicholas of Cusa is forced to somehow consider the concept of the creation of the world. If God is wholly contained in the entire world (and even more so, as Cusansky claims, the world is eternal, and not created at a certain point in time), then Nicholas of Cusa is forced to fight Neoplatonic emanativism in order to avoid the conclusion that God created the world by some necessity (as we remember, according to Plotinus' concept, the world is created by virtue of emanation from God, and emanation is a certain moment of necessity, which is the essence of God and, therefore, exceeds Him). Nicholas of Cusa shares neither the concept of the creation of the world in time, nor the concept of emanation. He asserts that the world is an unfolding of God - an explication. God is the unity of everything, He is being-possibility; God unfolds into some actuality, into reality. This reality does not contain opposites, but is what it is, but the unfolding is not an emanation, not a necessary force that exceeds God, but is the unfolding of God by virtue of His own will. Therefore, God represents the whole world in a folded form; what results from unfolding is no longer God. One cannot accuse Nicholas of Cusa of pantheism (the identification of God and the world), one cannot say that he completely and completely breaks with Christianity in his ontology. Most likely, his concept, like that of Plotinus, is panentheism, although it is difficult to choose the terminology here: not “everything is God” (pantheism), but “everything is in God” (panentheism), but in a collapsed form. Since the world is the unfolding of God, the world is eternal. Man is a part of the world created by God, and the most perfect part, because man includes not only material, bodily nature, but also spiritual, mental. Therefore, a person really includes everything in his entirety; man, in the words of ancient thinkers, is a microcosm. However, it cannot be said that each person is a microcosm. By saying this, we are talking only about the essence of man. Man is a being afflicted with sin. Only one Man included the whole world - Jesus Christ. Having incarnated, taking into Himself the whole world spiritually and materially, becoming a perfect Man, God showed people the way not only to salvation, but also to perfection, to human essence. Therefore, each person, in the words of Cusa, is God, but not absolutely.

The theory of knowledge of Nicholas of Cusa is very interesting and not quite common for that time. Man is a divine being, therefore he can cognize. However, Kuzansky does not believe that all knowledge for a person is carried out on the paths of his mind. He tries to combine the Platonic and Aristotelian positions, connecting the sensual, rational and intellectual elements of knowledge. Understanding, on the one hand, that truth is non-material and the knowledge of truth is not the knowledge of material objects, but is the knowledge of God (and, in the end, the knowledge of truth is the knowledge that we know nothing), Nicholas, on the other hand, argues that knowledge concrete, limited, and not absolute truth perhaps and begins with the process of sensory perception. It is precisely this that is the impetus that induces our organs of cognition to the beginning of action. After feelings, another ability of human cognition comes into force - imagination, which, without going beyond sensory cognition, generalizes the data given in the senses. Feelings and imagination are the lowest level of knowledge. At a higher level, reason begins to operate, which distinguishes and compares. Reason is a special intellectual activity, the faculty of cognition, and has its own instrument. Reason does not depend on feelings, it has in itself ideas (or forms, in Aristotelian language) that are invested in us at birth by God. However, Kuzansky does not take the position of the Platonists, who argued that knowledge is already inherent in us before birth. Knowledge appears in us when the sense organs are active. Nevertheless, the mind contains in itself all these ideas and forms in a collapsed form, and the mind compares and distinguishes the ideas and data that come from the imagination. Such is the rational activity of our cognition. The highest stage of cognitive activity is the intellect, or reason, which does not compare, does not compare, but combines all the data. Reason, comparing and comparing, acts on the basis of the law of the excluded middle and the law of non-contradiction. The mind, on the other hand, operates on the basis of other laws - it seems to see the whole truth, it grasps it in all its opposites. This is an intuitive grasp of the truth. The mind cannot know infinity - but the mind can. Thus, striving for infinity (and we remember that infinity is God, the maximum, embracing all opposites), the mind sees all opposites. As a result of such activity, the mind contemplates everything as if at one point, so that everything is one and one is everything. Nicholas of Cusa calls this intellectual intuition.

Niccolo Machiavelli

Humanists were, as we can see, romantically inclined and believed that the revival of ancient knowledge, ancient philosophy, the return of interest in man would solve the numerous problems of that time. However, life went on as usual, and the humanists saw the collapse of their ideals. This gave rise to more pragmatic approaches to philosophy. Such a Renaissance pragmatist is Niccolò Machiavelli (1469–1527). He was born in Florence in the family of a poor lawyer, he received his own education: he studied Latin, philosophy, and eventually felt a great interest in political science. Niccolo at the age of 30 begins a political career, becomes secretary of the government of the Florentine Republic, travels a lot around Europe. But in 1512 the republic fell, the Medici fell into disgrace. Machiavelli is imprisoned, tortured, and subsequently exiled to Florence. He spends the last years of his life away from politics, writes his main works, among which stand out "Discourses on the first decade of Titus Livius" and "Sovereign" (or "Monarch"). Machiavelli had no interest in philosophy and religion, but, being a man of his time, he was forced to turn to questions of philosophy and religion. He formulated his attitude to God as follows: God is not the God whom Christians imagine as some higher being, but some fortune, fate, directing the world in accordance with its laws. Just as the material world has its own laws, so do the social world. God created these laws in the form of fate and no longer interferes in them, therefore this pattern in society is always constant. A person must recognize this pattern and act in accordance with it. The world, therefore, is always the same in this regularity, there is always good and evil in it, there are political interests, and so on. States arise and disappear according to the laws of fortune, and a person, if he learns these laws, will be successful in his activities. “Fate is a woman,” said Machiavelli, “if you want to own it, you have to beat and push it.” Society arises quite naturally from the desire of people for self-preservation. People unite and a society emerges. To manage society, people choose chiefs. Thus, a power appears that appoints the army, police, etc. to protect society. The nature of the functioning and emergence of society does not have any higher religious or moral purpose. Morality arises at a later stage and is what is useful for each member of society and for society as a whole. Laws are created to observe morality, an army and power are created to protect people, and religion is created for the spiritual unity of society. It was also created for the spiritual unity of the people, but this was a mistake - Christianity is an imperfect religion, since it is based on the cult of not those human qualities that society needs. Christianity relies too much on the other world, on the afterlife retribution and does not value reality, it values ​​weakness rather than courage. Machiavelli stands on the positions of Greek paganism - this is exactly the religion that could really unite society. Due to the fact that we are dominated by the Christian religion, our world is imperfect and the power in it belongs not to worthy people, but to scoundrels. The pagan religion elevates courage, virtues, bravery, glory - exactly those character traits that a real citizen needs. Thus, according to Machiavelli, politics is absolutely autonomous; it is not the offspring of morality and religion - on the contrary, morality and religion are the offspring of politics. Therefore, the political goal is the highest goal, for the achievement of which all methods are suitable. If we say that some method is immoral, and some is inapplicable, because it contradicts religious institutions, then Machiavelli objects: the lower cannot be an argument to the higher, morality and religion are themselves a product of politics, therefore the famous formula comes from Machiavelli : "The end justifies the means." Morality and religious norms cannot serve as arguments against some political goal. The criterion for evaluation can only be usefulness and political success. Political success for Machiavelli is the success of society. He was a democrat, a republican, but not at all a monarchist, although one of his works is called The Sovereign. The meaning and spirit of this work lies in the fact that a good sovereign should serve for the benefit of society. The highest goal is the goal of society, and not of an individual citizen, even if that citizen is a monarch. Therefore, there is no need to invent any ideal states, no need to build anything, you just need to get to know the real social world and live in this world.

Pietro Pomponazzi

Another thinker of this time is Pietro Pomponazzi (1462-1525). His biography can fit in three phrases: he was born into a wealthy family in the city of Padua, studied at the University of Padua, and then taught there. True, at the end of his life he taught for several years at the University of Bologna. He was a typical scholastic university lecturer, interested in the philosophy of Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas. However, he was more interested in Aristotle, read through the prism not of Thomas Aquinas, but of Averroes. The Aristotelianism of Pietro Pomponazzi was more heretical than Catholic, although Pomponazzi interprets both Aristotle himself and Averroes quite freely. From the Averroists, Pomponazzi borrows the concept of two truths: there is the truth of philosophy and there is the truth of religion, the truth of philosophy is the truth of reason (and not the truth of Aristotle, Pomponazzi emphasizes), and the truth of religion is not philosophical truth, because religion does not contain any truth, no lie, it serves for worldly needs, for the language of faith is the language of parables and morality. Therefore, the concept of dual truth turns into the concept that truth is contained only in philosophy. Philosophy is thus completely separated from religion, which is not concerned with truth.

Pomponazzi owns the treatise On the Immortality of the Soul. He interprets immortality in the spirit of Aristotle, or rather Averroes, although with some remarks. In the question of the immortality of the soul, two aspects should be distinguished: the question of knowledge and the question of morality. Since knowledge, i.e. thinking depends on the body and the soul experiences nothing without the body, then the soul is the form of the body (in the spirit of Aristotle). Therefore, the mind is inseparable from the body, and the soul is material and mortal. In addition to the human soul, there are non-material, intelligible beings that are capable of cognition without a body, and there are animals, lower beings. Man is in the middle between non-material beings and animals. He can cognize both the particular, like animals, and the general, like non-material beings. A person can become both, both an angel and an animal. Yet the soul remains dependent on the body and mortal. What to do with morality if the soul turns out to be mortal? It turns out, according to Pomponazzi, morality not only does not disappear with the acceptance of the mortality of the soul, but, on the contrary, becomes morality itself. For morality, which is built in the hope of a posthumous reward, is not morality, but a certain form of egoism, the hope of receiving reward for one's deed. Morality can only be moral when it does not count on anything. Morality is a virtuous act directed towards the very virtue. Therefore, belief in the immortality of the soul not only does not affirm morality, but, on the contrary, denies it, and Pomponazzi, denying the immortality of the soul, believes that he affirms the highest morality. Pomponazzi also raises the question of God's relationship to the world. For him, the problem of justifying the evil that exists in the world is insoluble. He argues like this: God either rules the world or does not. If He does not rule the world, then He is not God, and if He rules, then where does such cruelty come from? If God created everything and is the cause of every act, then why is a person responsible for each specific sinful act, and not the real reason? After all, it is God who ultimately leads man to sin. Pomponazzi sees the next way out of this. It is not necessary to imagine God as a person, because then God will be like, in the words of Pomponazzi, "a mad father." God is fate, impersonal fate, nature, the beginning of movement, therefore He does not bear personal responsibility for the evil existing in the world. God does not have free will and therefore is not responsible for evil in the world. Evil is a manifestation of contradictions in the world, and contradictions must exist in order for there to be order, for there to be harmony. Therefore, evil exists to justify the whole, it is a necessary part of the good existing in the world. Religion, if needed, is only to curb the common people as a form of self-consolation; for the philosopher, religious truth has no value.

The philosophy of renaissance in the north of Europe

Northern humanism, the northern Renaissance has its own characteristics in comparison with the southern, Italian Renaissance. First, the Northern Renaissance is much less represented by major philosophers. Secondly, it is more closely related to religion. If in Italy philosophers often simply broke with, as if not noticing it, as was the case, say, with Niccolo Machiavelli, or were simply carried away by Platonism, Stoicism, Epicureanism, then in Germany, Holland and other northern countries, philosophy was more closely connected with Christian theology.

In the northern Renaissance, Erasmus of Rotterdam stands out first of all. This is a thinker who had an unconditional and enormous influence on many people and on many events of his time.

Erasmus of Rotterdam

Erasmus of Rotterdam (1469–1536) was born in Holland, in the city of Rotterdam. He was of humble origin, moreover, he was the illegitimate son of a priest. Therefore, he had to start, as they say, from scratch. He entered the school of brothers of common life in the city of Deventer. Studying is given to him easily, and in 1487 Erasmus was tonsured a monk, because in order to continue his studies, he had no money. In the monastery, he uses a rich library, reads the Church Fathers and ancient authors. The local bishop notices him and takes him into his service. A few years later, the bishop sent him to Paris, and Erasmus studied at the Sorbonne. There he receives a doctorate in theology, and after that he teaches at one of the Italian universities. He often travels around Europe, in England he meets the famous philosopher and writer Thomas More, the author of Utopia. They become friends. Subsequently, Erasmus will greatly experience the execution of Thomas More. By that time, the influence of Erasmus of Rotterdam becomes quite strong. Many are trying to win him over to their side. He is destined for a brilliant career, if he agrees to serve for the benefit of the state or the Church, but Erasmus chooses a different path - he remains a free writer. When the events of the Reformation break out, Erasmus leaves for the tolerant Basel, where he lives until his death.

Erasmus of Rotterdam was one of the most prolific writers of the Renaissance. He translated a lot, was engaged in publishing activities. In particular, he was the first to draw attention to the fact that by the 16th century, various versions of the Bible had already been published in print, including its Latin translation, and translations into modern languages, and only the Greek text remained unpublished. Erasmus hurries to fill this gap and during the year prepares and publishes the Greek edition of the New Testament. This text was subsequently called "Textus receptus", until the 19th century. he was the main one, according to which they read in the original. True, later, through the efforts of many scientists, scientific research was carried out, as a result of which new New Testament texts appeared. Translation errors were not difficult to detect, since Erasmus was in a hurry and even, not having the last lines of the Book of Revelation of John the Theologian, translated them from Latin into Greek. But although this edition was imperfect, many still use it. He also published Thomas More’s Utopia, translated ancient authors (one of the first books was Proverbs, where he collected statements from many ancient books and from the Bible), in particular Lucian, a caustic Roman writer of the 2nd century (“Voltaire of antiquity”) . In addition, he had a lot of his own works, among which the famous “Praise of Stupidity” stands out, where he in a caustic form gives praise to Mrs. Stupidity, who reigns supreme in the world, whom all people worship. Here he allows himself to mock both illiterate peasants and high-browed theologians - clergymen, cardinals and even popes. His books “Antibarbarians”, “Ciceronian”, “Julius Not Admitted to Heaven” (a pamphlet against the popes of Rome), “Conversations easily” also stand out. However, we are, of course, primarily interested in the philosophical and theological works of Erasmus.

It is worth noting the so-called "Enchiridion, or Weapon of the Christian Warrior" and "Diatribe, or Discourse on Free Will". The first work is devoted, as Erasmus said, to the philosophy of Christ. Erasmus himself considered himself a true Christian and defended the ideals of the Catholic Church, although, of course, he did not like much - licentiousness, lawlessness, abuse of various kinds of Catholic dogma, in particular - the dogma of indulgences, etc.

However, Erasmus did not share many of the provisions that were taken for granted in the Middle Ages. So, he was an enlightener in spirit, believing that all people were created by God equal and the same, and their nobility depends not on their belonging by birth to a noble or royal family, but on their upbringing, morality, education. Nobility can only be spiritual and moral, but not inherited. Therefore, the main thing for Erasmus is the upbringing and education of a person; he puts an ill-bred and uneducated person even lower than an animal, since it lives in harmony with its nature, and an uneducated person lives worse than an animal, not understanding what he should do. Erasmus also speaks out against the superstitions and pseudoscientific hobbies especially common in the Renaissance - alchemical, astrological, etc., and sometimes he even goes too far, speaking out against miracles, saying that miracles are possible and necessary, since God exists, but they were in the times of the prophets, Jesus Christ, the apostles, and now those people who could work miracles are no longer there, and therefore there is no need to look for them. He also speaks against scholastic philosophy and theology. As a graduate of the Sorbonne, he knew these disciplines very well. He opposed scholasticism on all counts - both against the scholastic method, and against disputes, and against titles and scientific degrees. Such a philosophy, according to Erasmus, is completely useless, since it does not lead to truth and virtue, namely, to perfection in the virtues, one must first of all direct human efforts. Philosophy must be moral; only such a philosophy can be called the true philosophy of Christ. Philosophy must solve the problems of human life, the problems of man, but scholastic philosophy did not notice this. Philosophy must be present in the whole life of a person, to lead him through life - this is the topic of the main work of Erasmus "Weapons of the Christian Warrior" (1501). The main thing for a Christian, as Erasmus points out, is the books of Holy Scripture. However, the Bible is written in such a way that not many people can understand and correctly interpret its provisions. If even the holy fathers often argued with each other, interpreting this or that passage of the Bible, then what can we say about us? The reason for this is that God, condescending to the weakness of the human mind, was forced to speak in hints, allegories, parables. Therefore, we must interpret these parables in order to correctly understand the meaning that the Lord put into His words. It is necessary to ascend from the sensible, i.e. from the letter, to the intelligible, to the sacrament.

This method had already been developed by the Fathers of the Church, and Erasmus does not at all claim to consider himself its founder. According to Erasmus, it was developed by Augustine, Ambrose of Milan, Jerome, Origen, Dionysius the Areopagite. But above all, he appreciates the ability of the Apostle Paul to correctly interpret the words of the Savior and considers him the first among all philosophers. Erasmus of Rotterdam sought to systematize and explain the teachings of Christ in such a way that it was understandable to any person. He relied primarily on the New Testament. The key to his understanding were the works of the Platonic school. Best of all, Erasmus believed, Origen succeeded in applying this method of interpreting the New Testament. It is not shameful for a Christian to resort to the method of ancient philosophers, since, as Erasmus writes, everything is pure for the pure. We should not be ashamed and afraid of this, just as the fathers of the Church were not afraid to use pagan wisdom to understand the truths of Holy Scripture. Following the thoughts of the Apostle Paul, Erasmus writes that the beginning of any wisdom is self-knowledge. Of course, Erasmus understands that this thesis was expressed by Socrates and picked up by all subsequent ancient philosophy, but he is sure that the apostle Paul also followed the method of self-knowledge. The apostle considered the subject of self-knowledge so complicated that he did not even dare to say that he had solved the problem. Nevertheless, a person in the struggle with passions must first of all know himself, his soul, his body, his passions, in order to be able to overcome them, for the main thing for a Christian is not not to have passions, but not to let them rule over him. Man, according to Erasmus (more precisely, according to Origen and the Apostle Paul), consists of soul, spirit and body. The body is the lowest part of man, it is even worse than that of animals. The Spirit is the light that overshadows a person: the light of truth, the light of goodness, the light of salvation. The soul binds the spirit and the body; it can direct its efforts either towards the body or towards the spirit. Thus a person becomes either immoral or moral. This is the virtue of man - in the right direction of the efforts of his own soul. The soul can become either worse than animals, or better than angels - depending on what a person becomes. The apostle Paul called the spirit the internal man, and passion - the body, flesh, external man. The goal of a person is to become a spirit, in this regard, the desire to know oneself should be realized. In the knowledge of oneself, a person is hindered by three evils: the blindness of ignorance, clouding the mind; passions coming from the flesh; weakness of human nature. Therefore, the order of directing the efforts of a person consists precisely in getting rid of these three evils. First you need to know the truth, overcome the blindness of ignorance, then overcome your flesh, i.e. hate evil, and then overcome your weakness, i.e. be persistent in overcoming your passions. Later in The Arms of the Christian Warrior, Erasmus describes how to implement this method. There is no need to dwell on this, because Erasmus often repeats the usual, trivial truths for any Christian: believe in Jesus Christ, read the Holy Scriptures, obey God in its entirety, and do not choose only some provisions that you like, etc. Another work that interests us is directly connected with the social situation in Europe in the 16th century - with the Reformation. I think that you will probably study the teachings of Martin Luther in the course of comparative theology, but there Lutheranism, Calvinism, etc. are studied as integral, established systems. We will touch on the historical aspect of this problem.

Martin Luther

Martin Luther (1483–1546) was the son of a miner who had achieved some position in society. From childhood, Martin was accustomed to hard work and deprivation and remained all his life a rude person, close to the common people. Luther studied at the University of Erfurt (his father wanted to see him as a lawyer), where he developed an interest in philosophy and theology. He reads the books of nominalists and all sorts of mystics, in particular the famous German mystic Meister Eckhart.

In 1505, Luther entered the Augustinian monastery in Erfurt - as he himself says, because of the fear of God's wrath. This fear of God was the overriding dominant of Martin Luther's behavior. All the time he felt like a guilty person, over whom God's wrath was about to break out, so that the abbot of the monastery even had to often reassure Luther, reminding him that God can not only be angry - He loves us.

Reading the mystics strengthens Luther's belief that salvation can be achieved not by good deeds, but by faith in Jesus Christ, personal communion with God. So gradually he comes to the idea that "only by faith is a man justified." In the era of the European Renaissance, it was easy to come to this position, because Catholicism often considered good deeds to be by no means what we consider. The well-known dogma about indulgences (about the treasury of good deeds) led to vicious practice. This dogma entered the practice of the Catholic Church quite late (in the 2nd millennium) and said that different people achieve different results in their lives. Some do not enough good deeds for salvation and end up in hell, while other people (saints) do so many good deeds that they remain in abundance for others. This surplus is stored in the so-called treasury of good deeds, and any person by his deeds for the benefit of the Church can partake of it. Financial assistance was also considered such a good deed. If a person gave money to the Church, he was given an indulgence - confirmation. In practice, everything looked simple: a person went to church, bought an indulgence, and it was believed that he received part of the grace from some saint - say, Francis of Assisi or Thomas Aquinas. Such "good" deeds cannot leave any normal person indifferent. For Martin Luther, this resulted in the conclusion that no good works are needed - only faith in Jesus Christ is enough to be saved.

Luther was extremely reverent of Erasmus of Rotterdam, although, as he grew more and more as a thinker and theologian, he gradually lost respect for Erasmus. For, as Luther later said, Erasmus is more human than divine. He also attacked Aristotle, considering him a pagan and therefore unacceptable for a Christian, and scholasticism for its method, for avoiding real human life. In October 1517, Martin Luther exhibits at the door of the palace church in Wurtenberg the famous 95 theses on indulgences, from which the Reformation era begins. At first, they treat Luther loyally, they try to reason with him, even the Pope of Rome does not immediately break with him, at first standing up for his defense. But then, when popular unrest begins, and the peasants smash Catholic churches, the attitude towards Luther changes. A papal bull is issued on his renunciation of the Church. Luther himself is afraid of the consequences to which his activities have led, and condemns the peasants and the mob in general for the destruction of temples. But the fact remains: the Reformation began with peasant wars and other violent actions. Erasmus was initially sympathetic to Luther, the followers of Erasmus even congratulated Luther on his victory over the Catholic Church, whose positions Erasmus did not fully accept. Subsequently, Erasmus begins to openly debate with Luther, although many contemporaries said that it was Erasmus who "lay the egg that Luther later hatched", that the roots of the Lutheran Reformation are still in the humanistic philosophy of Erasmus. One of the problems that arose in the philosophy of both Erasmus and Luther was the problem of free will. Luther argued that the human will is like a pack animal, which does not depend on which rider saddles it. So it does not depend on the will of a person which rider will saddle him - God or Satan. A person does not have free will, all his actions are predetermined from above. People from their birth (and even from the creation of the world) are predestined - some to salvation, others to eternal condemnation. Erasmus criticized this concept when he wrote his work "Diatribe, or Discourse on Free Will". In response to this work, Luther wrote a much larger work, On the Bondage of the Will. Erasmus responded with a small work called Overprotection. Both thinkers in this dispute appealed to the blessed. Augustine, and Luther, in addition, reproached Erasmus for reviving the heresy of Pelagianism. Luther said that, according to Augustine, after the fall, the will of man became imperfect and became directed towards evil. The necessity of sin is revealed in man, and the necessity to sin becomes the law of his will. Therefore, fallen man becomes a slave to sin and loses free will. Only God can lead some people to salvation and others to condemnation. However, Augustine did not entirely deny free will. We remember that he was greatly influenced by Plotinus and was grateful to him for suggesting to him the solution to the problem of good and evil: evil has no substantive basis; only good exists in substance. Therefore, if a man remained a man, then his nature remained good. She became perverted, but remained kind; a person cannot be so perverted that he becomes evil - evil does not exist as a kind of substance. Man did not become completely evil, but only approached evil, to "nothing". Man remained a man even after the fall; being capable of doing good deeds. But the difference between man and Eve is that they did good deeds solely out of love for God. This is what makes a good deed really good. Fallen man does good deeds out of other considerations, selfish or any other worldly, but never out of love for God. There is always some earthly moment in a person, no matter how moral it may be. That is why Augustine concludes that man always sins. If he does a good deed, but not out of love for God, this is sin. This does not negate the freedom of man, but he cannot achieve the same freedom that Adam had - the freedom to act out of love for God. Grace is given to man for this, that he be freed from his sinfulness and direct his own will towards the path of salvation.

Thus, Augustine tries to combine the necessity of grace with the presence of freedom - and he does it very gracefully. So the teaching of Augustine subsequently becomes one of the most widespread teachings. Theologians have distorted this teaching in various ways. One such example is the teaching of Luther.

Erasmus of Rotterdam also appealed to Augustine in this dispute and defended the existence of free will in man. First of all, he argued that the Holy Scripture itself testifies to this, although there are mysteries about which God wished that we should not know about them, but many places are transparent and obvious. Luther's opinion that everything in the world is driven by necessity and that man has no freedom is completely useless, because then it turns out that God Himself works both good and evil in us, and therefore, doing good, as if He rewards Himself for this good, and doing evil, then he punishes people for the evil that He did in them.

This concept teaches about God, an all-loving being, completely wrong, and besides, it undermines morality, because a person loses all hope for salvation, not finding any basis for fighting his passions, his flesh. Since Luther most often quotes Scripture, Erasmus also resorts to this method, quoting Scripture in support of his positions. But in Scripture, Erasmus agrees, there are many places that say that man really does not have any free will. Therefore, Erasmus resorts to the method of allegorical interpretation, saying that Scripture, and especially these obscure passages, should be interpreted allegorically. The peculiarity of Luther and all the reformers in general is the assertion that the Scriptures do not need to be interpreted - if God wanted to say something to people, He said it just like that, and not otherwise. Therefore, the Scripture itself is clear, and each person, reading it, should understand everything as it is said. In answering this, Erasmus refers to the Fathers of the Church, saying that even they often contradict each other in interpreting the same passages. To this, the Lutherans replied that the Fathers of the Church are just people who can make mistakes. But who then gives the true interpretation? Lutherans: those who have the Spirit. But how to determine who has the Spirit and why the Fathers of the Church do not have the Spirit? Lutherans: The preaching of the gospel ended with the apostles and has just resumed. But why are you sure that the Holy Spirit is in you? Prove it with miracles. After all, even the Apostle Paul proved this by miracles, not to mention the fathers of the Church. To this, the Lutherans replied that there were no more miracles, and the Scriptures are clear enough, so why interpret it and prove that we have the Holy Spirit? But then why did the Fathers of the Church contradict each other? A vicious circle emerges. It is brilliantly reproduced by Erasmus in his book. He cites Augustine's reasoning that Adam was created with an immaculate and free will (man's freedom had both a formal and a qualitative side). Now in us the will and especially the mind are darkened by sin, but the will has not become so corrupted that we cannot serve the good. Grace helps us direct our efforts towards this. I will not give details of Erasmus' further reasoning, since most of the "Discourse on Free Will" consists of a huge number of quotations from Holy Scripture, confirming the existence of free will in a person, which is difficult to argue with, and an allegorical interpretation of those quotations that seem to reject the existence of free will. will. But Erasmus makes a characteristic of the Renaissance, albeit somewhat unexpected conclusion: citing mainly Augustinian methods, he says that Lorenzo Valla solved the problem best of all, and cites his arguments, which repeat Augustine (foreseeing events by no means excludes their occurrence; freedom and predestination do not exclude, but presuppose each other, etc. ). We got acquainted with the Renaissance philosophy of Renaissance Italy, then we saw how the Renaissance manifested itself in the north of Europe, in Germany, where it took the form of a religious revolution. Michel Montaigne is considered the most significant philosopher of the Renaissance in France.

Michel Montaigne

Michel Montaigne was born in 1533 into a noble family; his father was a very noble man and sat in the Parliament of Bordeaux. Mother was a baptized Jew. Michel received a good education, knew ancient languages ​​(Greek and Latin) very well. He goes to college in Bordeaux, then follows in his father's footsteps and goes into politics (for some time he was even the mayor of Bordeaux, he supported the king's party), but in the 70s of the 16th century. retired to his family castle and until the end of his days was engaged only in literary activities, wrote his famous "Experiments". Here he died in 1592. Montaigne is the founder of a new literary genre - the essay. His Essays are a collection of various essays written in living French (not Latin) so that as many people as possible get acquainted with his works, for he considered that he wrote mainly for them. For Montaigne, the main problem is the problem of man, but not of what occupies a central place in the universe, as in Pico della Mirandola, but of an ordinary, concrete person. This is a new subject for philosophy, in accordance with it Montaigne also comes up with a new form of presentation of his philosophy.

Philosophy, according to Montaigne, must return to everyday life. The tool for this is self-knowledge. Montaigne calls to abandon any authorities and schools, because they cannot lead a person to knowledge. Therefore, he criticizes scholasticism, because it is not true, since it is based on traditions, and not on a clear and solid philosophical foundation that has been tested and proven.

Genuine philosophy can only be free, not taking on faith any arguments and positions. Therefore, it existed in the ancient world, but scholasticism left it, and one of the signs that it is not a true philosophy is that scholasticism is the same everywhere. True philosophy is always free. Just as free people differ from each other, so do philosophies differ from each other. We saw such a variety of philosophical schools precisely in ancient Greece, and therefore ancient philosophy is true free philosophy.

The main vice for philosophy, according to Montaigne, is the power of authority, the lack of freedom. The search for truth in such a philosophy is replaced by interpretation, exegesis. And true philosophy speaks about a person, about his specific needs, about his joys and pains, grief and happiness, and therefore true philosophy, like a true person, is joyful and happy. That is why Montaigne introduces a new method into philosophy; this also justifies his choice of priorities among ancient philosophers. Montaigne is not interested in Plato, or Platonists, or Peripatetics (he does not like Aristotle, because he is a philosopher canonized by scholasticism), skeptics are closest to him.

A few decades earlier, the treatises of Sextus Empiricus were published (in the beginning, "Three Books of Pyrrhonic Principles", and then "Against the Scholars"). These treatises were published for the purpose of preventing religious wars. The publisher Herve, having found the books of Sextus Empiricus, thought that skeptical arguments could make people understand that they do not know the truth, and therefore it is not worth arguing about something that you cannot be absolutely sure of. Such an anti-reformist orientation of the publishers of Sextus Empiricus led to the appearance of books by this ancient skeptic.

The treatises of Sextus Empiricus, however, did not become very famous. The reformers Luther and Calvin had little interest in philosophy and, on the contrary, reproached other philosophers (including Erasmus) for skepticism. Montaigne also became the philosopher who popularized the ideas of ancient skeptics.

At one time, a work was published by the Spanish theologian Mund of Sebund, in which he, himself a Catholic, tried, while remaining on Thomistic positions, to prove the impossibility of a rational proof of the existence of God. The Catholic Church took up arms against him, and Montaigne writes the "Apology of Raymond of Sebund", where he tries to prove the validity of Raymond's position that the human mind cannot prove the existence of God. But since Montaigne was not really interested in questions of religion, this was only an occasion for a renewed interest in skeptical arguments. The work "Apology of Raymond Semund" is a talented retelling of the books of Sextus Empiricus, his arguments, presented in the form of an essay, not in such a harmonious form as in the "Three Books of Pyrrhonic Propositions". "Apology" was reduced to the thesis that the human mind can not prove anything, including the existence of God.

Over time, thanks to the influence that Montaigne had on contemporary Europe, the ideas of skeptics began to penetrate deeper and deeper into the minds of philosophers. Already after Montaigne, a real skeptical crisis breaks out, replacing the enthusiasm for Platonism that existed in Renaissance Italy. Only Rene Descartes will be able to overcome this crisis later. However, Montaigne himself was not as consistent a skeptic as the Pyrrhonics. His skeptical arguments were mainly directed against religious fanaticism. As Montaigne caustically put it, to roast a person for the sake of following certain provisions is to attach too much importance to them. The greatest value for Montaigne, of course, is a person; no provisions can be compared in their value with human life. That is why he writes the Apology, and why he spreads the ideas of skeptics.

Montaigne's doubts are directed against the universally recognized, against traditions - i.e. something that should have been overcome long ago, that exists not because it is true, but because people are used to believing in it, used to have no doubts. In order for a person to know the truth, doubt in everything is necessary. It is self-confidence that gives rise to all human vices. To come to true knowledge, you must first make sure that a person knows nothing. That's what skeptical arguments are for. Starting from the moment when a person cleanses himself of various prejudices, true knowledge begins. Therefore, skepticism for Montaigne is not the goal, not the end, but the beginning of true philosophizing. Skepticism is a means of purifying us of various prejudices, including philosophical and religious ones.

But skepticism is not only the beginning of knowledge, but also its result, because the more a person knows, the more he becomes convinced of the weakness of his knowledge, the insufficiency of his knowledge. Therefore, without rejecting knowledge in general, Montaigne affirms the relativity of knowledge: a person knows something, but he cannot have absolute knowledge. The process of cognition, according to Montaigne, is endless. Knowledge begins from sensations, but sensations themselves are fluid, as the paths of Aenesidemus show, and the world itself is fluid, so knowledge about the world, although possible, is unreliable. Montaigne's anti-religious orientation (anti-religious - that is, anti-scholastic) is adjacent to the anti-anthropocentric position, which claims that everything that exists in the world exists for man. Montaigne points out that man is a part of nature - rational, moral, but only a part. Therefore, man must recognize the inexorable fact that he lives according to the laws of nature and, acting according to these laws, can gain freedom. Here the Stoic thesis is clearly repeated, that freedom is action in accordance with the necessary, inexorable law of nature. Michel Montaigne also objects to the anthropomorphic understanding of God. If one can speak of God, it is only as a being that immeasurably surpasses any description. It is impossible to speak of God as a person, endowing Him with such categories as reason, will, love, etc. God is above everything, therefore He is so much above the world that He treats it as a very distant subject. God does not single out anything in this world, for Him everything is the same - both a person and a leaf on a tree. A person should not boast of his position, because for God everyone is equal. Every part of nature is the same for God, and He controls everything equally.

Different religions exist because they represent the distant and unknowable God in different ways. In every religion, according to Montaigne, there is a part of the true religion, and Christianity should not pretend to be the true religion. He proves this by saying that some Christians are much worse morally than many atheists and pagans.

A person's belonging to a particular religion is determined, according to Montaigne, by his nationality. “We are Catholics as much as we are French,” he writes. Therefore, morality must be built not on religious, but on natural foundations. The foundations of morality are laid down in nature itself, and since nature does not tell us anything about the immortality of our soul, the soul is not immortal and dies with the body. But this does not destroy morality, and Montaigne, like Pietro Pomponazzi and some Averroists long before him, repeats the thesis that the absence of faith in the immortality of the soul and hope for an afterlife reward does not eliminate, but introduces true morality. Not believing in an afterlife reward, a person is deprived of the egoistic foundations of his life and lives according to truly moral laws. These moral laws are established by nature; knowing them, a person lives a moral life. Montaigne's ethics echoes the Epicurean ethics, according to which a person, on the one hand, must live unnoticed, content with the benefits that nature gives him and not inventing excessive luxuries (Montaigne understands Epicurus in his authentic sense), and on the other hand, the meaning and purpose of human life are in the pursuit of happiness. Therefore, the ethics of Montaigne is cheerful in the Epicurean sense of the word. The purpose of life can only be in life itself.

Giordano Bruno

Another thinker who strongly influenced his contemporary era was Montaigne's younger contemporary, Giordano Bruno. He was born in 1548 in Nola near Naples and was burned at the stake in the Square of Flowers on February 17, 1600.

Giordano was born into a family of a petty nobleman, studied at a local Latin school, then listened to lectures at the University of Naples. To continue his education, he entered the Dominican monastic order in 1565. However, Bruno did not fit into the order. He shows free-thinking, the inquisition process begins, and Bruno flees to Rome in 1576, then wanders around Italy, and then leaves for Geneva, where he is no longer persecuted by Catholics, but by Calvinists. He ends up in prison, after leaving which he leaves for France and lives in Toulouse, teaching at a local university. After that, he leaves for Paris, where he also teaches philosophy. In 1583 he moved to London (of course, not of his own free will), where he lived until 1585, and this was one of the most fruitful periods of his life. He writes here most of his works in the form of dialogues (two dialogues stand out - “On Cause, Beginning and One” and “On Infinity, the Universe and Worlds”; both were written in 1584 in Oxford), teaches at Oxford University. But again he leaves England - first to France, then to Germany. He teaches in Württemberg, where he is persecuted by the Lutherans. Bruno wanders again and is eventually forced to return to his homeland, to Italy. In Venice, he gets a job as a home teacher to one of the patricians (he is not allowed to the University of Padua). The owner begins to pester Giordano with a demand that he tell him about his secret knowledge and contribute to his power over the world. Bruno is forced to leave. The owner, offended, declares to the Inquisition that a heretic lived with him. The Inquisition grabs Bruno and in 1592 puts him in prison - first in the local, Venetian, and a year later - in Rome. For eight years he was imprisoned, but he did not give up his beliefs. February 17, 1600 Bruno was burned at the stake. His phrase is known after the verdict was pronounced: “You should be much more afraid to pass your sentence than to listen to it.” What is this heresy that Giordano Bruno was accused of? Atheist propaganda most often said that he was burned for his scientific beliefs.

Bruno's main problem stems from his philosophical attachments. His main teacher was Nicholas of Cusa. He was also influenced by the Muslim medieval philosophers Avicenna and Averroes, as well as the natural science views of Nicolaus Copernicus. He tried to synthesize their teachings in his teaching, which in general is a revival of Neoplatonism. In the works of Bruno all the time there are neoplatonic terms known to us: "one", "mind", "soul", "matter". True, he understands them not as Plotinus (not as levels of being), but in the spirit of Cusa, for whom God is the maximum and minimum, the highest unity of the world. For Giordano, God is also One, which is the starting point for understanding the world. The One is both the cause of being (for God is One) and being itself (for all being is one). Therefore, God and the world are one and the same. All its opposites are united in the world – possibility and reality, spirit and matter. The world is neither born nor destroyed, since the world and God are one and the same. Actually, in Giordano Bruno we see one of the most consistent expressions of the pantheistic concept. Since God is infinite, so is the world infinite; since God, being the maximum, is also the minimum, so He is contained in every point of this world. Every part, every atom of the world is at the same time God. And since the driving mechanism of the world (that beginning that sets the world in motion and animates it) is God, then, due to the coincidence of the minimum and maximum, each part of the world is God, and therefore each part of the world, each of its atoms have a source of movement in themselves. The world and God are identical, therefore the world develops itself. In the world, as in God, all opposites coincide, therefore it is impossible to divide the world into matter and form. Being opposites, they coincide, therefore it is impossible to conceive of matter without form, as well as form without matter. Therefore, it is also impossible to define God, for the definition presupposes some limitation, and God, including all definitions, all opposites, transcends any definition. In God, unity and plurality coincide, minimum and maximum, a straight line is at the same time a curve (an obvious borrowing from Nicholas of Cusa), cold is at the same time heat, emergence implies destruction, etc. The whole world is constantly changing, and nothing is identical to itself. The same change exists in God. Giordano Bruno objects to the Aristotelian division of matter and form and points out that there is no primal matter. Matter and form always exist together, so matter is eternal. The world is not created in time, it is as infinite and eternal as God. Matter unfolds itself (a repetition of the term of Nicholas of Cusa about the unfolding of the world from a single one). Matter has in itself the ability to form forms and therefore cannot be conceived outside of form. It is in this way - as the ability of matter to self-formation - that Bruno understands the soul of the world, Plotinus's third hypostasis of being. The soul is the universal form of the world. It is also inside matter as a form inherent in matter, and a certain principle that unites matter. Therefore, the whole world is animated, the whole world itself carries a vital principle.

In the universe, which, like God, is infinite, there is no center. Neither the earth nor man can be considered as such. In the universe, everything is homogeneous, any point can be simultaneously called both the center and the circle (and here the influence of Nicholas of Cusa is obvious). The Earth is not located in the center of the world, but is one of the planets, of which there are an infinite number in the world. Here, on the basis of arguments drawn from Cusa, Bruno at the same time criticizes the concept of Copernicus, who stopped at changing the geocentric system to heliocentric, leaving nevertheless the sphere of fixed stars. Giordano objects to this and, following Nicholas of Cusa, argues that the world is infinite. Stars are the same suns, they can also have planets around them, on which life can also exist. Thus, instead of the Plotinian emanation and deployment of Nicholas of Cusa, Bruno identifies God and nature. God is not outside things, but is contained in things themselves; He is the inner beginning of the world, and is not above the world.

In the theory of knowledge, Bruno follows the thought of Nicholas of Cusa and repeats the same hierarchy of human abilities: sensations, generalization, reason, intellect, mind. Each time, starting his knowledge from sensible things, a person generalizes feelings, abstracts from them, makes a generalization, and then performs a rational analysis, ascending from them to certain definitions, and then from the definitions ascends even higher - to the mystical contemplation of everything in all opposites. Surpassing the limitations of discursive thinking, the mind contemplates God, uniting all opposites in Himself.

However, man's knowledge of God is not an end in itself. Bruno disagrees with Plotinus, arguing that knowledge, in addition to saving the human soul, also has a practical goal: knowing the world, a person can create some kind of practical magic (in Bruno's terminology) and thus control natural phenomena and improve human life. Bruno denies personal immortality. The soul after death unites with the One, so a person must look for the meaning of life in life itself. The main thing for a person is constant work to improve himself and the world. It is in labor, in domination over the world, that the purpose of man consists. Instead of a religion of revelation, Bruno insists that there must be a religion of reason. Thus, the persecution of Giordano Bruno by the Catholic Church was not persecution for his natural scientific beliefs. Bruno was not an independent scientist, his theory of natural science was only a fragment, borrowed by him from Nicolaus Copernicus, an aspect of his pantheistic philosophical and religious teaching.

Renaissance humanism, classical humanism is a European intellectual movement that is an important component of the Renaissance. It arose in Florence in the middle of the XIV century, existed until the middle of the XVI century; from the end of the 15th century it passed to Spain, Germany, France, partly to England and other countries.

Renaissance humanism is the first stage in the development of humanism, a movement in which humanism first appeared as an integral system of views and a broad current of social thought, causing a genuine revolution in the culture and worldview of people of that time. The main idea of ​​the Renaissance humanists was the improvement of human nature through the study of ancient literature.

Term [ | ]

The original Latin form of this concept is studia humanitatis. In this form, it was introduced by the Renaissance humanists themselves, who reinterpreted Cicero, who at one time sought to emphasize that the concept of "humanity" as the most important result of the culture developed in the ancient Greek policies, took root on Roman soil.

The meaning of the term "humanism" in the Renaissance (as opposed to today's meaning of the word) was: "zealous study of everything that constitutes the integrity of the human spirit," since lat. humanitas meant "the fullness and division of human nature". Also, this concept was opposed to the "scholastic" study of the "divine" (studia divina). Such an understanding studia humanitatis for the first time received its justification as an ideological program of a new mental movement in the writings of Petrarch.

Renaissance "humanism" is not the defense of human rights, but the study of man as he is. Humanism, from the point of view of Petrarch and other philosophers, meant the transfer of man to the center of the world, the study of man in the first place. The term "humanism" in this regard is somewhat synonymous with the word "anthropocentrism" and is opposed to the term "theocentrism". In contrast to the religious philosophy of Western Europe, humanistic philosophy sets as its task the study of man with all his earthly and unearthly needs. Instead of ontological questions, ethical questions come to the fore.

The word "humanist" appeared at the end of the 15th century. Actually the term "humanism" in its current form, as noted by L. Batkin, was first used in 1808 by the teacher F. Nithammer; after the work of G. Vogt "" (1859), a discussion of the historical content and limits of this concept began in science.

The humanists themselves of the 15th century usually called themselves "orators", less often "rhetors", thereby emphasizing their difference from university scientists, as well as their connection with the ancient traditions of ancient orators.

Concept and activity[ | ]

The humanists themselves described themselves as follows: Leonardo Bruni defined studia humanitatis so - "the knowledge of those things that relate to life and customs, and which improve and adorn a person" . Salutati believed that this word combined "virtue and learning" (virtus atque doctrine), and "scholarship" assumed the universality of knowledge based on the possession of "literature" (literae), and "virtue" included spiritual meekness and benevolence (benignitas), meaning the ability to behave correctly. This virtue, according to the humanists, was inseparable from classical education, and thus turned out not to be an innate quality, but something individually achieved through vigilance over the classics. The Renaissance was dominated by the idea of ​​cultivation, "cultivation" of the soul through the study of ancient authors, the ability through humanistic studies to realize and reveal all the possibilities inherent in nature in the individual. Guarino Veronese wrote: "there is nothing more suitable and appropriate for the acquisition of virtues and good manners than the diligent reading of learned ancient writers." Humanists believed that through humanistic pursuits, a person will be able to realize all the possibilities inherent in the individual, to cultivate his "virtues". For Petrarch studia humanitatis were primarily a means of self-knowledge.

Modern scholars are clarifying interpretations: Paul Kristeller understands Renaissance humanism as a “professional area” of activity approximately between - years, which consisted in studying and teaching a well-known set of disciplines (grammar, rhetoric, poetry, history and moral philosophy, including political philosophy) based on classical Greek-Latin education. Thus, as Batkin notes, such boundaries of humanism do not coincide with the medieval quadrivium, differ from the traditional nomenclature of the liberal arts and show a serious gap between humanism and the then university education (jurisprudence, medicine, natural science, logic, theology, philosophy in understanding of natural philosophy).

E. Garen interprets Renaissance humanism as a new world outlook, which led to a comprehensive change in culture and was an important stage in history and philosophy, and all thinking in general. The center of interests of the humanists was "literature" - philology and rhetoric, the Word was at the center of philosophy, the cult of beautiful and pure classical speech reigned. The word was identified with Knowledge and Virtue, it was understood as the embodiment of the universal and divine human nature, as its harmonious ethos and an instrument of practical human activity among friends, family and native community (ideal homo civilis).

Humanistic "literature" made it possible to develop a new worldview, which was imbued with criticism, secularism, opposed itself to the themes and methods of medieval scholasticism and, in addition, made it possible for the first time to develop an understanding of historical distance in relation to antiquity.

The lifestyle and ideals of the humanists[ | ]

Humanistic pursuits, as a rule, remained a private affair of humanists, their hobby, not being their profession, although they brought reputation, and as a result, gifts from patrons.

Renaissance humanists were an informal group of like-minded people, who were distinguished by their inner content, and not by an official kind of activity. Representatives of completely different strata, conditions and professions became humanists. Although some of the humanists were members of old workshops and corporations, what united them had nothing to do with this: “their meeting place was a country villa, a monastery library, a bookshop, a sovereign’s palace, or just a private house where it’s comfortable to talk, leaf through manuscripts looking at antique medals. In imitation of the ancients, they began to call their mugs academies» . (See for example the Platonic Academy in Careggi). Batkin notes that, apparently, the humanists were the first intellectuals in European history; other researchers agree that “the appearance of that category of persons, which later became known as humanists, in essence, marked the beginning of the process of emergence in this era secular intelligentsia» . The unifying feature for the circle of humanists was an exclusively spiritual community, which at the same time remained too broad and not connected with material interests; "The line between humanism as a state of mind and as an activity is conditional." Vergerio points out that humanism is not a profession, but a vocation, and denounces people who turned to literature for the sake of money and honors, and not for the sake of scholarship and virtue.

An important component studia humanitatis in the ideas of the humanistic environment there was "leisure" (otium, ozio) filled with high occupations, sweet and gratifying, always opposed to service and various business duties (negotium, ufficio). Freedom to manage your time and yourself is a precondition for becoming a humanist. Lorenzo Valla lists five essential conditions for learning:

1. "Communication with educated people" (litteratorum consuetudo)
2. "An abundance of books"
3. "Comfortable spot"
4. "Free time" (temporis otium)
5. "Peace of Mind" (animi vacuitas), a special “emptiness, incompleteness, liberation of the soul”, making it ready to be filled with learning and wisdom.

Humanists are reviving the philosophy of Epicureanism, which promotes pleasure - but primarily spiritual, not sensual (Cosimo Raimondi, "Defense of Epicurus", to. 1420s; Lorenzo Valla, dialogue "On Delight (On True and False Good)", 1433). A typical idea of ​​the Renaissance - questa dolcezza del vivere("this sweetness of life").

At the same time, there was a concept of a close connection between the ideals of contemplative life (vita contemplativa) and active (vita activa), and the latter was to be directed to the benefit of society. Humanist scientists felt like teachers (Pier Paolo Veggerio, Guarino Veronese, Vittorino da Feltre) and considered it their main task to educate a perfect person who, thanks to a liberal education, can become an ideal citizen. The sciences are studied in order to make people free. In k. XIV - early. 15th century Coluccio Salutati and Leonardo Bruni put forward a new, close to the Florentines, ideal of civil life (vita civile), in which classical education became inseparable from active political activity for the benefit of the republic - see Civil humanism. Northern Italian humanists who lived in monarchies, the idea of ​​a perfect citizen was more associated with the ideal of a perfect sovereign, they also develop the ideal of an obedient courtier.

New human ideal[ | ]

In this environment, a new ideal of personality arose, generated by the secular and classical aspirations of the humanistic worldview. In humanistic literature, he received his development.

The main principle of the entire humanistic ethics of the Renaissance was the doctrine of the high purpose of man, of his dignity - dignitas. He said that a person endowed with reason and an immortal soul, possessing virtue and unlimited creative possibilities, free in his actions and thoughts, is placed at the center of the universe by nature itself. This doctrine was based on the views of ancient philosophy and also partly on the medieval theological doctrine that man was created in the image and likeness of God.(In fact, it was directed against Christian asceticism with its predestination of a person's place in the hierarchy). One of the ancient sources of this idea was the dialogue of Cicero "About Laws".

“Nature, that is, God, has put into man a heavenly and divine element, incomparably more beautiful and noble than anything mortal. She gave him talent, learning ability, intelligence - divine properties, thanks to which he can explore, distinguish and know what he must avoid and follow in order to preserve himself. In addition to these great and priceless gifts, God has placed in the human soul moderation, restraint against passions and excessive desires, as well as shame, modesty and the desire to deserve praise. In addition, God implanted in people the need for a firm mutual connection that supports coexistence, justice, justice, generosity and love, and with all this a person can earn gratitude and praise from people, and from his creator - favor and mercy. God has put in the human chest the ability to endure any work, any misfortune, any blow of fate, to overcome all sorts of difficulties, to overcome sorrow, not to be afraid of death. He gave man strength, steadfastness, firmness, strength, contempt for insignificant trifles... Therefore, be convinced that a person is born not to drag out a sad existence in inaction, but to work on a great and grandiose deed. By this he can, firstly, please God and honor him, and, secondly, acquire for himself the most perfect virtues and complete happiness.

Reasoning on this topic was a favorite subject of humanists (Petrarch; Alberti, treatise "About family", 1433-43, 41; Manetti, treatise "On the Dignity and Excellence of Man" 1451-52; Ficino; Pico della Mirandola, "Speech on the Dignity of Man" 1486) .

All their reasoning was imbued with one main idea - admiration for reason and its creative power. Reason is a priceless gift of nature, which distinguishes man from all things, makes him god-like. For the humanist, wisdom was the highest good available to people, and therefore they considered the propaganda of classical literature to be their most important task. In wisdom and knowledge, they believed, a person finds true happiness - and this was his true nobility.

In contrast to the medieval and feudal ideal of personality (religious and class), the new humanistic ideal had a clearly defined secular and social orientation. Humanists, relying on the ancients, reject the importance of origin in assessing the dignity of a person, which now depends on his individual qualities.

Virtue [ | ]

A common feature of the worldview of the early humanists, which stemmed from their characteristic desire to revive the ideas and spirit of ancient culture as much as possible, while preserving all the main content of the Christian doctrine, consisted in its paganization, that is, saturation with ancient, "pagan" moral and philosophical ideas. For example, Eneo Silvio Piccolomini, one of the humanists of this era, wrote that "Christianity is nothing but a new, more complete presentation of the doctrine of the highest good of the ancients"- and, characteristically, Piccolomini will become Pope Pius II.

Any arguments of the humanists were supported by examples from ancient history. They liked to compare their contemporaries with the outstanding "men of antiquity" ( uomini illustrations): the Florentines preferred the philosophers and politicians of republican Rome, and the feudal circles preferred generals and Caesars. At the same time, the appeal to antiquity was not felt as the resurrection of the dead - the proud feeling of being direct descendants and successors of traditions allowed the humanists to remain themselves: “the half-forgotten treasures of art and literature of antiquity are brought to light with glee, like expensive, long-lost property” .

Relationship to Christianity[ | ]

Humanists have never opposed themselves to religion. At the same time, opposing themselves to scholastic philosophizing, they believed that they were reviving the true Church and faith in God, not finding any contradiction in the combination of Christianity with ancient philosophy.

“Praising the mind of man, the humanists saw in the rational human nature the image of God, what God endowed man with, so that man would perfect and improve his earthly life. As a rational being, man is a creator and it is in this that he is similar to God. Therefore, the duty of a person is to participate in the world, and not to leave it, to improve the world, and not to look at it with ascetic detachment as something unnecessary for salvation. Man and the world are beautiful, because they were created by God, and the task of man is to improve the world, making it even more beautiful, in this man is a co-worker with God. Thus, humanists argue with the essay written by Pope Innocent III "On contempt for the world, or On the insignificance of human life", where the body is humiliated and the spirit is praised, and they seek to rehabilitate the bodily principle in man (Gianozzo Manetti): The whole world created by God for man is beautiful, but the peak of his creation is only man, whose body many times exceeds all other bodies. How amazing, for example, are his hands, these "living tools" capable of any kind of work! Man is intelligent, prudent and very insightful animal (…animal rationale, providum et saga…), it differs from the latter in that if each animal is capable of any one occupation, then a person can engage in any of them. The spiritual and bodily man is so beautiful that, being a creation of God, at the same time he serves as the main model according to which the ancient pagans, and behind them the Christians, depict their gods, which contributes to the worship of God, especially among more rude and uneducated people. God is the creator of all things, while man is the creator of the great and beautiful realm of culture, material and spiritual.

At the same time, in relation to the clergy, the humanists experienced more negative emotions: “the weakening of the ties of the humanists with the church, since many of them lived on the income received from their professional activities (as well as from noble and wealthy people who are not dependent on the church), increased their hostility in relation to official scholarship, saturated with the ecclesiastical-scholastic spirit. For many of them, such hostility developed into a sharply critical attitude towards the entire system of this scholarship, towards its theoretical and philosophical foundations, towards authoritarianism, outside and without which this scholarship could not exist. It is also important to recall that the humanist movement began in Italy in the era of the decline of the moral and political authority of the papacy, associated with the events of his Avignon captivity (1309-1375), the frequent splits of the Catholic Church, when antipopes appeared in opposition to legitimate popes and when the supremacy was contested at church councils popes in the life of the church (...) The revival of this [classical Latin] language was a form of criticism of the prevailing ecclesiastical scholastic scholarship and religious practice, which operated with “corrupted”, inexpressive Latin, far from the ancient Roman classical images. Critical studies of the history of the Catholic Church appear ("On the forgery of the Gift of Constantine").

Humanist theory of art[ | ]

An important theorist and practitioner who worked on this topic was Leon Battista Alberti. At the heart of early humanistic aesthetics was the idea of ​​the ability of art to imitate, borrowed from antiquity. "Imitation of nature" ( imitation, imitation) is not a simple copying, but a creative act with a conscious selection of the most perfect. The idea of ​​"art" (as a craft) was introduced in conjunction with talent, genius (individual interpretation by the artist) - ars and ingenium, as a formula for the aesthetic evaluation of a work of art. The concept of "similarity" ( similitude) - as a direct likeness, necessary for a portrait.

Genres of humanist creativity[ | ]

Epistoles [ | ]

Letters (epistoles) were one of the most common genres of humanist creativity. They used letters not for the exchange of topical and personal information, but for general reasoning and exercises in literature according to the Cicero model. The epistole was often sent not only to the addressee, but also to his friends, who, in turn, made copies of it, so that as a result the message diverged in many copies. In fact, it was not a “letter”, as this concept is interpreted today, but an essay of a special literary genre, in some way anticipating journalism. From the time of Petrarch, the letters of the humanists were from the very beginning intended precisely for publication.

The style of these letters was characterized by solemnity and publicity. As the researchers note, perhaps "no other type of source so expressively shows the artificiality, invention, stylized life and communication of humanists as their epistles" . Epistol subgenres are characteristic:

• consolatoriae- "comfort"
• hortatoriae- "inspired appeal"

The authors, having accumulated a sufficient number of epistles, compiled collections of them, which were included in lifetime collected works. So did, for example, Petrarch, from whom everyone took an example. Petrarch revised and edited his "Letters to relatives" hindsight (the first two books of these "Letters" are dated 1330-40, but were actually rewritten around 1351-40 and revised and corrected until 1366). Some of these letters are even addressed to the long-dead Cicero or Seneca, which allowed the author to express his position on various issues.

Humanists and humanism

The humanists and humanism of the Renaissance is a complex and ambiguous phenomenon in the assessments of historians, culturologists and philosophers. But the fact is indisputable that for the first time in the history of civilizations, the heralds of a new culture appear - humanists ("humanus" in Latin - "human"), revealing a humane worldview position for all mankind and for an individual. Focusing on the individual abilities of a person, regardless of his high social status and title, Renaissance humanism gives priority to education, talents and personal virtues.

anthropocentrism

The anthropocentrism and humanism of the Renaissance, which made "the sky not too high", put an emphasis on the worldview of a person, his proud dignity, individualism. The ideals of humanism were formulated as early as the 14th century by the poet and philosopher Francesco Petrarch (1304-1374). He was against the semi-official nature of Catholic postulates, but welcomed "faith within oneself." His religion is love for man and God, free from the shackles of excessive rationalism and cold logic. No wonder he considered the human soul to be that great and incomprehensible, before which everything else seems insignificant. The humanism of the Renaissance forms a new philosophical concept, anthropocentric in its essence. According to Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527), it is the individual human personality that plays the most important role in history. Fortune is not so omnipotent over him, and a person is endowed with a powerful mind and will to resist it. The individual becomes a new subject of society. According to his concept, religion should be assigned the role of a moral regulator of society, but not the role of an absolute leader and a state dictator unlimited in its power. Otherwise, the fate of the state will depend entirely on the religion of the individual.

Ideas of humanism in art

The ideas of humanism in art are manifested in the fact that it begins to free itself from Byzantine influence. Spatiality, depth, volume appear in painting. Already in Verrocchio's early work, The Baptism of Christ, the head of an angel was painted by his student, then very young Leonardo da Vinci. But it was a different painting, a different image. An angel is alive, inspired, natural. This small figure is like a sign of the transition to a new time, which in a couple of decades became a great era that established humanism. A new approach to the essence of the human personality is reflected in the architecture of the Renaissance. Unlike medieval architecture, humanism in the Renaissance not only returns the ancient order of the building, but also reveals the face of the author who created it. Architectural creations are no longer anonymous. The names of architects become personified, and the style is recognizable by the individual author's manner. In 1436, the famous Florence Cathedral was completed, where the brilliant building skills of Filippo Brunelleschi are manifested. For the first time in the history of architecture, a pointed dome was erected, resting on eight ribs, without scaffolding. Not so grandiose, but no less great is another creation of the master: the Orphanage - a shelter for orphans, built with the money of a wealthy merchant Francesco Datini. The arched colonnade with thin columns and the chamber courtyard, typical of Italian residential buildings, create the appearance of a hospitable cozy building, to the threshold of which, a few weeks after the opening, on February 5, 1445, the first baby was brought - a newborn girl named Agatha.

Entered into the history of the development of human civilization as a period of the rise of the arts, the development of science and a grandiose revolution in the worldview of people, the humanism of the Renaissance paved the way for the further development of the civilization of the New Age.