Pedagogical views of Helvetius and Diderot briefly. Pedagogical ideas of French enlighteners of the 18th century. (Voltaire, K.A. Helvetius, D. Diderot). Pedagogical theories

Political Views French materialists of the Enlightenment (C. Helvetius, P. Holbach, D. Diderot)

The most important representatives of French materialism of the 18th century. there were D. Diderot, C. Helvetius, P. Holbach. Diderot, Holbach and Helvetius stood in the positions of the advanced, democratically minded layers of the bourgeoisie in the anti-feudal camp.

Denny Diderot (1713-1784) supervised the publication of the famous Encyclopedia, which became a kind of printed organ of the French enlightenment. The Encyclopedia played an important role in promoting the ideas of enlightenment and preparing the Great French Bourgeois Revolution.

Diderot's socio-political teaching is based on a number of provisions of the theory of natural law. According to her views, people initially lived in a natural (pre-state) state; they were equal to each other and enjoyed complete independence. This description, which largely coincides with the previous teachings of the school of natural law, Diderot sought to supplement with facts from primitive history. In his interpretation, the state of nature was no longer so much a period of isolated existence of individuals, but rather an era of primitive collectives with public ownership of the means of labor.

With the advent of private property and the spirit of profit, this “source of all vices,” natural equality disappeared, and people were divided into rich and poor. Diderot cited the Inca society as one example of the state of nature.

State power arises from a contract that people made among themselves to ensure their happiness. Diderot viewed the social contract not as a real agreement that took place in the past, but as a constantly renewed consent of citizens to submit to the existing government.

Such consent (agreement) serves as the basis only for correct, well-ordered states; Tyranny arises as a result of violence, treachery and deceit. Diderot was convinced that the source of state power is the people, while rulers and sovereigns are just its holders. As he wrote in the Encyclopedia, the crown and public power are “the essence of things, the owner of which is the entire nation as a whole.” If the sovereign refuses to provide happiness to the citizens, then the nation is not bound by any agreement with him and has the right to conclude a new one with another sovereign. From here Diderot derived the right of peoples to resist tyrants and destroy a political system that does not correspond to the general will of the nation.

Diderot believed, however, that the destruction of feudal orders was quite possible peacefully, with the help of legislative reforms and moral education people. The political program set out in his writings provided for the abolition of serfdom and the endowment of land to peasants, the abolition of class privileges, giving citizens the right to participate through their deputies in government, the protection of personal security, freedom of speech, press, trade and crafts. In order to reach a compromise with the nobility, capable of ensuring the peaceful course of social transformations, Diderot proposed preserving landownership.

However, Diderot did not at all call for the socialization of property. He was a supporter of small and medium-sized private property, and his demands did not extend beyond utopian projects for the equal distribution of wealth. The goal of policy is not to eliminate private property, but to mitigate the excessive inequality between luxury and poverty. To do this, Diderot believed, it was necessary to find a social mechanism that could force the owner, pursuing private interests, to bring as much benefit as possible to society, to his fellow citizens. Diderot believed that the implementation of these activities would bring with it the flourishing of personality and social harmony.

Diderot gave his political sympathies to the republic, but, like many other educators, he considered it unsuitable for the vast territory of France. He left the question of the future state structure of the country essentially open.

The concept of education as a means of transition to a reasonable and fair social system was developed by Claude Adrian Helvetius (1715-1771). The thinker's main works are called "About the Mind" and "About Man".

The socio-political doctrine was formed in a polemic with Montesquieu about the reasons that determine social life. Helvetius excluded geographical factors from these reasons. Refuting the teachings of Montesquieu, he argued that differences in laws and morals are due exclusively to the social environment. People everywhere are born with equal abilities and inclinations, and begin to differ only under the influence of the family, the laws of upbringing and the immediate environment. Helvetius also derived the emergence of the state from public interests.

Helvetius's socio-political doctrine, in general, was idealistic and metaphysical, for among the reasons causing changes in legislation and morals, he puts in first place reasons of a spiritual order - the form of government, the influence of prevailing opinions.

The idealism of Helvetius's social views was especially clearly manifested in his interpretation of the transition to a rational organization of society. Helvetius emphasized the importance of positive laws in establishing a “reasonable system.” The views of the people, he argued, can only be changed if the legislation is changed. Exaggerating the possibilities legal regulation social relations, Helvetius brought the postulates of the legal worldview to extreme conclusions.

Helvetius considered the goal of legislative reforms to be the creation of a legal order that would guarantee the correspondence of personal and public interests. It is necessary to organize relations between people in such a way that it becomes beneficial for each individual to do good for his fellow citizens. The state must protect the interests of the majority.

The political ideal of the enlightener is a republic. Polemicizing with Montesquieu, Helvetius opposed the preservation of the monarchy (even if he retained power) and expressed the idea of ​​​​the possibility of forming a federal republic in France.

Helvetius's concept was a significant step forward in terms of theoretical understanding of the social nature of man, his consciousness, political life and morals.

The systematization of the teachings of the French enlighteners was completed by Paul Holbach (1723-1789). He authored a series of atheistic works, as well as the treatise “System of Nature,” which was a kind of compilation of materialist philosophy of the 18th century. He summarized his political and legal views in the book “Natural Politics”.

While systematizing the concepts created by representatives of the democratic movement in the Enlightenment, Holbach was forced to take into account the interpretations that French materialism acquired from supporters of the idea of ​​​​socialization of property. He consistently and methodically excluded from the ideology of the Enlightenment all provisions that could give rise to communist conclusions. Holbach therefore did not support either Diderot’s ideas about the communist life of ancient peoples, or Helvetius’s teachings on the equality of people’s mental abilities, or their democratic sympathies. Revisiting these ideas, Holbach strengthens the argument for private property and imbues his doctrine with the postulates of natural law. Property, he argued, has always existed and is one of the eternal, inalienable human rights. In turn, property inequality entails inequality of civil rights. Holbach's political program reproduced the demands characteristic of the liberal enlightenment (separation of powers, constitutional monarchy).

French materialists of the 18th century. - La Mettrie, Helvetius, Diderot, Holbach - bring their ideas to wide circles of urban society. They do not directly appeal to the rulers of contemporary Europe (although they do not miss the opportunity to interest them in their views) and not only to readers from the nobility, but also to the mass of readers from the bourgeois class. French materialists relied on the widespread development of free thought in England. Behind the bright figures of La Mettrie, Helvetius, Diderot, Holbach, there are no less bright and significant in their ideological influence figures of the English enlighteners Toland, Tyndall, Shaftesbury. Another important source of materialist ideas was for them the mechanistic materialism of Descartes' physics, as well as Spinoza's materialist teaching about nature, substance and its attributes, about man, about the soul and its relation to the body.
French materialism of the 18th century. not only continued the materialist traditions generated by the socio-historical development of England, France and the Netherlands, he developed these traditions further and put forward new ideas. For the great materialists of the 17th century. The main scientific support of materialist thought was mechanics and astronomy. For French materialists, along with mechanics, medicine, physiology and biology also become such support. The discoveries and ideas of Newton, Euler, Laplace, Lavoisier, Buffon and other outstanding scientists form the natural science basis for the philosophical generalizations of the French materialists of the 18th century.

The philosophy of French materialism is composed of the materialist doctrine of nature and the doctrine of man and society.
The founder of French materialism of the 18th century. Julien-Aufret La Mettrie (1709-1751) expressed in general form almost all the ideas that were subsequently developed, enriched, and specified by Helvetius, Diderot, Holbach and some naturalists - Buffon, Maupertuis and others.
La Mettrie argued that not only every form is inseparable from matter, but also all matter is associated with movement. Deprived of the ability to move, inert matter is only an abstraction. Substance is ultimately reduced to matter, in the nature of which is rooted not only the capacity for movement, but also the universal potential capacity for sensitivity or sensation. Contrary to the teachings of Descartes, La Mettrie not only sought to prove the animation of animals, but at the same time pointed out the material nature of animation itself - animals and humans. Although for us, La Mettrie argued, the mechanism by which matter is endowed with the property of sensation is currently still unclear, there is no doubt that all our sensations are caused by the connection of feeling - through the nerves - with the material substance of the brain. Therefore, no sensation and no change in an existing sensation can arise without a specific change in the corresponding organ of sensory perception.
La Mettrie only outlined a number of basic ideas, but did not give them a detailed systematic development. The most systematic propagandist of the philosophical teachings of French materialism was Paul Holbach (1723-1789). The fruit of the mutual exchange of thoughts with friends was Holbach’s “System of Nature” (1770), in the writing of which, in addition to Holbach, Diderot, Nezhon and others took part. “System of Nature” is the largest of Holbach’s works devoted to the theory of materialism.
The main idea of ​​the treatise is the idea of ​​the reducibility of all natural phenomena to various forms movements of material particles, “forming in their totality the eternal uncreated nature. All theological and idealistic prejudices about the nature of the forces operating in nature and their causes are consistently refuted.
The basis of all natural processes is matter with its inherent property of motion. In the "System of Nature" two types of movement are distinguished: 1) the movement of material masses, thanks to which bodies move from one place to another; 2) internal and hidden movement, depending on the energy inherent in the body, that is, on the combination of action and reaction of the invisible molecules of matter of which this body consists. Referring to Toland, Holbach proves the universality of movement in nature. Everything in the Universe is in motion. The essence of nature is to act; if we carefully examine its parts, we will see that there is not a single one of them that is at absolute rest. Those that seem to us to be devoid of movement are actually in relative rest. In contrast to Descartes, who taught that motion was imparted to matter by God, Holbach argues that nature receives its motion from itself, for nature is a great whole, outside of which nothing can exist. Matter is eternally moving; movement is a necessary way of its existence and the source of such initial properties as extension, weight, impenetrability, figure, etc.
The materialistic understanding of nature is incompatible with the assumption of any supernatural causes. According to Holbach, there can only be natural causes and actions in nature. All movements arising in it follow constant and necessary laws. We can at least judge by analogy about those laws of phenomena that elude our observation. The laws of causality are as universal as the property of motion in nature. Therefore, if we know the general laws of motion of things or beings, decomposition or analysis will be enough for us to discover the movements that entered into combination with each other, and experience will show the consequences that we can expect from them. The strictest necessity reigns over all connections of causes and actions in nature: nature in all its phenomena acts necessarily, in accordance with its inherent essence. Thanks to movement, the whole comes into contact with its parts, and the latter with the whole. The universe is just an immense chain of causes and effects, continuously flowing from each other. Material processes exclude any kind of randomness or expediency. Holbach extends the proposition of necessity to human behavior and to the emergence of all his sensations and ideas. This teaching is undoubtedly mechanistic materialism. This teaching reduces human behavior in society and his actions to mechanical necessity. French materialism does not suspect the existence of a special pattern and necessity generated by the emergence of society.
Since everything in nature is necessary and since nothing that is in it can act otherwise than it acts, then from this Holbach derives the denial of chance. In a whirlwind of dust raised by a stormy wind, no matter how chaotic it may seem to us, there is not a single molecule of dust that is located randomly; Each molecule has a specific reason why it occupies exactly the place where it is located at each moment. From the theory of universal determinism, Holbach also derives the denial of order and disorder in nature. The ideas of order and disorder are subjective and represent only our assessment of a necessary and objective situation.
The doctrine of nature, set forth in Holbach’s “System of Nature,” was further developed in the works of the most outstanding representative of French materialism, Penny Diderot (1713-1784). Diderot went from ethical idealism and deism to materialism in the doctrine of being, in psychology, in the theory of knowledge, and also to atheism in matters of religion. Diderot's philosophical writings of the 40s and 50s clearly reflect this evolution. In the later written “Ramo's Nephew”, “D'Alembert's Conversation with Diderot” and “D'Alembert's Dream”, the exposition of the theory of materialism reaches the highest inspiration, the charm of literary form, ingenuity and wit in argumentation. Simultaneously with these philosophical works, Diderot wrote a lot on issues of art, aesthetics and art criticism. In the “Salons” he published, in correspondence with the sculptor Falconet, in “The Paradox of the Actor,” he developed a new aesthetics of realism, contrasting it with the theories of the epigones of classicism and the naturalistic understanding of truth. Diderot sought to implement the theoretical principles of aesthetics in his works of art - in novels and dramas.
Like other representatives of French materialism, Diderot proceeds from the position of the eternity and infinity of nature. Nature was not created by anyone; besides it and outside of it there is nothing.
Diderot introduced some features and ideas of dialectics into the materialist doctrine of nature. Through his views on organic nature, the thought of development, of the connection between processes occurring in nature, breaks through. In a number of issues, Diderot's teaching breaks through the narrow framework of mechanistic metaphysics. According to Diderot, everything changes, disappears, only the whole remains. The world is constantly being born and dying, every moment it is in a state of birth and death; There has never been and never will be another world. Certain features of Diderot's dialectics were highly appreciated by Engels.
Special attention Diderot was attracted by the problem of the materialistic interpretation of sensations. How can the mechanical movement of material particles give rise to a specific content of sensations? There can be two answers to this question: either sensation appears at a certain stage in the development of matter as something qualitatively new, or an ability similar to the ability of sensation should be recognized as a property of all matter, regardless of the form of the material body and the degree of its organization. According to the latter view, organization determines only the type of animation, but not the quality of animation itself, which belongs to matter as such.
Diderot was a supporter of the idea of ​​the universal sensitivity of matter. As stated above, La Mettrie was already inclined towards this view. Later, the inconsistent materialist Robinet (1735-1820), author of the treatise “On Nature,” also defended the doctrine of the universal sensitivity of nature and organic embryos as its material primary elements.
Diderot not only developed a clear formulation of this doctrine, but, in addition, refuted the arguments usually put forward against it. In “D'Alembert's Conversation with Diderot,” he argued that the recognition that the difference between the psyche of man and animals is due to differences in their bodily organization does not contradict the idea that the ability to sense is a universal property of matter.
Developing this view, Diderot outlined a materialist theory of mental functions, which in many ways anticipated the newest doctrine of reflexes. According to this theory, in the ways of communication between animals and people there is nothing except actions and sounds. An animal is an instrument with the ability to sense. People are also instruments, gifted with the ability to sense and memory. Our feelings are “keys” that are hit by the nature around us and which often hit ourselves. At one time, Descartes drew the conclusion from similar ideas that animals are simple machines . According to Diderot, something else follows from them. Man, like animals, contains something automatic in his organization, and the automatism of organic forms is not only not devoid of animation, but presupposes the possibility of sensation as a universal property of matter. From inert matter, organized in a certain way, under the influence of other matter, as well as heat and movement, the ability of sensation, life, memory, consciousness, emotion, thinking arises. This teaching is incompatible with the ideas of idealists about the spontaneity of thinking. According to Diderot, we are not the ones who draw conclusions: they are all derived by nature, we only register related phenomena known to us from experience, between which there is a necessary or conditioned connection. Recognition of the existence of the external world independent of consciousness, as well as recognition of the ability of sensations to reflect the properties of external things, does not mean, however, that sensations are mirror-exact copies of objects. Already Fr. Bacon found that the human mind is not like a smooth mirror, but like a rough mirror, in which things are reflected in an inaccurate way. According to Diderot, there is no more similarity between most sensations and their causes than between these same ideas and their names. Together with Locke and with all the mechanistic materialism of the 17th-18th centuries. Diderot distinguishes between “primary” qualities in things, that is, existing in the things themselves and independent of the attitude of our consciousness towards them, and “secondary” qualities, consisting in the relationship of an object to other things or to itself. The latter qualities are called sensual. As Diderot explained, sensory qualities are unlike the ideas that are created about them. However, unlike Locke, Diderot emphasizes the objective nature of “secondary” qualities, i.e., the fact that they exist independently of the consciousness of the perceiving subject. Based on the materialist doctrine of nature, French materialism put forward the doctrine of the dependence of all forms of knowledge on experience, on sensations, which are transformed at a higher stage of development into forms of thinking and inference. Knowledge that is experienced in its source has the goal not of abstract comprehension of the truth, but of achieving the ability to improve and increase human power. French materialists adopted this view from Fr. Bacon. Diderot developed this view, taking into account the role of technology and industry in the evolution of thought and knowledge. The condition for the emergence of any knowledge is the excitement of the soul, sensation from the outside. The work of memory, which preserves acquired knowledge, comes down to material organic processes.
Diderot and other French materialists recognized experiment and observation as methods of knowledge. Fighting against the idealism of Leibniz, the dualism of Descartes and theology, French materialists, starting with La Mettrie, argued that the cognitive value of reason is not diminished by the fact that it relies on the data of external senses, experience and observation. It is on this basis that knowledge can achieve, if not complete reliability, then at least a high degree of probability.
The conditioning of cognition by the mechanism of sensations and physical causes does not reduce the importance of language in the development of intelligence. In language, La Mettrie sees a system of signs invented by individuals and communicated to people through mechanical training. In the process of understanding someone else's speech, French materialism sees a reflex of the brain excited by words, similar to how a violin string responds to a strike on a piano key.
With the installation of signs dedicated to various things, the brain begins to compare these signs with each other and consider the relationships between them. The brain does this with the same necessity with which, for example, the eye sees objects, when their influence is transmitted along the nerve from the periphery of the visual apparatus to the brain. All ideas of the human mind are conditioned by the presence of words and signs. In turn, everything that happens in the soul comes down to the activity of the imagination. Various types mental talent is only various ways using the power of imagination.
In their doctrine of society, French materialists still remain, like all pre-Marxist philosophers, idealists. However, they oppose the idealistic-theological understanding of human history, arguing that the driving force of human history is the human mind, the progress of enlightenment. In the doctrine of human nature, education, society and the state, French materialists defend determinism, that is, the doctrine of the causality of all human actions. Although man is a product of external forces and physical conditions, he still cannot be exempt from responsibility for everything he does to society. Since imputing an offense to a person only means attributing the commission of this offense to a certain person, the necessity of the actions performed by a person does not in any way exclude the legality of punishment. Society punishes crimes because the latter are harmful to society, and they do not cease to be harmful because they are committed by virtue of necessary laws. Further, punishment itself is the strongest means of preventing future crimes.
The doctrine of morality, according to French materialists, should be based on experience. Like all sentient beings, man is driven solely by the desire for pleasure and an aversion to pain. A person is able to compare various pleasures and choose the greatest of them, as well as set goals for himself and find means. Therefore, rules and concepts about actions that underlie morality are possible for him.
Physical pleasures are the most powerful, but they are fickle and, in excess, cause harm. Therefore, preferences deserve mental pleasure - more durable, lasting and more dependent on the person himself. Strictly speaking, the starting point of wisdom should not be pleasure, but a knowledge of human nature guided by reason.
Since people cannot live alone, they form a society, and from their union new relationships and new responsibilities arise. Feeling the need for the help of others, a person is forced, in turn, to do something useful for others. This is how a general interest is formed, on which the private interest depends. According to the teachings of Holbach and Helvetius, correctly understood personal interest necessarily leads to morality.
Claude-Adrian Helvetius (1715-1771) saw the main task of ethics in determining the conditions under which personal interest as a necessary stimulus for human behavior can be combined with public interest. Helvetia devoted his treatise “On the Mind” to the substantiation of this idea. According to Helvetius, not only is the individual part of a broader whole, but also the society to which he belongs is a link in a larger community or a single society of peoples, bound by moral ties. This view of society should become, according to the French materialists, the motivating reason for the complete transformation of the entire public life. Holbach and Helvetia consider the current state of society to be far from ideal. They did not see this ideal in the “state of nature,” because nature made an isolated existence impossible for man and pointed out to him the reciprocity of benefits as the basis of a rational community. Without mutual benefit, no happiness is possible for a person. By virtue of the social contract, we must do for others what we want them to do for us. At the same time, the obligations arising from the social contract are valid for every person, regardless of what part of society he belongs to. From here, French materialists, for example Holbach, derived precepts of philanthropy, compassion, etc., common to all people.
According to French materialists, there is no such form of government that would fully satisfy the requirements of reason: excessive power leads to despotism; excessive freedom leads to self-will, that is, to an order in which everyone will be a despot; concentrated power becomes dangerous, divided power becomes weak. A remedy for getting rid of shortcomings existing methods French materialists see government not in revolution, but in the enlightenment of society. Education guided by a wise government is the most reliable means of giving people the feelings, talents, thoughts, and virtues necessary for the prosperity of society. At the same time, individual representatives of French materialism assess the role of education differently. Holbach considers the purpose of education to be the remaking of the original, distinctive personality make-up. Helvetius sees in man a being from whom, thanks to upbringing, one can make anything he wants. The natural givenness of temperament does not prevent the possibility of changing it in any direction. The process of raising a person has a decisive influence on his physical, mental and moral abilities.
In the worldview of French materialists, an important place was occupied by proof of the independence of ethics from religion and proof of the possibility of a highly moral society consisting of atheists. This teaching, as well as the proof of the inconsistency of all beliefs and dogmas of religion, especially shocked contemporaries. Not only Voltaire, who considered direct attacks on the very principle of religious beliefs dangerous for a society of property owners, but even people like D'Alembert, Diderot's colleague in the Encyclopedia, condemned Holbach's atheism and ethics as a teaching, although sublime, but not supported by philosophical principles.

Pedagogical ideas French enlighteners of the 18th century. (Voltaire, K.A. Helvetius, D. Diderot)

Denis Diderot is one of the most prominent French materialists of the 18th century. Like all representatives of this trend, Diderot was a materialist from below (in the explanation of nature) and an idealist from above (in the interpretation of social phenomena). He recognized the materiality of the world, considered movement inseparable from matter, the world knowable, and resolutely opposed religion.

Standing on the position of materialistic sensationalism, Diderot considered sensations to be the source of knowledge. But unlike Helvetius, he did not reduce the complex to them. process of cognition, but recognized that its second stage is the processing of sensations by the mind. He also believed that “opinions rule the world,” and mistakenly associated the possibility of reorganizing society not with revolution, but with the publication of wise laws and the spread of education, correct upbringing. He outlined his thoughts on education mainly in the work “Systematic Refutation of Helvetius’s Book “On Man.”

Diderot rejected Helvetius's assertion about the omnipotence of education and the absence of individual natural differences among people. He sought to limit the extreme conclusions to which Helvetius came. Thus, Diderot wrote: “He (Helvetius) says: Education means everything.

Diderot correctly argued that all people, and not just a select few, are endowed with favorable inclinations by nature. Diderot rebelled against the dominance of classical education in schools and brought real knowledge to the fore; V high school, he believed, all students should study mathematics, physics and natural sciences, as well as humanities.

Claude Adrian Helvetius - became famous as the author of the book “On the Mind,” which was published in 1758. and provoked furious attacks from all forces of reaction, ruling circles. The book was banned and sentenced to be burned. Helvetius developed his ideas even more thoroughly in the book “On Man, His mental abilities and his upbringing." This book, written in 1769, in order to avoid new persecution, Helvetius bequeathed to be published only after his death, and it was published in 1773.

In his works, Helvetius, for the first time in the history of pedagogy, quite fully revealed the factors that shape a person. As a sensualist, he argued that all ideas and concepts in humans are formed on the basis of sensory perceptions, and reduced thinking to the ability to sense.

The most important factor He considered the formation of man to be influenced by the environment. Man is a product of circumstances (social environment) and upbringing, Helvetius argued. The atheist Helvetius demanded that public education be taken out of the hands of the clergy and made unconditionally secular. Sharply condemning the scholastic methods of teaching in the feudal school, Helvetius demanded that teaching be visual and based, if possible, on the child’s personal experience educational material, he believed, should become simple and understandable to students.

Helvetius recognized the right of all people to education and believed that women should receive equal education with men. Helvetius believed that all people with normal physical organization have by nature equal abilities and opportunities for development. He resolutely rejected reactionary opinions about the inequality of mental development of people due to their social origin, race or nationality. In fact, he argued, the cause of inequality is rooted in social conditions that do not allow most people to receive the right education and develop their abilities.

François Marie Voltaire (1694–1778). Known as a poet, playwright, writer, historian, philosopher. Voltaire did not leave special pedagogical works, and the ideas of education are quite rare in his work, but his entire philosophy and his entire ideology became the actual basis of many pedagogical concepts, ideas and attitudes in the field of upbringing and education.

Pedagogical ideas of French enlighteners of the 18th century. (Voltaire, K.A. Helvetius, D. Diderot) - concept and types. Classification and features of the category "Pedagogical ideas of French enlighteners of the 18th century (Voltaire, C.A. Helvetius, D. Diderot)" 2017, 2018.

MATERIALISM (from the Latin materialis material), a philosophical direction that proceeds from the fact that the world is material, exists objectively, outside and independently of consciousness, that matter is primary, not created by anyone, exists forever, that consciousness, thinking is a property of matter, that the world and its patterns are knowable. Materialism is the opposite of idealism; their struggle constitutes the content of the historical and philosophical process.

Denis Diderot(1713 - 1784) - a consistent materialist who gave examples of dialectical thinking. From his point of view, the world is moving matter; the source of motion is inside matter.

Diderot was a sensualist who at the same time recognized the importance of reason and thinking for knowledge. He presented the process of cognition in a balanced way. Being a supporter of the enlightened monarchy, he spoke out with irreconcilable criticism of feudalism, absolutism, the Christian religion and the church, and defended (based on sensationalism) materialist ideas; one of the ideologists of the revolutionary French bourgeoisie of the 18th century.

Diderot led the creation of the first Encyclopedia in human history. Thanks to the fact of the creation of the Encyclopedia, the 18th century is called the Age of Enlightenment.

French philosopher, materialist, atheist, educator, encyclopedist.

Holbach(1723 - 1789) - the largest systematizer of the worldview of French materialists of the 18th century. He asserted the primacy and uncreateability of the material world, nature, existing independently of human consciousness, infinite in time and space. Matter, according to Holbach, is the totality of all existing bodies; its simplest, elementary particles are immutable and indivisible atoms, the main properties of which are extension, weight, figure, impenetrability, movement; Holbach reduced all forms of movement to mechanical movement. Matter and motion are inseparable. Constituting an integral, fundamental property of matter, its attribute, movement is as uncreated, indestructible and infinite as matter. Holbach denied the universal animation of matter, believing that sensitivity is inherent only in certain organized forms of matter.

Holbach recognized the existence of objective laws of the material world, believing that they were based on a constant and indestructible connection between causes and their actions. Man is a part of nature and therefore subject to its laws. Holbach denied free will due to the causality of human behavior. Defending the knowability of the material world, Holbach, based on materialistic sensationalism, considered sensations to be the source of knowledge; cognition is a reflection of reality; sensations and concepts are considered as images of objects. Holbach's materialist theory of knowledge, also shared by other French materialists, was directed against agnosticism, theology, the idealistic sensationalism of J. Berkeley and Rene Descartes' doctrine of innate ideas. He denied the objective nature of chance.

Holbach owns atheistic works imbued with caustic sarcasm. Due to persecution by the clergy, Holbach's works were published anonymously and, as a rule, outside France.

Developed ethical views more consistently Claude Adrian Helvetius(1715-1771) in the work “About Man”. According to Helvetius, there is also no innate morality (this idea was shared by Diderot), and vice is not innate either. Both virtue and vice are the result of upbringing, therefore it depends on society what kind of person a person will be. Education is omnipotent; a person owes everything to it. Helvetius understands education broadly: it is not only the admonishing words of parents and teachers, but the cumulative influence of the surrounding world - both society and nature.

The basis of the educational process, according to Helvetius, is a person’s physical sensitivity to pain and pleasure. It is through the perception of both that a person begins to understand what is good for him and what is bad. Every person is characterized by self-love, which is the deepest impulse of human activity. From self-love through sensitivity to pain and pleasure all passions grow. Interests, the meaning of life, the desire for happiness - everything grows through sensitivity to pain and pleasure.

Helvetius deliberately emphasizes the apology of passions, contrasting it with the Christian teaching about passions, that a person should be able to control his passions. According to Helvetius, passions must be cultivated and their necessity understood, since they move the world. Helvetius analyzes different passions. For example, passions such as interests resonate with profit and benefit and lead to the development of society and the emergence of private property.

Julien Ofret de La Mettrie(1709-1751). Let us note that the first work expressing the ideas of French materialists was La Mettrie’s “Natural History of the Soul.” Since, in his opinion, the soul is mortal, we need to take a different look at morality. There is no religious concept of morality, because there is no eternal life, and morality exists insofar as the moral sense is innate. There is a certain moral law, just like the laws of nature. Even animals have this moral law, and since man is a product of the animal world, he also obeys this law. In the 18th century, mechanistic materialism flourished. At this time, mechanics was on the rise and philosophers began to liken many things to mechanical processes. They tried to represent man and society in a mechanical way. Thus, La Mettrie in his essay “Man-Machine” likened man to a machine. He presents the human body as a clockwork mechanism. Then society began to be likened to mechanical systems.

Helvetius: Seeing the enormous mental inequality of people, one must first of all admit that minds are as different as bodies... But this reasoning is based only on analogy. The obvious inequality between the minds of different people cannot be taken as proof of their unequal ability to mental development...What is the mind in itself? The ability to notice similarities and differences, correspondences and inconsistencies between various objects.

Diderot: But is this ability innate, or is it acquired?

Helvetius: Born.

Diderot: So, is it the same for all people?

Helvetius: All normally organized people.

Diderot: And what lies at the heart of it?

Helvetius: Physical sensitivity.

Diderot: What about sensitivity?

Helvetius: This is an ability, the action of which changes only under the influence of upbringing, chance and interest.

A.: So, here Helvetius (more precisely, Diderot expounding his views) points to three factors that lead to inequality of minds with the initial equality of human natural abilities. Next we will look at them in more detail.

Diderot: But doesn’t the organization, unless it is monstrously perverted, play any role here?

Helvetius: No.

Diderot: What do you see as the difference between a person and an animal?

Helvetius: In the organisation...

Diderot: And you don't notice all your inconsistency?

Helvetius: What other inconsistency?

Diderot: You reduce the difference between the two extremes of the animal chain - man and animal - to a difference in organization and use the same reason to explain the difference between dogs, but reject it when it comes to the difference between people in such characteristics as intelligence, insight and intelligence ... .

A.: So, even purely logically, if the difference between two animals in their mental functions is explained by the difference in their nervous organization, then why not assume this in relation to people, who are a link in the chain of living organisms?

Helvetius: I considered intelligence, talent and virtue as a product of education.

Diderot: Imagine five hundred newborn babies; you are trusted to raise them as you see fit. Tell me, how many of them will you make geniuses? Why not all five hundred? Think carefully about your answers, and you will be convinced that ultimately they will lead you to the difference in organization, this primary source of laziness, frivolity, stubbornness and other vices or passions... Prince Golitsyn has two children: a kind, meek and simple-minded boy and a crafty, cunning girl who always gets her way in roundabout ways. Their mother is devastated by this. She did everything she could to teach her daughter to be frank, and all to no avail. Why this difference between two children, barely four years old, who were raised and cared for by their parents in the same way? Whether Mimi corrects herself or not, her brother Dmitry will never be able to maneuver among court intrigues like she does. A teacher's lesson will never compare with a nature lesson.

Helvetius: No one receives the same education, for everyone’s mentors are... the form of government under which he lives, and his friends, and his mistresses, and the people around him, and the books he read, and, finally, chance, that is, an infinite number events, the cause and combination of which we cannot indicate due to ignorance of them.

S.: And which of them is right?

A.: As has happened many times in the history of scientific thought, both opinions reflect only different sides single process. Later, Sergei Leonidovich Rubinstein would express this pattern in the classic formula: “External causes act through internal conditions.” Of course, Diderot is right when he speaks about differences in innate predisposition and inclinations. But Helvetius is also right in emphasizing the role of external conditions, including the “pattern of government” in the state, in the development of people’s abilities.

Helvetius: Nations groaning under the yoke of unlimited power can have only short-term successes, only flashes of glory; sooner or later they will fall under the rule of a free and enterprising people. But even if we assume that they will be freed from this danger due to exceptional circumstances and situation, then bad management is enough to destroy them, depopulate them and turn them into a desert [Ibid., p. 632].

A.: Helvetius is also right that even with the supposedly “identical” upbringing of two twins, this upbringing is still not the same: and this has been proven by subsequent empirical studies of the psychology of upbringing and development of twins.

Helvetius: Chance plays a vital role in the formation of character... Genius is the product of chance... It is chance that brings known objects before our eyes, and therefore gives us especially successful ideas and sometimes leads us to great discoveries.

Chance is the master of all inventors.

Diderot: Mister? Better say “servant”, for he serves them, and not vice versa. Do you believe that chance led Newton from the falling pear to the motion of the Moon, and from the motion of the Moon to the system of the universe? Does this mean that chance would lead to the same discovery of any other? Newton himself thought about it differently. When asked how he came to his discovery, he answered: “Through reflection” [Ibid.].

A.: And again the truth lies somewhere in the middle. And chance plays an important role in the seemingly sudden “illumination” of a scientist, but only on the condition that he has first thought about it for a long time. It's shown modern research psychology of thinking.

Helvetius: Competition creates geniuses, and the desire to become famous creates talents... Inequality of minds arises not so much from the too unequal distribution of the gifts of chance, but from the indifference with which they are received.

Diderot: My dear philosopher, don't say that; say better that these reasons give them the opportunity to express themselves, and no one will argue with you.

Competition and desire do not create genius where there is none.

There are thousands of things that seem to me so beyond my strength that neither the hope of obtaining the throne, nor even the desire to save my life would prompt me to achieve them, and there has not been a moment in my entire life when my feelings and thoughts would have swayed me in this. conviction

A.: And again, both are right: passion plays an extremely important role in the development of abilities; very often a person is so in love with his own business that he acquires the necessary knowledge and skills as if playfully and quickly develops his abilities; but the opposite picture also happens, when a child is forced to study first, and despite this, geniuses appear; a classic example is Paganini, whom his father literally forced him to play the violin as a child.

I won’t lie: despite the fact that in these dialogues the extreme positions of both authors appear, both of them in their works often express themselves in the above-mentioned sense of compromise and therefore their views should be considered only as certain tendencies in understanding a particular problem...

Well, we went over the main problems of the French empirical psychology of consciousness of the 18th century, which developed the problem of the experimental origin of mental functions and emphasized the role of internal conditions (needs, subject activity, abilities, and so on) in the functioning of consciousness. This distinguished it from the English associative psychology that we looked at earlier.

S.: What is happening in Germany?

A.: But we will talk about German empirical psychology a little later, when we touch on the problem of unconscious mental processes, because this problem was developed mainly by German-speaking authors...

Literature

1. Locke J. Experience about human understanding // J. Locke. Op. In 3 vols. M., 1985. T. 1. P. 78-582.

2. Bykhovsky B.E. George Berkeley. M., 1970.

3. Berkeley J. Experience of a new theory of vision // J. Berkeley. Essays. M., 1978. S. 49-136.

4. Hume D. A treatise on human nature, or an attempt to apply a method of reasoning based on experience to moral subjects // D. Hume. Op. In 2 vols. M., 1966. T. 1. P. 77-788.

5. Narsky I.S. David Hume. M., 1973.

6. Hume D. An abbreviated summary of the “Treatise on Human Nature” // D. Hume. Works. In 2 volumes. M., 1966. T. 1. P. 789-810.

7. Hume D. Research on human cognition // D. Yum. Op. In 2 vols. M., 1965. T. 2. P. 5-169.

8. Gartley D. Reflections on man, his structure, his duty and hopes // English materialists of the 18th century: Collection. prod. In 3 vols. M., 1967. T. 2. P. 193-371.

9. Zhdan A.N. History of psychology from antiquity to the present day. M., 1990.

10.Zenger S. J. St. Mill, his life and works. St. Petersburg, 1903.

11.Mill J.St. System of logic. M., 1914.

12.Yaroshevsky M.G. History of psychology. M., 1985.

13.Koenig E. Wilhelm Wundt. His philosophy and psychology. St. Petersburg, 1902.

14.Ebbinghaus G. Basics of psychology. St. Petersburg, 1912.

15.Wertheimer Michael. Max Wertheimer; Gestalt Prophet // Gestalt Theory. 1980. Vol. 2. N 1. P. 3-17.

16.Rubinshtein S.L. A few comments in connection with the article by A.A. Vetrov “Productive thinking and association” // Problems of psychology. 1960. No. 1. P. 156.

17.Boguslavsky V.M. La Mettrie. M., 1977.

18.Boguslavsky V.M. Scientist, thinker, fighter // J.O. Lametrie. Essays. M., 1983. P. 3-57.

19.Lametrie J.O. Treatise on the soul: Natural history of the soul // Ibid. pp. 58-143.

20.Lametrie J.O. Man-machine // Ibid. pp. 169-226.

21.Lametrie J.O. Plant Man // Ibid. pp. 227-240.

22.Lametrie J.O. A brief summary of philosophical systems to facilitate understanding of the treatise on the soul // Ibid. pp. 144-168.

23.Boguslavsky V.M. Etienne Bonneau de Condillac. M., 1984.

24.Condillac E.B. Treatise on sensations // E.B. Condillac. Op. In 3 vols. M., 1982. T. 2. P. 189-399.

25.Diderot D. Consistent refutation of Helvetius’s book “On Man” // D. Diderot. Works in 2 volumes. M., 1991. T. 2. pp. 342-506.

26.Helvetius K.A. About the mind // Anthology of world philosophy. In 4 vols. M., 1970. T. 2. P. 621-635.

27.Ben A. Psychology // Main directions of psychology in classical works. Associative psychology. G. Ebbinghaus. Essay on psychology. A. Ben. Psychology. M., 1998. pp. 209-511.

28.Spencer G. Foundations of psychology // Main directions of psychology in classical works. Associative psychology. G.Spencer. Foundations of psychology. T. Ziegen. Physiological psychology in 14 lectures. M., 1998. P. 11-309.