Problems of ancient philosophy. Ancient philosophy: main problems, concepts and schools

29.09.2019

1. The main question is the question of the essence of space, nature as an integral, unified world, universe. The cosmos was presented as a finite living being, harmoniously calculated, hierarchically arranged, and spiritualized. The cosmos is arranged according to the principle of unity and forms a structure where everything is in everything, where each element serves as a representation and reflection of the whole and restores this whole in itself in its entirety, where each part is also everything, not mixed and inseparable from the whole. Every person, thing, event has its own meaning. The harmony of the cosmos manifests itself at all levels of the hierarchy, so that man is a microcosm.

2. The problem of being and becoming is based on the empirically observed difference between the stable and the changeable. That which is always unchangeable is being, existing, and that which is changeable is becoming. Being absolutely exists, i.e. exists before all its possible divisions; it is whole, simple and united. It is complete, unchangeable, has no other existence as its beginning, is necessary, i.e. cannot but be, already become and identical.

3. Understanding of space and existence is based on expediency. If something happens, then there must be a reason that gives rise to it - a goal. “The beginning of a thing,” says Aristotle, “is the reason for which it exists. And becoming is for the sake of a goal.” If there is a goal, there is also a meaning - “for what”. For many ancient thinkers, what everything strives for is Good as the first and last goal cause of existence.

4. Putting unity above plurality, ancient philosophers identified unity and integrity. The whole was understood primarily as the indivisible. For representatives of the Milesian school these are various types of the first principle (water, air, apeiron), for Heraclitus - fire, for atomists - an atom. For Plato and Aristotle these are eidos, forms, ideal existential essences.

5. Ancient philosophers were mainly epistemological optimists, considering knowledge of the world possible. They considered reason to be the main means of knowledge. They are characterized by recognition in accordance with the principle of hierarchy and hierarchically divided structure of cognitive abilities, which depend on the parts of the human soul.

6. The problem of man is to clarify the essence of man, his connection with the cosmos, his moral predetermination, rationality and self-worth.

7. The problem of soul and body as a type of problem of the relationship between the material and the ideal. The soul is understood either as independent of the material and predetermined by supernatural forces, immortal (Plato), or as a type of material (the fiery atoms of Democritus). Universal animation (hylozoism) is recognized by Democritus and Aristotle.

8. Ethical problems in which a person appears as a being who has base passions and desires and at the same time is virtuous, endowed with higher virtues. Within the framework of antiquity, he identifies several ethical directions:

- eudaimonism– harmony between virtue and the pursuit of happiness (Socrates, Plato, Aristotle),

- hedonism– virtue is intertwined with pleasure, vice with suffering (Democritus, Epicurus),

- asceticism– self-restraint as a means of achieving higher moral qualities (cynics, stoics).

9. Ethical problems are closely intertwined with political problems. The individual and the citizen are considered identical, therefore the problems of the state are ethical problems and vice versa.

10. The problem of genesis, nature and systematization scientific knowledge, an attempt to identify sections of philosophical knowledge (Aristotle).

11. Specific classification sciences, based on human cognitive abilities or determined by the degree of significance of the object of study.

12. Developing ways to achieve truth in a dispute, i.e. dialectics as a method of thinking (Socrates, Zeno of Elea).

13. The discovery and subsequent development of a kind of objective dialectics, stating the fluidity, variability, and inconsistency of the material world (Milesian school, Heraclitus).

14. The problem of beauty, reflected in art, is recognized as either illusory (a copy of a copy, according to Plato, cannot be beautiful), or capable of freeing a person from the power of feelings and giving space to the rational principle in a person (catharsis in Aristotle).

Topic 2. Ancient philosophy and the range of its problems

Ancient philosophy arose in the Greek city-states (“polises”) at the turn of the 7th-6th centuries. BC). Having experienced a period of brilliant prosperity in the 1st-1st centuries. BC it continues to develop in the era of Alexander the Great and the Roman Empire until the beginning of the 6th century. AD

Periods of ancient philosophy:

· naturalistic(problems of space and the search for the beginning of being) - Milesian school, Pythagoreans, eclectic physicists.

· classical(problems of determining the essence of man, issues of happiness, freedom, morality were considered) - Sophists, Socrates

· period grand fusion(Plato and Aristotle) - the discovery of ideal being, the formulation of the main philosophical problems, construction of the first large metaphysical systems.

· Hellenistic schools the era of the conquests of Alexander the Great and until the end of the pagan era - Cynicism, Epicureanism, Stoicism, skepticism.

The main features of ancient philosophy:

1. Syncreticity, i.e. indivisibility, unity of the most important problems, the spread of ethical categories throughout the entire Cosmos.

2. Cosmocentrism. Ancient philosophy tries to develop universal categories covering the problems of the relationship between man and the Cosmos, to give a meaningful representation of the essence of man as a microcosm.

3. Pantheism, understood as the intelligible Cosmos and as an absolute deity.

4. Virtue and functionality. Ancient philosophy is designed to help people in their lives.

Problems of existence. They were founded by the Milesian school. Thales believed that everything that exists arose from moist primary matter or water. Everything is born from this original source.

Anaximenes calls air the primary substance. It is air that is characterized by the process of rarefaction and condensation, thanks to which all substances are formed from it.

According to Heraclitus, the world or nature is in a continuous process of change; of all natural substances, fire is the most mobile. Therefore, the primary substance of nature is “fire”. The world remains fundamentally fire, despite all its transformations.

Anaximander names as the first principle not any specific material substance, but “apeiron” - the eternal, immeasurable, infinite substance from which everything arises, everything consists and into which everything turns.

Atomists are a materialist philosophical school, whose philosophers (Democritus, Leucippus) considered microscopic particles - “atoms” - to be the “building material” of all things. The entire material world consists of atoms. The atom is the “first brick” of everything that exists. Atoms are eternal and unchanging, things are transitory and changeable. So the atomists tried to build a picture of the world in which creation and destruction, movement, and multiplicity of things were possible.

Plato contrasted the materialistic solution to the problems of existence in the natural philosophy of the ancient Greeks with an idealistic solution. He created the doctrine of ideas - the incorporeal essences of things and phenomena. Material things arise and perish, change and move, there is nothing lasting or true in them. Ideas (eidos) of material objects are permanent, eternal and unchanging. The material world is formed from the combination of “idea” and “matter”, that which gives the “idea” form and substance. Plato believes that the world of ideas is primary, the world of ideas is secondary. Therefore, he is called the creator of the world's first idealistic system

Plato's student Aristotle criticized his teacher. Plato's mistake, from his point of view, was that he separated the “world of ideas” from the real world. The essence of an object is in the object itself, and not outside it. There is no world of “pure ideas”; only isolated and specifically defined objects exist. The essence of an object and its cause are contained in the form, which is inseparable from the thing. Form is Aristotle's key concept. It is the form that makes an object what it is.

According to Aristotle, being is hierarchical and it is expressed in the hierarchy of forms. Climbing the ladder of forms, the importance of matter weakens, and forms increase. The form of inanimate objects - plant form - animal form - human form (soul) - God (as a pure form freed from matter in general). Aristotle's God is the perfect Mind, the source of all movement - the Prime Mover, although he himself is motionless, eternal, has no history, is impassive and does not take part in the affairs of people. God is like absolute perfection, that target, final cause that attracts the whole world to itself.

The problem of man in ancient philosophy. This problem is philosophical thought antiquity is presented in various approaches:

· naturalistic approach - man as a small semblance of the Universe (Thales, Anaximenes, Heraclitus, Democritus);

· anthropological approach – the focus is on man, his psychology, structure social life(Sophists, Socrates, Epicurus);

· sociocentric approach – society plays an active role in the upbringing of a person (Plato, Aristotle).

Problems of social structure. In ancient philosophy, two main trends emerged in the understanding of society:

· society as artificial formation, the result of an agreement between people (sophists);

· society as a natural formation, legal norms are based on natural and universal human law (Plato, Aristotle). Plato views society as a complex social system, including various spheres (production, management, creation of spiritual values), based on the division of labor. Aristotle believes that for government(as in ethics) “moderate and average best”, i.e. it is the middle class that owns moderate property that establish best shape board. Unlike Plato, Aristotle is a defender of private property. He says that “the mere thought of property gives unspeakable pleasure.” The reason for the injustice of society is the unwillingness of managers to act in the interests of the common good. It is service to the common good that is the criterion of correct forms.

Characteristic features of ancient philosophy.

Periodization of ancient philosophy.

Historical types of philosophy. Ancient philosophy.

Topic 2.

Ancient philosophy is a set of philosophical teachings that developed in Ancient Greece and Rome (7th century BC - 6th century AD).

Based on the criterion of the content of philosophical problems, six stages are identified:

Naturalistic (dominance of problems in the study of physics and space) – 7th – 5th centuries. BC;

Humanistic (dominance of problems of human cognition) – V – IV centuries. BC;

A period of great genesis, characterized by the discovery of the supersensible and the systematization of philosophical problems, was the 4th – 3rd centuries. AD;

The period of Hellenistic schools - Cynicism, Epicureanism, etc. – III century BC – I century AD;

The religious period of ancient pagan thought in the form of degenerating Neoplatonism - 1st century. AD – III century AD;

The period of Christian thought in its inception and the attempt to rationally formalize the dogmas of the new religion - 1st century. AD – III century AD..

Various ancient schools have common features, characteristic of the entire development period:

Striving to explain totality things, consider nature, space, existence, reality as whole (cosmocentrism)

Being as a whole is revealed through origin(the cause of all things).

Consideration of being is given either from a materialistic or idealistic point of view, from a dialectical or metaphysical point of view (although these points of view are often not expressed clearly enough)

A variety of philosophical systems, opposite in content: materialism and idealism, metaphysics and dialectics (subjective and objective), monism and dualism, rationalism and sensationalism

Striving for rational explanation of the universal as an object of study, search for patterns, logos

The goal of philosophy is the contemplation of truth, beyond utilitarian practical goals (truth is valuable in itself)

The lack of differentiation of scientific and philosophical knowledge itself

Encyclopedism of ancient thinkers, breadth of philosophical and scientific issues.

The use of a mythological form of representation of philosophical ideas (up to Plato). Presentation philosophical works in the form of poems, dialogues and letters.

Development of the theory of evidence, methods of establishing the truth of a particular system, certain statements (logic), and rhetoric as the art of persuasion

In anthropological views of man, the moral aspect predominates; ethical virtues coincide with civil and state virtues.

6. The problem of man is to clarify the essence of man, his connection with the cosmos, his moral predetermination, rationality and self-worth.

- eudaimonism– harmony between virtue and the pursuit of happiness (Socrates, Plato, Aristotle),

- hedonism– virtue is intertwined with pleasure, vice with suffering (Democritus, Epicurus),

- asceticism– self-restraint as a means of achieving higher moral qualities (cynics, stoics).

9. Ethical problems are closely intertwined with political problems. The individual and the citizen are considered identical, therefore the problems of the state are ethical problems and vice versa.

10. The problem of the genesis, nature and systematization of scientific knowledge, an attempt to identify sections of philosophical knowledge (Aristotle).

11. A certain classification of sciences, based on human cognitive abilities or determined by the degree of significance of the object of study.

12. Developing ways to achieve truth in a dispute, i.e. dialectics as a method of thinking (Socrates, Zeno of Elea).

13. The discovery and subsequent development of a kind of objective dialectics, stating the fluidity, variability, and inconsistency of the material world (Milesian school, Heraclitus).

topic:

"ANTIQUE PHILOSOPHY: main problems, concepts and schools"

Introduction

1 Milesian school and school of Pythagoras. Heraclitus and the Eleatics. Atomists

2 Schools of Socrates, Sophists and Plato

3 Aristotle

4 Philosophy of early Hellenism (Stoicism, Epicureanism, skepticism)

5 Neoplatonism

Conclusion

List of used literature

Introduction

Most researchers are unanimous that philosophy as an integral phenomenon of culture is the creation of the genius of the ancient Greeks (VII-VI centuries BC). Already in the poems of Homer and Hesiod, impressive attempts are made to imagine the world and man's place in it. The desired goal is achieved primarily by means characteristic of art (artistic images) and religion (belief in gods).

Philosophy supplemented myths and religions by strengthening rational motivations and developing interest in systematic rational thinking based on concepts. Initially, the formation of philosophy in the Greek world was facilitated by the achievements of the Greeks in the city-states political freedoms. Philosophers, whose number increased and whose activities became more and more professional, could resist political and religious authorities. It is in ancient Greek world philosophy was for the first time constituted as an independent cultural formation, existing alongside art and religion, and not as their component.

Ancient philosophy developed during the 12th-13th centuries, from the 7th century. BC to the 6th century AD Historically, ancient philosophy can be divided into five periods:

1) the naturalistic period, where the main attention was paid to the problems of nature (fusis) and the Cosmos (Milesians, Pythagoreans, Eleatics, in short, Pre-Socratics);

2) the humanistic period with its attention to human problems, primarily to ethical problems (Socrates, Sophists);

3) classical period with his grandiose philosophical systems of Plato and Aristotle;

4) the period of Hellenistic schools (Stoics, Epicureans, Skeptics), engaged in the moral development of people;

5) Neoplatonism, with its universal synthesis, brought to the idea of the One Good.

The presented work examines the basic concepts and schools of ancient philosophy.

1 Milesian school of philosophy and the school of Pythagoras. Heraclitus and the Eleatics. Atomists.

One of the oldest philosophical schools is considered to be Miletus (VII-V centuries BC). Thinkers from the city of Miletus ( Ancient Greece) - Thales, Anaximenes and Anaximander.

All three thinkers took decisive steps towards demythologizing the ancient worldview. "What is everything made of?" - this is the question that interested the Milesians in the first place. The very formulation of the question is ingenious in its own way, because it has as its premise the conviction that everything can be explained, but for this it is necessary to find a single source for everything. Thales considered water to be such a source, Anaximenes - air, Anaximander - some infinite and eternal beginning, apeiron (the term "apeiron" literally means "limitless"). Things arise as a result of those transformations that occur with primary matter - condensations, rarefaction, evaporation. According to the Milesians, at the basis of everything there is a primary substance. Substance, by definition, is something that does not need anything else for its explanation. The water of Thales, the air of Anaximenes are substances.

To evaluate the views of the Milesians, let us turn to science. Postulated by the Milesians The Milesians did not manage to go beyond the world of events and phenomena, but they made such attempts, and in the right direction. They were looking for something natural, but imagined it as an event.

School of Pythagoras. Pythagoras is also occupied with the problem of substances, but fire, earth, and water no longer suit him as such. He comes to the conclusion that “everything is a number.” The Pythagoreans saw in numbers the properties and relationships inherent in harmonic combinations. The Pythagoreans did not miss the fact that if the lengths of the strings in a musical instrument (monochord) relate to each other as 1:2, 2:3, 3:4, then the resulting musical intervals will correspond to what are called octave, fifth and fourth. Simple numerical relationships began to be sought in geometry and astronomy. Pythagoras, and before him Thales, apparently used the simplest mathematical proofs, which, quite possibly, were borrowed from the East (in Babylonia). The invention of mathematical proofs was crucial for the development of the type of rationality characteristic of modern civilized man.

When assessing the philosophical significance of Pythagoras' views, one should pay tribute to his insight. From a philosophical point of view, special meaning had an appeal to the phenomenon of numbers. The Pythagoreans explained events on the basis of numbers and their relationships and thereby surpassed the Milesians, for they almost reached the level of the laws of science. Any absolutization of numbers, as well as their patterns, is a revival of the historical limitations of Pythagoreanism. This fully applies to the magic of numbers, to which, it must be said, the Pythagoreans paid tribute with all the generosity of an enthusiastic soul.

Finally, especially noteworthy is the Pythagoreans’ search for harmony in everything, for beautiful quantitative consistency. Such a search is actually aimed at discovering laws, and this is one of the most difficult scientific tasks. The ancient Greeks loved harmony very much, admired it and knew how to create it in their lives.

Heraclitus and the Eleatics. Further development philosophical thought is most convincingly presented in the well-known confrontation between the teachings of Heraclitus from Ephesus and Parmenides and Zeno from Ele.

Both sides agree that external senses are not capable of giving true knowledge on their own; truth is achieved by reflection. Heraclitus believes that the world is ruled by logos. The idea of logos can be regarded as a naive understanding of the law. Specifically, he meant that everything in the world consists of opposites, opposition, everything happens through discord, struggle. As a result of this, everything changes, flows; figuratively speaking, you cannot step into the same river twice. In the struggle of opposites their inner identity is revealed. For example, “the life of some is the death of others,” and in general, life is death. Since everything is interconnected, every property is relative: “donkeys would prefer straw to gold.” Heraclitus still overly trusts the world of events, which determines both weak and strengths his views. On the one hand, he notices, albeit in a naive form, the most important properties of the world of events - their interaction, coherence, relativity. On the other hand, he still does not know how to analyze the world of events from the positions characteristic of a scientist, i.e. with evidence and concepts. The world for Heraclitus is fire, and fire is an image of eternal movement and change.

The Heraclitean philosophy of the identity of opposites and contradictions was sharply criticized by the Eleatics. Thus, Parmenides considered those people for whom “to be” and “not to be” are considered the same and not the same, and for everything there is a return path (this is a clear allusion to Heraclitus), “two-headed.”

Special attention The Eleatics paid attention to the problem of multiplicity; in this regard, they came up with a number of paradoxes (aporias), which to this day cause headaches for philosophers, physicists and mathematicians. A paradox is an unexpected statement, an aporia is a difficulty, bewilderment, an intractable problem.

According to the Eleatics, plurality cannot be conceived despite sensory impressions. If things can be infinitesimal, then their sum will in no way give something finite, a finite thing. If things are finite, then between the finite two things there is always a third thing; we again come to a contradiction, for a finite thing consists of an infinite number of finite things, which is impossible. Not only multiplicity is impossible, but also movement. The argument “dichotomy” (division into two) proves: in order to travel a certain path, you must first travel half of it, and in order to complete it, you must travel a quarter of the way, and then one eighth of the way, and so on ad infinitum. It turns out that it is impossible to get from a given point to the closest one, because it actually doesn’t exist. If movement is impossible, then fleet-footed Achilles cannot catch up with the tortoise and he will have to admit that the flying arrow does not fly.

So, Heraclitus is interested, first of all, in change and movement, their origins, the reasons that he sees in the struggle of opposites. The Eleatics are primarily concerned with how to understand, how to interpret what everyone considers to be change and movement. According to Eleatic thinking, the lack of a consistent explanation of the nature of motion casts doubt on its reality.

Atomists. The crisis caused by Zeno's aporias was very deep; in order to at least partially overcome it, some special, unusual ideas were required. The ancient atomists managed to do this, the most prominent among whom were Leucippus and Democritus.

To get rid of the difficulty of understanding change once and for all, it was assumed that atoms are immutable, indivisible and homogeneous. Atomists, as it were, “reduced” change to the unchangeable, to atoms.

According to Democritus, there are atoms and emptiness. Atoms differ in shape, location, and weight. Atoms move in various directions. Earth, water, air, fire are the primary groups of atoms. Combinations of atoms form entire worlds: in infinite space there are an infinite number of worlds. Of course, man is also a collection of atoms. The human soul is made up of special atoms. Everything happens according to necessity, there is no chance.

Essay on philosophy

topic:

"ANTIQUE PHILOSOPHY: main problems, concepts and schools"

Introduction

1 Milesian school and school of Pythagoras. Heraclitus and the Eleatics. Atomists

2 Schools of Socrates, Sophists and Plato

3 Aristotle

4 Philosophy of early Hellenism (Stoicism, Epicureanism, skepticism)

5 Neoplatonism

Conclusion

List of used literature

Introduction

Philosophy supplemented myths and religions by strengthening rational motivations and developing interest in systematic rational thinking based on concepts. Initially, the formation of philosophy in the Greek world was facilitated by the political freedoms achieved by the Greeks in the city-states. Philosophers, whose number increased and whose activities became more and more professional, could resist political and religious authorities. It was in the ancient Greek world that philosophy was first constituted as an independent cultural entity, existing alongside art and religion, and not as a component of them.

Ancient philosophy developed during the 12th-13th centuries, from the 7th century. BC to the 6th century AD Historically, ancient philosophy can be divided into five periods:

1) the naturalistic period, where the main attention was paid to the problems of nature (fusis) and the Cosmos (Milesians, Pythagoreans, Eleatics, in short, Pre-Socratics);

2) the humanistic period with its attention to human problems, primarily to ethical problems (Socrates, Sophists);

3) the classical period with its grandiose philosophical systems of Plato and Aristotle;

4) the period of Hellenistic schools (Stoics, Epicureans, Skeptics), engaged in the moral development of people;

5) Neoplatonism, with its universal synthesis, brought to the idea of the One Good.

The presented work examines the basic concepts and schools of ancient philosophy.

1 Milesian school of philosophy and the school of Pythagoras. Heraclitus and the Eleatics. Atomists.

One of the oldest philosophical schools is considered to be Miletus (VII-V centuries BC). Thinkers from the city of Miletus (Ancient Greece) - Thales, Anaximenes and Anaximander.

All three thinkers took decisive steps towards demythologizing the ancient worldview. "What is everything made of?" - this is the question that interested the Milesians in the first place. The very formulation of the question is ingenious in its own way, because it has as its premise the conviction that everything can be explained, but for this it is necessary to find a single source for everything. Thales considered water to be such a source, Anaximenes - air, Anaximander - some boundless and eternal principle, apeiron (the term "apeiron" literally means "limitless"). Things arise as a result of those transformations that occur with primary matter - condensations, rarefaction, evaporation. According to the Milesians, at the basis of everything there is a primary substance. Substance, by definition, is something that does not need anything else for its explanation. The water of Thales, the air of Anaximenes are substances.

School of Pythagoras. Pythagoras is also occupied with the problem of substances, but fire, earth, and water no longer suit him as such. He comes to the conclusion that “everything is a number.” The Pythagoreans saw in numbers the properties and relationships inherent in harmonic combinations. The Pythagoreans did not miss the fact that if the lengths of the strings in a musical instrument (monochord) are related to each other as 1:2, 2:3, 3:4, then the resulting musical intervals will correspond to what are called octave, fifth and fourth . Simple numerical relationships began to be sought in geometry and astronomy. Pythagoras, and before him Thales, apparently used the simplest mathematical proofs, which, quite possibly, were borrowed from the East (in Babylonia). The invention of mathematical proofs was crucial for the development of the type of rationality characteristic of modern civilized man.

When assessing the philosophical significance of Pythagoras' views, one should pay tribute to his insight. From a philosophical point of view, the appeal to the phenomenon of numbers was of particular importance. The Pythagoreans explained events on the basis of numbers and their relationships and thereby surpassed the Milesians, for they almost reached the level of the laws of science. Any absolutization of numbers, as well as their patterns, is a revival of the historical limitations of Pythagoreanism. This fully applies to the magic of numbers, to which, it must be said, the Pythagoreans paid tribute with all the generosity of an enthusiastic soul.

Heraclitus and the Eleatics. The further development of philosophical thought is most convincingly presented in the well-known confrontation between the teachings of Heraclitus from Ephesus and Parmenides and Zeno from Ele.

Both sides agree that external senses are not capable of giving true knowledge on their own; truth is achieved by reflection. Heraclitus believes that the world is ruled by logos. The idea of logos can be regarded as a naive understanding of the law. Specifically, he meant that everything in the world consists of opposites, opposition, everything happens through discord, struggle. As a result of this, everything changes, flows; figuratively speaking, you cannot step into the same river twice. In the struggle of opposites their inner identity is revealed. For example, “the life of some is the death of others,” and in general, life is death. Since everything is interconnected, every property is relative: “donkeys would prefer straw to gold.” Heraclitus still overly trusts the world of events, which determines both the weak and strong sides of his views. On the one hand, he notices, albeit in a naive form, the most important properties of the world of events - their interaction, coherence, relativity. On the other hand, he still does not know how to analyze the world of events from the positions characteristic of a scientist, i.e. with evidence and concepts. The world for Heraclitus is fire, and fire is an image of eternal movement and change.

The Eleatics paid special attention to the problem of multiplicity; in this regard, they came up with a number of paradoxes (aporias), which to this day cause headaches for philosophers, physicists and mathematicians. A paradox is an unexpected statement, an aporia is a difficulty, bewilderment, an intractable problem.

According to Democritus, there are atoms and emptiness. Atoms differ in shape, location, and weight. Atoms move in different directions. Earth, water, air, fire are the primary groups of atoms. Combinations of atoms form entire worlds: in infinite space there are an infinite number of worlds. Of course, man is also a collection of atoms. The human soul is made up of special atoms. Everything happens according to necessity, there is no chance.

The philosophical achievement of the atomists is the discovery of the atomic, the elementary. Whatever you are dealing with - with a physical phenomenon, with a theory - there is always an elemental element: an atom (in chemistry), a gene (in biology), material point(in mechanics), etc. The elementary appears as unchangeable, not requiring explanation.

The naivety in the ideas of the atomists is explained by the underdevelopment of their views. Having discovered atomicity in the world of events and phenomena, they were not yet able to give it a theoretical description. Therefore, it is not surprising that very soon ancient atomism encountered difficulties that it was not destined to overcome.

2 Schools of Socrates, Sophists and Plato

The views of Socrates have reached us mainly thanks to the beauty of both philosophy and artistically works of Plato, a student of Socrates. In this regard, it is appropriate to combine the names of Socrates and Plato. First about Socrates. Socrates differs in many ways from the already mentioned philosophers, who mainly dealt with nature, and therefore they are called natural philosophers. Natural philosophers sought to build a hierarchy in the world of events, to understand, for example, how the sky, earth, and stars were formed. Socrates also wants to understand the world, but in a fundamentally different manner, moving not from events to events, but from the general to events. In this regard, his discussion of beauty is typical.

Socrates says that he knows many beautiful things: a sword, a spear, a girl, a pot, and a mare. But each thing is beautiful in its own way, so beauty cannot be associated with one of the things. In that case, the other thing would no longer be beautiful. But all beautiful things have something in common - beauty as such is their general idea, eidos, or meaning.

Since the general can be discovered not by feelings, but by the mind, then Socrates attributed the general to the world of the mind and thereby laid the foundations for some reason, which is hated by many. Socrates, like no one else, grasped that there is a generic, a common thing. Starting with Socrates, humanity confidently began to master not only the world of events, but also the world of the generic, the general. He comes to the conclusion that the most main idea- this is the idea of good, it determines the suitability and usefulness of everything else, including justice. For Socrates, there is nothing higher than ethical. This idea will subsequently take its rightful place in the reflections of philosophers.

But what is ethically justified, virtuous? Socrates answers: virtue consists in knowing what is good and acting in accordance with this knowledge. He connects morality with reason, which gives reason to consider his ethics rationalistic.

But how to acquire knowledge? On this score, Socrates developed a certain method - dialectics, consisting of irony and the birth of thought and concept. The irony is that the exchange of opinions initially produces a negative result: “I know that I know nothing.” However, this does not end there; a search of opinions and their discussion allow us to reach new thoughts. Surprisingly, Socrates' dialectic has fully retained its meaning to this day. Exchange of opinions, dialogue, discussion are the most important means of obtaining new knowledge and understanding the extent of one’s own limitations.

Finally, it should be noted that Socrates is principled. For Socrates' alleged corruption of youth and the introduction of new deities, he was condemned. Having many opportunities to avoid execution, Socrates, nevertheless, based on the conviction that the laws of the country must be observed, that death applies to the mortal body, but not to the eternal soul (the soul is eternal like everything in common), took hemlock poison.

Sophists. Socrates argued a lot and from a principled standpoint with the sophists (V-IV centuries BC; sophist - teacher of wisdom). The Sophists and Socratics lived in a turbulent era: wars, the destruction of states, the transition from tyranny to slave-owning democracy and vice versa. In these conditions, I want to understand man as opposed to nature. The Sophists contrasted the artificial with nature and the natural. There is no natural thing in society, including traditions, customs, and religion. Here the right to exist is given only to that which is justified, proven, and of which it was possible to convince fellow tribesmen. Based on this, the sophists, these enlighteners of ancient Greek society, paid close attention problems of language and logic. In their speeches, the sophists sought to be both eloquent and logical. They understood perfectly well that correct and convincing speech is a matter of the “master of names” and logic.

The initial interest of the Sophists in society, in man, was reflected in the position of Protagoras: “Man is the measure of all things: those that exist, that they exist, those that do not exist, that they do not exist.” If there were no words after the colon and the sentence was limited to the statement that “man is the measure of all things,” then we would be dealing with the principle of humanism: a person in his actions proceeds from his own interests. But Protagoras insists on more: man turns out to be even the measure of the very existence of things. We are talking about the relativity of everything that exists, including the relativity of knowledge. Protagoras's thought is complex, but it has often been understood in a simplified form: as each thing seems to me, that is how it is. Naturally, from the point of view of modern science, such reasoning is naive; the arbitrariness of subjective assessment is not recognized in science; to avoid it, there are many ways, such as measurement. One is cold, the other is hot, and a thermometer is in place here to determine the true air temperature. However, Protagoras' thought is quite unusual: sensation really cannot be mistaken - but in what sense? The fact is that the cold must be warmed, the sick must be cured. Protagoras translates the problem into the practical sphere. This reveals the dignity of his philosophical attitude; it protects against oblivion of real life, which, as we know, is by no means uncommon.

But is it possible to agree that all judgments and sensations are equally true? Hardly. It becomes obvious that Protagoras did not avoid the extremes of relativism - the doctrine of the conditionality and relativity of human knowledge.

Of course, not all sophists were equally sophisticated masters in polemics; some of them gave reason to understand sophistry in the bad sense of the word, as a way of constructing false conclusions and not without a selfish goal. We cite the ancient sophism “Horned”: “What you have not lost, you have; you have not lost the horns, therefore, you have them.”

Plato. About Plato's ideas. Anyone who knows even very little about philosophy, nevertheless, must have heard the name of Plato, an outstanding thinker of antiquity. Plato seeks to develop Socratic ideas. Things are not considered only in their seemingly so familiar empirical existence. For every thing, its meaning is fixed, an idea, which, as it turns out, is the same for every thing of a given class of things and is designated by one name. There are many horses, dwarf and normal, piebald and black, but they all have the same meaning - equineness. Accordingly, we can talk about the beautiful in general, the good in general, the green in general, the house in general. Plato is convinced that it is impossible to do without turning to ideas, for this is the only way to overcome the diversity and inexhaustibility of the sensory-empirical world.

But if, along with individual things, there are also ideas, each of which belongs to a specific class of things, then, naturally, the question arises about the relationship of the one (idea) with the many. How do thing and idea relate to each other? Plato views this connection in two ways: as a transition from things to an idea and as a transition from an idea to things. He understands that the idea and the thing are somehow involved in each other. But, Plato argues, the degree of their involvement can reach different levels of perfection. Among many horses, we can easily find both more and less perfect ones. The closest thing to the idea of equineness is the most perfect horse. Then it turns out that within the framework of the relationship thing - idea - idea is the limit of the formation of a thing; within the framework of the relationship between an idea and a thing, an idea is a generative model of the class of things to which it is involved.

Thought and word are the prerogatives of man. Ideas exist without a person. Ideas are objective. Plato is an objective idealist, the most prominent representative of objective idealism. The general exists, and in the person of Plato, objective idealism has a great merit for humanity. Meanwhile, the general (idea) and the individual (thing) are so closely involved in each other that there is no real mechanism for the transition from one to the other.

Plato's cosmology. Plato dreamed of creating a comprehensive concept of the world. Well aware of the power of the apparatus of ideas he created, he sought to develop an idea of both the Cosmos and society. It is very significant how Plato uses his concept of ideas in this connection, modestly noting that he claims only to have a “plausible opinion.” Plato gives a cosmic picture of the world in the dialogue Timaeus.

The world soul in its initial state is divided into elements - fire, air, earth. According to the harmonic mathematical relationships, God gave the Cosmos the most perfect form - the shape of a sphere. At the center of the Cosmos is the Earth. The orbits of planets and stars obey harmonic mathematical relationships. God the demiurge also creates living beings.

So, Cosmos is a living being endowed with intelligence. The structure of the world is as follows: divine mind (demiurge), world soul and the world body. Everything that happens, temporary, as well as time itself, is an image of the eternal, ideas.

Plato's picture of the Cosmos summed up the natural philosophy of nature in the 4th century. BC For many centuries, at least until the Renaissance, this picture of the world stimulated philosophical and private scientific research.

In a number of respects, Plato's picture of the world does not stand up to criticism. It is speculative, invented, and does not correspond to modern scientific data. But here’s what’s surprising: even taking all this into account, it would be very reckless to hand it over to the archives. The fact is that not everyone has access to scientific data, especially in some generalized, systematized form. Plato was a great taxonomist; his picture of the Cosmos is simple and understandable in its own way to many. It is unusually figurative: the Cosmos is animated, harmonious, in it the divine mind is encountered at every step. For these and other reasons, Plato’s picture of the Cosmos has its supporters to this day. We also see justification for this position in the fact that in a hidden, undeveloped form it contains potential that can be used productively in our days. Plato's Timaeus is a myth, but a special myth, constructed with logical and aesthetic grace. This is not only a significant philosophical, but also an artistic work.

Plato's teaching about society. In thinking about society, Plato again seeks to use the concept of ideas. The diversity of human needs and the impossibility of satisfying them alone is an incentive for the creation of a state. According to Plato, the greatest good is justice. Injustice is evil. He attributes the latter to the following types of government: timocracy (the power of the ambitious), oligarchy (the power of the rich), tyranny and democracy, accompanied by arbitrariness and anarchy.

Plato “deduces” a just state structure from three parts of the soul: rational, affective and concupiscible. Some are reasonable, wise, they are capable and, therefore, should rule the state. Others are affective, courageous, destined to be strategists, military leaders, warriors. Still others, who have predominantly a lustful soul, are reserved; they need to be artisans and farmers. So, there are three classes: rulers; strategists; farmers and artisans. Further, Plato gives a lot of specific recipes, for example, what should be taught to whom and how to educate him, he proposes to deprive guards of their property, establish for them the community of wives and children, and introduces various kinds of regulations (sometimes petty). Literature is subject to strict censorship, everything that can discredit the idea of virtue. In the afterlife - and the human soul as an idea continues to exist even after his death - bliss awaits the virtuous, and terrible torment awaits the vicious.

Plato begins with an idea, then he proceeds from an ideal. All the smartest authors do the same thing, using ideas about ideas and ideals. Plato's ideal is justice. The ideological basis of Plato's thoughts deserves the highest praise; it is impossible to imagine modern man without it.

Plato's ethics. Plato was able to identify many of the most pressing philosophical problems. One of them concerns the relationship between the concept of ideas and ethics. At the top of the hierarchy of Socratic and Platonic ideas is the idea of good. But why exactly the idea of good, and not the idea, for example, of beauty or truth? Plato argues in this way: “... that which gives truth to knowable things, and endows a person with the ability to know, then you consider the idea of good, the cause of knowledge and the knowability of truth. No matter how beautiful both are - knowledge and truth - but if you will consider the idea of good as something even more beautiful, you will be right.” Good manifests itself in various ideas: both in the idea of beauty and in the idea of truth. In other words, Plato places the ethical (i.e., the idea of good) above the aesthetic (idea of beauty) and scientific-cognitive (idea of truth). Plato is well aware that the ethical, aesthetic, cognitive, and political are somehow related to each other, one determines the other. He, being consistent in his reasoning, “loads” each idea with moral content.

3 Aristotle

Aristotle, along with Plato, his teacher, is the greatest ancient Greek philosopher. In a number of respects, Aristotle appears to be a decisive opponent of Plato. In essence, he continues the work of his teacher. Aristotle goes into more detail than Plato into the intricacies of various kinds of situations. He is more concrete, more empirical than Plato, he is truly interested in the individual, the given in life.

Aristotle calls an original individual being a substance. This is a being that is not capable of being in another being, it exists in itself. According to Aristotle, individual being is a combination of matter and eidos (form). Matter is the possibility of being and at the same time a certain substrate. You can make a ball, a statue out of copper, i.e. like matter copper is the possibility of a ball and a statue. In relation to a separate object, the essence is always the form (spherical shape in relation to the copper ball). The form is expressed by the concept. Thus, the concept of a ball is valid even when a ball has not yet been made from copper. When matter is formed, then there is no matter without form, just as there is no form without matter. It turns out that eidos - form - is both the essence of a separate, individual object, and what is covered by this concept. Aristotle stands at the foundations of modern scientific style thinking. By the way, when a modern person speaks and thinks about essence, he owes his rationalistic attitude precisely to Aristotle.

Every thing has four causes: essence (form), matter (substrate), action (start of movement) and purpose ("that for which"). But both the efficient cause and the target cause are determined by eidos, form. Eidos determines the transition from matter-thingness to reality; this is the main dynamic and semantic content of a thing. Here we are dealing, perhaps, with the main substantive aspect of Aristotelianism, the central principle of which is the formation and manifestation of essence, primary attention to the dynamics of processes, movement, change and what is connected with this, in particular to the problem of time.

There is a whole hierarchy of things (thing = matter + form), from inorganic objects to plants, living organisms and humans (a person’s eidos is his soul). In this hierarchical chain, the extreme links are of particular interest. By the way, the beginning and end of any process usually have special meaning.

The concept of the prime mover mind was the logical final link of the ideas developed by Aristotle about the unity of matter and eidos. Aristotle calls the prime mover mind god. But this, of course, is not the personified Christian God. Subsequently, centuries later, Christian theologians would be interested in Aristotelian views. Aristotle’s possibilistically dynamic understanding of everything that exists determined a whole series very fruitful approaches to solving certain problems, in particular to the problem of space and time. Aristotle considered them following movement, and not simply as independent substances. Space acts as a collection of places, each place belongs to some thing. Time is a number of motion; like a number, it is the same for different movements.

Logic and methodology. In the works of Aristotle, logic and categorical thinking in general, i.e., reached significant perfection. conceptual, analysis. Many modern researchers believe that the most important thing in logic was done by Aristotle.

Aristotle examines in great detail a number of categories, each of which appears in him in a threefold form: 1) as a kind of being; 2) as a form of thought; 3) as a statement. The categories that Aristotle operates with particular skill are the following: essence, property, relationship, quantity and quality, movement (action), space and time. But Aristotle operates not only with individual categories, he analyzes statements, the relationships between which are determined by the three famous laws of formal logic.

The first law of logic is the law of identity (A is A), i.e. the concept must be used in the same meaning. The second law of logic is the law of excluded contradiction (A is not non-A). The third law of logic is the law of the excluded middle (A or not-A is true, “there is no third given”).

Based on the laws of logic, Aristotle builds the doctrine of syllogism. A syllogism cannot be identified with proof in general.

Aristotle very clearly reveals the content of the famous Socratic dialogical method. The dialogue contains: 1) posing the question; 2) a strategy for asking questions and getting answers to them; 3) correct construction of inferences.

Society. Ethics. In his teaching about society, Aristotle is more specific and far-sighted than Plato; together with the latter, he believes that the meaning of life is not in pleasure, as the hedonists believed, but in the most perfect goals and happiness, in the implementation of virtues. But contrary to Plato, the good must be achievable, and not an otherworldly ideal. The goal of man is to become a virtuous being, not a vicious one. Virtues are acquired qualities, among them the most important are wisdom, prudence, courage, generosity, generosity. Justice is the harmonious combination of all virtues. Virtues can and should be learned. They act as a middle ground, a compromise of a prudent Man: “nothing too much...”. Generosity is the mean between vanity and cowardice, courage is the mean between reckless courage and cowardice, generosity is the mean between wastefulness and stinginess. Aristotle defines ethics in general as practical philosophy.

Aristotle divides forms of government into correct (the general benefit is achieved) and incorrect (meaning only the benefit for some).

Regular forms: monarchy, aristocracy, polity

Irregular forms taking into account the number of rulers: one – tyranny; rich minority - oligarchy; majority - democracy

Aristotle associates a certain state structure with principles. The principle of aristocracy is virtue, the principle of oligarchy is wealth, the principle of democracy is freedom and poverty, including spiritual poverty.

Aristotle actually summed up the development of classical ancient Greek philosophy. He created a very differentiated system of knowledge, the development of which continues to this day.

4 Philosophy of early Hellenism (Stoicism, Epicureanism, skepticism)

Let's consider the three main philosophical movements of early Hellenism: Stoicism, Epicureanism, and skepticism. Regarding them, a brilliant expert on ancient philosophy. A.F. Losev argued that they were nothing more than a subjective variety, according to the pre-Socratic theory material elements(fire first of all), the philosophy of Democritus and the philosophy of Heraclitus: the theory of fire - stoicism, ancient atomism - Epicureanism, the philosophy of fluidity of Heraclitus - skepticism.

Stoicism. As a philosophical movement, Stoicism existed from the 3rd century. BC until the 3rd century AD The main representatives of early Stoicism were Zeno of Citium, Cleanthes and Chrysippus. Later, Plutarch, Cicero, Seneca, and Marcus Aurelius became famous as Stoics.

The Stoics believed that the body of the world was composed of fire, air, earth and water. The soul of the world is a fiery and airy pneuma, a kind of all-penetrating breath. According to a long ancient tradition, fire was considered by the Stoics to be the main element; of all the elements it is the most pervasive and vital. Thanks to this, the entire Cosmos, including man, is a single fiery organism with its own laws (logos) and fluidity. The main question for the Stoics is to determine the place of man in the Cosmos.

Having carefully thought through the situation, the Stoics came to the conviction that the laws of existence are beyond the control of man, man is subject to fate, fate. There is no escape from fate; reality must be accepted as it is, with all its fluidity of bodily properties, which ensures the diversity of human life. Fate and fate can be hated, but a stoic is more inclined to love it, receiving rest within the framework of what is available.

Stoics strive to discover the meaning of life. They considered the essence of the subjective to be the Word, its semantic meaning (lekton). Lecton - meaning - is above all positive and negative judgments; we are talking about judgment in general. Lecton is carried out in inner life person, creating a state of ataraxia, i.e. peace of mind, equanimity. The Stoic is by no means indifferent to everything that happens; on the contrary, he treats everything with maximum attention and interest. But he still understands the world, its logos, law in a certain way and, in full accordance with it, maintains peace of mind. So, the main points of the Stoic picture of the world are as follows:

1) Cosmos is a fiery organism;

2) man exists within the framework of cosmic laws, hence his fatalism, destiny, and peculiar love for both;

3) the meaning of the world and man - lekton, the significance of the word, which is neutral to both the mental and the physical;

4) understanding the world inevitably leads to a state of ataraxia, dispassion;

5) not only an individual person, but people as a whole constitute an inseparable unity with the Cosmos; The cosmos can and should be considered both as God and as a world state (thus the idea of pantheism (nature is God) and the idea of human equality are developed).

Already the early Stoics identified a number of deepest philosophical problems. If a person is subject to various kinds of laws, physical, biological, social, then to what extent is he free? How should he deal with everything that limits him? In order to somehow cope with these issues, it is necessary and useful to go through the school of Stoic thought.

Epicureanism. The largest representatives of Epicureanism are Epicurus himself and Lucretius Carus. Epicureanism as a philosophical movement existed at the same historical time as Stoicism - this is the period of the 5th-6th centuries at the turn of the old and new era. Like the Stoics, the Epicureans raise, first of all, issues of structure and personal comfort. The fire-like nature of the soul is a common idea among the Stoics and Epicureans, but the Stoics see some meaning behind it, and the Epicureans see the basis of sensations. For the Stoics, in the foreground is reason in accordance with nature, and for the Epicureans, sensation in accordance with nature is in the foreground. The sensory world is what is of main interest to the Epicureans. Hence the basic ethical principle of the Epicureans is pleasure. The doctrine that puts pleasure at the forefront is called hedonism. The Epicureans did not understand the content of the feeling of pleasure in a simplified way, and certainly not in a vulgar spirit. In Epicurus we are talking about noble tranquility, balanced pleasure, if you like.

For the Epicureans, the sensory world is the present reality. The world of sensuality is unusually changeable and multiple. There are ultimate forms of feelings, sensory atoms, or, in other words, atoms not in themselves, but in the world of feelings. Epicurus endows atoms with spontaneity, “free will.” Atoms move along curves, intertwining and unraveling. The idea of stoic rock is coming to an end.

The Epicurean does not have any master over him, there is no need, he has free will. He can retire, indulge in his own pleasures, and immerse himself in himself. The Epicurean is not afraid of death: “As long as we exist, there is no death; when death exists, we are no more.” Life is the main pleasure with its beginning and even its end. (Dying, Epicurus took a warm bath and asked to bring him wine.)

Man consists of atoms, which provide him with a wealth of sensations in the world, where he can always find a comfortable abode for himself, refusing active activity and the desire to reorganize the world. The Epicurean treats the life world completely disinterestedly and at the same time strives to merge with it. If we take the qualities of the Epicurean sage to their absolute extreme, we get an idea of the gods. They also consist of atoms, but not decaying atoms, and therefore the gods are immortal. The gods are blessed; they have no need to interfere in the affairs of people and the universe. Yes, this would not give any positive result, because in a world where there is free will, there are no and cannot be sustainable, purposeful actions. Therefore, the gods have nothing to do on Earth; Epicurus places them in interworldly space, where they rush around. But Epicurus does not deny the worship of God (he himself visited the temple). By honoring the gods, man himself strengthens himself in the correctness of his own self-elimination from active practical life along the paths of Epicurean ideas. We list the main ones:

1) everything consists of atoms that can spontaneously deviate from straight trajectories;

2) a person consists of atoms, which provides him with a wealth of feelings and pleasures;

3) the world of feelings is not illusory, it is the main content of the human, everything else, including the ideal-mental, is “closed” to sensory life;

4) the gods are indifferent to human affairs (this, they say, is evidenced by the presence of evil in the world).

5) for happy life a person needs three main components: the absence of bodily suffering (aponia), equanimity of the soul (ataraxia), friendship (as an alternative to political and other confrontations).

Skepticism. Skepticism is a characteristic feature of all ancient philosophy; As an independent philosophical direction, it functions during the period of relevance of Stoicism and Epicureanism. Largest representatives- Pyrrho and Sextus Empiricus.

The ancient skeptic rejected the knowability of life. To maintain inner peace, a person needs to know a lot from philosophy, but not in order to deny something or, conversely, affirm something (every statement is a negation, and, conversely, every negation is an affirmation). The ancient skeptic is by no means a nihilist; he lives as he wants, fundamentally avoiding the need to evaluate anything. The skeptic is in constant philosophical search, but he is convinced that true knowledge is, in principle, unattainable. Being appears in all the diversity of its fluidity (remember Heraclitus): there seems to be something definite, but it immediately disappears. In this regard, the skeptic points to time itself, it exists, but it is not there, you cannot “grasp” it. There is no stable meaning at all, everything is fluid, so live the way you want, accept life in its immediate reality. One who has known a lot cannot adhere to strictly unambiguous opinions. A skeptic can be neither a judge nor a lawyer. The skeptic Carneades, sent to Rome to petition for the abolition of the tax, spoke before the public one day in favor of the tax, another day against the tax. It is better for the skeptical sage to remain silent. His silence is a philosophical answer to the questions put to him. Let us list the main provisions of ancient skepticism:

1) the world is fluid, it has no meaning and no clear definition;

2) every affirmation is also a negation, every “yes” is also a “no”; the true philosophy of skepticism is silence;

3) follow the “world of phenomena”, maintain inner peace.

5. Neoplatonism

The basic principles of Neoplatonism were developed by Plotinus, who lived in Rome in adulthood. Below, when presenting the content of Neoplatonism, mainly the ideas of Plotinus are used.

Neoplatonists sought to provide a philosophical picture of everything that exists, including the Cosmos as a whole. It is impossible to understand the life of a subject outside the Cosmos, just as it is impossible to understand the life of the Cosmos without a subject. The existing is arranged hierarchically: the One – Good, Mind, Soul, Matter. The highest place in the hierarchy belongs to the One-Good.

The soul produces all living beings. Everything that moves forms the Cosmos. The lowest form of existence is matter. By itself, it is not active, it is inert, it is a receptive of possible forms and meaning.

The main task of a person is to deeply think through and feel his place in the structural hierarchy of existence. Good (Good) comes from above, from the One, evil - from below, from matter. Evil is not a thing; it has nothing to do with Good. A person can avoid evil to the extent that he manages to climb the ladder of the immaterial: Soul-Mind-United. The ladder of Soul-Mind-Unity corresponds to the sequence feeling - thought - ecstasy. Here, of course, attention is drawn to ecstasy, which stands above thought. But ecstasy, it should be noted, includes all the richness of the mental and sensory.

Neoplatonists see harmony and beauty everywhere; the One Good is actually responsible for them. As for the life of people, it also, in principle, cannot contradict universal harmony. People are actors; they only carry out, each in their own way, the script that is laid down in the World Mind. Neoplatonism was able to provide a rather synthetic philosophical picture of contemporary ancient society. This was the last flowering of ancient philosophy.

Conclusion

The field of problematic issues in the philosophy of antiquity was constantly expanding. Their development became more and more detailed and in-depth. It can be concluded that characteristic features ancient philosophy are as follows.

1. Ancient philosophy is syncretic, which means that it is characterized by greater unity and indivisibility of the most important problems than subsequent types of philosophizing. The ancient philosopher, as a rule, extended ethical categories to the entire Cosmos.

2. Ancient philosophy is cosmocentric: its horizons always cover the entire Cosmos, including the human world. This means that it was the ancient philosophers who developed the most universal categories.

3. Ancient philosophy comes from the Cosmos, sensual and intelligible. Unlike medieval philosophy, it does not put the idea of God in first place. However, Cosmos in ancient philosophy is often considered an absolute deity (not a person); this means that ancient philosophy is pantheistic.

4. Ancient philosophy achieved a lot at the conceptual level - the concept of Plato’s ideas, the concept of form (eidos) of Aristotle, the concept of the meaning of a word (lekton) of the Stoics. However, she knows almost no laws. The logic of antiquity is predominantly the logic of common names and concepts. However, in Aristotle’s logic the logic of propositions is also considered very meaningfully, but again at a level characteristic of the era of antiquity.

5. The ethics of antiquity is primarily an ethics of virtues, and not an ethics of duty and values. Ancient philosophers characterized man mainly as endowed with virtues and vices. They reached extraordinary heights in developing virtue ethics.

6. Noteworthy is the amazing ability of ancient philosophers to find answers to the cardinal questions of existence. Ancient philosophy is truly functional, it is designed to help people in their lives. Ancient philosophers sought to find a path to happiness for their contemporaries. Ancient philosophy has not sunk into history; it has retained its significance to this day and awaits new researchers.

List of used literature.

1. Aristotle. Works in four volumes. Volume 1-4. Academy of Sciences of the USSR. Institute of Philosophy. Publishing house "Mysl", Moscow, 1976-1984.

2. V.A.Kanke. Philosophy. Historical and systematic course. "Logos", M., 2001.

3. Plato. Theaetetus. State socio-economic publishing house. Moscow-Leningrad, 1936.

4. Plato. Feast. Publishing house "Mysl", Moscow, 1975.

5. V. Asmus. Plato. Publishing house "Mysl", Moscow, 1975.

6. T. Goncharova. Euripides. Series “Life wonderful people" Publishing house "Young Guard", M., 1984.

7. Life of wonderful people. Biographical library of F. Pavlenkov. "Lio Editor", St. Petersburg 1995.

8. History of philosophy. Tutorial for universities, edited by V.M. Mapelman and E.M. Penkov. Publishing house "PRIOR" Moscow 1997.

9. Soviet encyclopedic dictionary. Editor-in-Chief A.M. Prokhorov. Fourth edition. " Soviet encyclopedia" M., 1989.

10. Philosophical Dictionary. Edited by I.T. Frolov. Fifth edition. Moscow, Publishing House of Political Literature, 1987.