Magnificent in style, the book covers a wide range of issues - from a new, Nesmelov proof of the existence of God to the problem of the salvation of mankind.

The two-volume work "The Science of Man" by a modest professor of the Kazan Theological Academy in significance and content has outgrown the framework of academic theology and has become an outstanding phenomenon of Russian religious and philosophical thought.

ru http://predanie.ru/lib/ ExportToFB21, FictionBook Editor Release 2.6 15.09.2011 OOoFBTools-2011-9-15-14-42-1-355 1.0

HUMAN SCIENCE

(in two volumes)

Volume I. EXPERIENCE OF PSYCHOLOGICAL HISTORY AND CRITICISM OF THE BASIC QUESTIONS OF LIFE

Preface

An unknown genius once wrote on the pediment of the Delphic temple: γνωθι σεαυτον ("know thyself"), and the genius later explained to the Greeks the mysterious meaning of this inscription. Socrates was the first to see in it the deepest riddle about man and the first to guess that the solution of this riddle should contain the fullness of human wisdom. He became an ardent preacher of his discovery, speaking of it wherever he could, and to all who would listen to it. From his conversations the Greeks heard that he, the wisest of the Athenians, according to the judgment of the oracle, resolutely rejected the justice of this judgment in regard to himself and considered himself a naked ignoramus; because, according to his deep conviction, until the great riddle about man himself is solved, all science and all knowledge can only serve as an expression of scientific ignorance. But among all other ignorant scholars, Socrates nevertheless stood out sharply in that he fully understood what true wisdom consisted in, and with love strove to achieve it. This was such an outstanding feature in him that he considered it possible to determine his position in Athenian society through it. Unlike all other teachers, who proudly considered themselves true sages (σοφιστης), he appropriated to himself the modest title of a lover of wisdom (φιλοσοφος) and was the first to introduce the word φιλοσοφια with the meaning of a special term.

Socrates thought that the good of man lies in man himself and is precisely man himself in his humanity. If people seek good outside themselves, then they are mistaken, and if they recognize the means of life as its ultimate goal, then they are deceived. The whole world is a complete insignificance in comparison with man, because no treasures of the world can buy that which constitutes the essence of man, cannot buy the living human spirit. If only people would clearly realize this immutable truth, they would certainly try to reveal it in their activities, and in this revelation they would undoubtedly see that what is really valuable in the world is brought into it only by people themselves. The high pleasure of such a consciousness would inevitably compel them to strive for the full and all-round development of that which is peculiar to man according to his humanity, and only that which is true, good, and beautiful is peculiar to him. In the striving for the knowledge and realization of these perfections lies true philosophy, and the real knowledge and realization of them in life constitutes true wisdom.

On the basis of such reflections, philosophy, of course, could in no case depart from the practice of life, because this practice itself served only as a true manifestation of the philosophical spirit. Hence, for the ancient thinker, to be a philosopher and to lead a virtuous life were one and the same thing, and therefore he wanted to know only the philosophy of life and unconditionally rejected any philosophy of any clever words. He so plainly declared this, that the word of a philosopher who does not intend to teach people good and remove them from evil is vain. It is clear that with such an understanding of philosophy, it could not claim the significance of a positive science, because it could not give man any positive knowledge. Its whole task was to explain to man himself, to reveal the meaning of his life and to create a living definition of his activity. By virtue of this task, philosophy naturally revolved more in the sphere of ideals than in the sphere of facts, and therefore was rather the expression of moral consciousness than of scientific consciousness. Completely absorbed in the burning questions of life, many ancient thinkers did not even understand the intrinsic value of scientific knowledge and, since they did not find in it a solution to their own problems, they treated them more or less negatively. Even about Socrates there is information that he treated the natural philosophical speculations of his predecessors and contemporaries with obvious disdain. But Socrates still had a special motive for this neglect. In his youth he had listened to many scholars, and they had taught him a great deal, but not at all what he had sought from them, and not at all in such a way that their reasoning could be regarded not as idle chatter, but as an expression of real knowledge. Therefore, it was quite natural for Socrates that he did not find any meaning in ontology, and in relation to Socrates there is nothing surprising that he eliminated ontological questions from the field of human knowledge. His disciples went in this direction much further than their teacher. It is known that the cynical philosophers recognized only ethics as the only science and unconditionally rejected any other science as completely useless for virtue. It is known that the head of the Cyrenaics, Aristippus, treated mathematics with the same contempt, and all on the same ground that it does not tell man about good and evil, and, consequently, does not mean and cannot teach man to be happy.