Ancient understanding of the place of man in society. Abstract on the topic "ancient culture man of the era of antiquity"
- Culture and civilization - page 2
- Culture and civilization - page 3
- Typology of cultures and civilizations - page 2
- Typology of cultures and civilizations - page 3
- General characteristics of primitiveness
- Periodization of primitive history
- Material culture and social relations
- spiritual culture
- The emergence of mythology, art and scientific knowledge
- Formation of religious ideas
- The East as a sociocultural and civilizational phenomenon
- Pre-Axial Cultures of the Ancient East
- Early state in the East
- Art culture
- Culture of Ancient India
- Worldview and religious beliefs
- Art culture
- Culture of Ancient China
- Level of development of material civilization
- The state and the genesis of social ties
- Worldview and religious beliefs
- Art culture
- General characteristics and main stages of development
- Antique polis as a unique phenomenon
- Art culture
- General characteristics of the European Middle Ages
- Material culture, economy and living conditions in the Middle Ages
- Social and political systems of the Middle Ages
- Medieval pictures of the world, value systems, human ideals
- Medieval pictures of the world, value systems, human ideals - page 2
- Medieval pictures of the world, value systems, human ideals - page 3
- Artistic culture and art of the Middle Ages
- Artistic culture and art of the Middle Ages - page 2
- General characteristics of the Arab-Muslim civilization
- Economic development
- Socio-political relations
- Features of Islam as a world religion
- Art culture
- Artistic culture - page 2
- Art culture - page 3
- Byzantine picture of the world
- General characteristics of Byzantine civilization
- Social and political systems of Byzantium
- Byzantine picture of the world
- Byzantine picture of the world - page 2
- Artistic culture and art of Byzantium
- Artistic culture and art of Byzantium - page 2
- General characteristics of medieval Russia
- Economy. Social class structure
- Economy. Social class structure - page 2
- Evolution of the political system
- The evolution of the political system - page 2
- The evolution of the political system - page 3
- The value system of medieval Russia. spiritual culture
- The value system of medieval Russia. Spiritual culture - page 2
- The value system of medieval Russia. Spiritual culture - page 3
- The value system of medieval Russia. Spiritual culture - page 4
- Artistic culture and art
- Artistic culture and art - page 2
- Art culture and art - page 3
- Artistic culture and art - page 4
- The content of the concept and periodization of the era
- Economic, social and political background of the European Renaissance
- Changes in the mindset of citizens
- Renaissance content
- Humanism - the ideology of the Renaissance
- Titanism and its "reverse" side
- Renaissance art
- General characteristics of the New Age
- The way of life and material civilization of modern times
- Social and political systems of modern times
- Pictures of the world of modern times
- Artistic styles in the art of modern times
- General information
- Characteristics of the main stages
- Economy. social composition. The evolution of the political system
- The social composition of Russian society
- The evolution of the political system
- The value system of Russian society
- The value system of Russian society - page 2
- The evolution of spiritual culture
- Correlation between provincial and metropolitan culture
- Culture of the Don Cossacks
- The development of socio-political thought and the awakening of civic consciousness
- The emergence of protective, liberal and socialist traditions
- Two lines in the history of Russian culture of the XIX century.
- The role of literature in the spiritual life of Russian society
- Artistic culture of modern times
- Artistic culture of modern times - page 2
- Artistic culture of modern times - page 3
- General characteristics of the period
- The choice of the path of social development. Programs of political parties and movements
- Liberal Alternative to Russia's Transformation
- Social-Democratic Alternative to the Transformation of Russia
- Reassessment of the traditional system of values in the public mind
- Silver Age - the renaissance of Russian culture
- General characteristics of the period
- General characteristics of the period - page 2
- The evolution of the value system in Western culture of the XX century.
- The main trends in the development of Western art
- Problems of the history of Soviet society and culture
- The formation of the Soviet system (1917–1930s)
- Economy
- social structure. public consciousness
- culture
- Soviet society during the years of war and peace. Crisis and collapse of the Soviet system (40-80s)
- Ideology. Political system
- Economic development of Soviet society
- Social relations. public consciousness. System of values
- Cultural life
- Political and socio-economic development of modern Russia
- Political and socio-economic development of modern Russia - page 2
- Public consciousness in the 90s: the main development trends
- Public consciousness in the 90s: the main development trends - page 2
- Cultural development
Man's worldview in ancient society
The Greek religion over the long period of its existence has undergone significant changes, taking on various forms, but has never been frozen and dogmatic. With its splendor, splendor and brilliance, it resembled folklore, which, in fact, it was. Such were the Greek myths, reflecting the worldview of ancient man.
Greek mythology is a reflection of nature, the surrounding world in sensually concrete images and in the form of animated beings that are thought to be quite real. The world-cosmos was understood by the ancient Greeks as an animated spherical body inhabited by people and gods.
Initially, the Greeks, like other peoples, inhabited the surrounding nature with spirits and deities that had a half-animal appearance: sirens - half-women, half-birds; Nereids - half-fish; satyrs covered with wool, with goat legs, horns and tail; centaurs - half-horses, etc.
Like other agricultural peoples, the Greeks revered the female deities of earthly fertility - Gaia, Demeter, Kore. The latter two were called, respectively, "mother of bread" and "girl of grain."
An important role was played by the patriarchal cult of ancestors. There were myths about the marriages of gods with earthly women, whose descendants became the founders of noble families. Shrines and temples were built in their honor.
Roman religion, too, was at an early stage permeated with belief in spirits and household deities. Good spirits were called mans, evil spirits were called lemurs. The hearth was guarded by the Lares and the Penates, and the door of the dwelling was guarded by the two-faced Janus, facing both the past and the future.
During the heyday of the Greek polis, a common Greek Olympic religion appeared, named after Mount Olympus, where, according to myth, the main gods lived on the snowy peak: Zeus, Hera, Apollo, Aphrodite, etc. During the period of the Roman Republic, the Greek Olympian gods were identified with the Roman gods and named after them: Zeus - Jupiter, Hera - Juno, Athena - Minerva, Aphrodite - Venus, Hermes - Mercury, etc. Of all the gods, the Romans singled out three main ones - Jupiter, Juno and Minerva.
The Olympic gods, in contrast to the despotic, mysterious ("chthonic") eastern gods, were considered as beings, although powerful, but close and understandable to man. They have everything that is characteristic of people: the ability to eat and drink, love and hate, and also have physical disabilities (the god of blacksmithing Hephaestus is lame). Such anthropomorphism - the humanization of the gods - is inherent in the whole of the ancient worldview, ancient culture.
However, not all gods were humanized. The deity, not amenable to any humanization, is fate (Moira). As A. Bonnard, a Swiss Hellenistic scholar, notes, “Moira represents a principle that is placed above the freedom of people and gods and makes something out of the world that really personifies order, something ordered.” Such an idea is due to the fact that in the relationship between people and ancient gods, the leading role belongs to man. Although the gods follow the predestinations of fate, a person, making his choice, is responsible for his own actions.
The polis system brought up a special worldview among the Greeks. He taught them to appreciate the real possibilities and abilities of each person. It was they who were elevated to the highest principle: a free, harmoniously developed, beautiful in spirit and body citizen - such is the ideal of antiquity. In achieving the ideal, an important role was played by the combination of a sense of collectivism and an agonistic (competitive) principle in ancient Greek morality.
Agon, i.e. competitive beginning, affirms in Greek society the idea of winning a competition as the highest value, glorifying the winner and bringing him honor and respect. Initially, the agons were mass athletic competitions, and later turned into mass pan-Greek games and festivities. Such were the famous Olympic Games, arranged for the first time in 776 BC. in honor of Olympian Zeus and repeated every four years.
A variety of entertainment and spectacles is one of the characteristic features of ancient civilization. Initially, they were closely associated with religious rituals and festivities. This is how the ancient Greek theater arose. Athens in the 6th century BC. there was an annual national holiday - the Great Dionysius, during which scenes from myths were played out.
The Greek tragedy (“Song of the Goats”) arose from a dithyramb (choral song) sung by satyrs dressed in goat skins and depicting the cheerful companions of the god of wine Dionysus. Subsequently, three actors were added to the choir - this is how the theatrical performance arose.
Spectacle culture reached its greatest extent in Ancient Rome. Perhaps this was due to the fact that hedonistic tendencies in lifestyle prevailed in Roman society. "Bread and circuses" demanded the plebs, and the authorities gave him what he demanded. For the Roman nobility, spectacles served as the embodiment of the idea of glory and honors obtained in battle. Therefore, gladiatorial fights and circus games were so popular there.
The oldest and most crowded were the games in the Circus Maximus, which could accommodate up to 200,000 spectators. Equestrian competitions and animal persecution were also held here. Interest in bloody spectacles was inherent to the Romans and persisted throughout Roman history.
Gladiator fights were originally part of the Etruscan funerary ritual, and then acquired the character of a public spectacle, carefully prepared and well organized. They were distinguished by scope and mass character. So, Julius Caesar brought 500 pairs of gladiators to the arena, and subsequently the Roman emperors sent several tens of thousands of gladiators to the arena.
In such a peculiar way, they tried to gain popularity among the people and become famous. The desire for fame, social recognition was a kind of social mechanism for the formation of a new type of personality, as it encouraged a person to social innovation, the development of all his potentialities, internal resources.
Agon as a competitive beginning, as an impulse to various successful activities, contributed to the formation of new moral and ethical values: a person compared himself and his fellow citizens, took responsibility for the fullness of his being, learned to become a person, mastered new types of social behavior (for example, leadership).
It was on this that Greek education was built, the purpose of which was not to train a professional in any field, but to educate a full-fledged citizen, a person. The historical merit of the ancient Greeks, their contribution to European world culture is the creation of an institution of education aimed at educating the human in a person.
Greek philosophy served the same goals, which, together with science, it was in ancient Greece that it first separated from religion. If at an early stage of development - natural philosophy - the subject of interest for the Greeks was mainly nature, then later it became a person and his deeds.
Determining a person's place in the surrounding unstable world, restoring the unity of man and the cosmos, moral justification of people's actions (instead of traditional communal morality) - such is the range of problems that philosophers of the 5th-6th centuries dealt with. BC. At first the sophists and Socrates, then Plato, Aristotle and other prominent philosophers of antiquity were the spokesmen for these ideas. Therefore, the V-IV centuries. BC. considered the era of classical ancient Greek philosophy.
Unlike the Greek philosophers of classical times, Roman thinkers were more politically oriented in the form of developing theories about what a modern monarch should be like, and on ethics, designed to show how a person should live in conditions when there is an eternal, like space, Roman Empire. .
A significant achievement of ancient Roman thought was the creation of an independent science - jurisprudence, which includes a wide range of political and legal problems in the field of the general theory of state and law. Roman jurisprudence reached its highest development during the period of activity of prominent Roman lawyers - Salvius, Julian and Gaius. Gaia's Institutions was the first textbook in which legal norms were clearly stated and systematized. Among the authors who wrote on moral topics, Plutarch of Chaeronea and the emperor-philosopher Marcus Aurelius are more famous than others.
Stoicism was very popular in Rome, the most prominent representative of which was Seneca. Seneca can be called the Roman predecessor of Christianity, since he largely anticipated the religious teachings of Christianity, in particular in determining the nature and role of the human spirit, the concept of its immortality. He owns the idea of a great ideal community of God, which was later called the universal church. Seneca's formula "reclaim yourself for yourself" was the result of the loss of the former unity of the citizen and the civil community, the search for new values.
Under the conditions of the empire, when the polis became a cosmopolitan, individualism began to develop instead of collectivism, and cosmopolitanism began to develop instead of patriotism. The existence of large powers facilitated the migration from city to city, from one locality to another, and no patriotism prevented people from moving to another place if it was profitable.
The ideas of cosmopolitanism, human community existed throughout the entire Hellenistic period, and in the first centuries of our era coincided with the spread of Christianity in Rome. Christianity strengthened the feeling that a person does not belong to the narrow world of the polis, that he is left alone with something universal and absolute. Christianity brought new values, it proclaimed the equality of all before God, which was of particular importance for people thirsting for justice in the face of aggravated contradictions.
As a new religion, Christianity first appeared in the eastern provinces of the Roman Empire (Judea, Asia Minor, Egypt), and later in the western ones. At first, Roman Christians were subjected to severe persecution, since Christianity was a refuge for the poor and slaves, and with the penetration of Christianity into the environment of the highest nobility, it took an equal position with other religions. Subsequently, Christianity was proclaimed the state religion of the Roman Empire, which played a decisive role in its transformation into a world religion.
Antiquity (from Latin this word means "antiquity" - antiquus) is the era of two great civilizations - Ancient Greece and Rome.
Periodization of antiquity
Answering the question of what an ancient society is, you need to know in what era it existed and what periods this time was divided into.
The following periodization is generally accepted:
1. Early antiquity - the time of the birth of the Greek states.
2. Classical antiquity - the period of unity of Roman and Greek civilization.
3. Late Antiquity - the time of the collapse of the Roman Empire.
Considering the ancient society, one must take into account the fact that it is impossible to establish the exact time frame here. Greek civilization appeared before the Roman, and the Eastern existed for some time after the fall of the Western. It is believed that the era of antiquity is the time from the VIII century. BC e. according to the VI century. n. e., before the beginning of the Middle Ages.
The emergence of the first states
On the Balkan Peninsula in antiquity, there were several unsuccessful attempts to create states. It was a period of prehistory
2700-1400 BC e. - the time of the Minoan civilization. It existed in Crete and had a high level of development and culture. It was destroyed by a natural disaster (volcanic eruption that gave rise to a strong tsunami) and the Achaean Greeks who captured the island.
Around the 16th century BC. Mycenaean civilization arose in Greece. She dies in 1200-1100 BC. e. after the Dorians invaded. This time is also called the "Greek Dark Ages".
After the disappearance of the remains of the Mycenaean culture, the first period of antiquity begins. In time, it coincides with the end and formation of early class society.
The ancient Greek state was the primary civilization. It originates in the primitive system, and before it there was no previous experience of statehood. Therefore, ancient society experienced a strong influence of primitiveness. This was manifested, first of all, in the religious worldview. A person in this period was considered as the main feature of antiquity - an active position in relation to the world.
Life in ancient society: structure and classes
The first Greek states developed very actively. This was facilitated by the struggle between the peasants and the nobility, when the latter tried to convert the former into debt slavery. In many other ancient civilizations, this was done, but not in the Greek. Here, the demos not only managed to defend its freedom, but also achieved some political rights. Of course, this does not mean that society in the ancient world did not know slavery. Both ancient Greece and later Rome were
What is an ancient society and what is its structure? The main state formation of the ancient world was the policy, or city-state. Therefore, a society has developed here that is completely different from other countries. The community was its core. Everyone occupied his position in it. It was determined by the presence of civil status. The entire population was divided into three categories: full-fledged citizens, incomplete and disenfranchised. Civil status is the main achievement of ancient society. If in other countries the population lived within the strict limits of estates, then in Greece and Rome it was more important to have the status of a citizen. He allowed the demos to take part in the management of the policy on an equal footing with the nobility.
Roman society was somewhat different from Greek and had the following structure:
2. Free farmers and artisans. Columns were included in the same category of the population.
3. Merchants.
4. Military.
5. Slave owners. Here in the first place was the senatorial estate.
Science and culture of ancient society
The first scientific knowledge was obtained in ancient times, in the states of the East. This period is called pre-scientific. In the future, these teachings were developed in ancient Greece.
The science of ancient society is the emergence of the first scientific theories, basic concepts, treatises and communities. At this time, the formation and emergence of many modern sciences.
In its development, the science of antiquity has come a long way:
1. Early stage - VII-IV centuries. BC. This is the time of natural science and philosophy. The first scientists-philosophers were mainly interested in the problems of nature, as well as in the search for the fundamental principle of all living things.
2. Hellenic stage - it is characterized by the division of a single science into separate areas: logic, mathematics, physics, medicine. This time is considered the highest flowering of ancient science. Euclid, Aristotle, Archimedes, Democritus create their great works.
3. The Roman stage - the time of the decline of ancient science. Among the most important achievements of this period is the astronomy of Ptolemy.
The main success of the science of ancient times lies in the formation of separate directions, the creation of the first terminology and methods of cognition.
The philosophy of ancient society and its famous representatives
It arose in the 7th-5th centuries. BC e. in Greece and is divided into the following stages:
1. Naturphilosophy, or early classics. Philosophers of this time were primarily interested in questions of cosmology. Outstanding representatives: Thales, Pythagoras, Democritus.
2. Classics is the heyday of the time in which its most prominent representatives lived: Socrates, Plato, Euclid, Aristotle. Here, for the first time, questions of natural philosophy were replaced by an interest in the problem of good and evil, ethics.
3. Philosophy of Hellenism - at this time, the active development of philosophical thought begins under the influence of ancient Greek scientists. The most famous representatives: Seneca, Lucretius, Cicero, Plutarch. There are many directions of Epicureanism, Neoplatonism and Stoicism.
The influence of antiquity on modern culture
Ancient Greece and Rome are poetically called the cradle of modern civilization. Undoubtedly, ancient society had a tremendous impact on the development of other countries and peoples. Science, theater, sports competitions, comedy, drama, sculpture - not to list everything that the ancient world gave to modern man. This influence is still traced in the culture, life and language of many Romanesque peoples and inhabitants of the Mediterranean region.
State educational institution
higher professional education
"Siberian State Industrial University"
Department of Philosophy
The problem of man in ancient philosophy
Completed: student gr. ESR - 08
Katasheva Irina Vasilievna
Checked: K. and. D., Associate Professor Prostak S. L.
Novokuznetsk 2009
1. Introduction………………………………………………………… 3
2. Man as a microcosm in ancient philosophy……………. 4
3. The moral code of the ancient world………………………… 5
4. Fate as a problem of the ancient worldview……………….9
5. Conclusion……………………………………………………… 16
6. References……………………………………………… 18
Introduction
Ancient philosophy is a consistently developed philosophical thought and covers a period of more than a thousand years - from the end of the 7th century. BC. up to the 6th c. AD and contains theories created in Greece and Rome by thinkers of the past. Despite all the diversity of views of the thinkers of this period, ancient philosophy, at the same time, is something unified, uniquely original and extremely instructive. The problem of man in ancient philosophy is a multifaceted problem that does not have a common uniform formulation. Philosophers of antiquity, especially natural philosophers, considered man as an image of the cosmos, as a "small world", a microcosm. Beginning with Socrates, philosophers of antiquity considered man to be a dual being, consisting of a body and a soul. Plato correlated the soul with the idea, Aristotle considered the soul a form.
The purpose of this work is to consider the problem of man in ancient philosophy.
Tasks - to consider a person as a microcosm
- the moral code of the ancient world
– fate as a problem of the ancient worldview
Man as a microcosm in ancient philosophy
The problem of man was identified, albeit in an undeveloped form, already in the philosophy of the ancient world. It is known that in that era cosmocentrism dominated as a type of philosophical thinking. Everything that exists was considered as a single and vast Cosmos, and man was thought of as its organic part, as a "small Universe". He is, as it were, immersed in this Cosmos and lives according to its laws. It was assumed that man is not free, since the world around him is huge and mysterious, and often even hostile to man. The ideal existence of a person is to live nevertheless in harmony with this world, which is what true wisdom consists of.
The turn of philosophical thought to the theme of a separate (separated) person from the Cosmos is usually associated with the name of the Greek philosopher Socrates. Socrates, like some sophists, focuses on man. But man was considered by Socrates only as a moral being. Therefore, the philosophy of Socrates is an ethical anthropologism. Both mythology and physics were alien to the interests of Socrates. He believed that the interpreters of mythology work inefficiently. At the same time, Socrates was not interested in nature either. He used to say: "The terrain and the trees don't want to teach me anything, let alone the people in the city." Socrates urged a person to engage in in-depth knowledge of himself, revealing his moral position. The call "Know thyself!" became for Socrates the next motto after the statement: "I know that I know nothing." Both of them determined the essence of his philosophy. Eternal self-knowledge, the search for oneself in the world - this is the true meaning of human life. Later, Epicurus drew attention to the problem of human freedom and happiness. He believed that each person is able to choose his own trajectory of being, i.e. life path. The philosopher Diogenes proposed the topic of asceticism for reflection, by which he understood a very modest lifestyle, an attitude towards moderation in everything.
In ancient philosophy, mainly separate sides (aspects) of the problem of man were considered. Thus, Democritus resolved the issue of isolating a person from an animal-like state. Aristotle paid special attention to the social qualities of a person, describing him as a "political animal" with a rational soul. Plato is a conscious and consistent objective idealist. Plato outlined the theme of the relationship between the citizen and the state, revealed the social types of personality, defined a person as the embodiment of an immortal soul. The same topic was actively comprehended in ancient Chinese philosophy (Confucianism). In the philosophy of Indian Buddhism, the theme of human suffering and the search for ways to overcome them became the focus of attention. In almost all ancient philosophical thought, wisdom was discussed as the ability of a person to live in harmony with nature, the Cosmos. At this time (in the philosophy of Ancient Greece) the foundations of humanism were laid - an ideological trend that considers a person as a unique being, the highest value and goal of society. In general, ancient philosophy focused not so much on the inner spiritual world of man, but on his relationship with the outer world, with the Cosmos.
The moral code of the ancient state
Antiquity (ancient Greek and Roman class society of the 7th century BC - 5th century AD) is the spring of modern civilization, the main political and ethical ideas. Antique thought is addressed mainly to the problems of ethics, politics and economics. Ancient society evolved from patriarchal relations to a republican system and to a monarchy. Politically, this society was unstable. The political regimes presented a mixed picture. The institution of slavery served as the basis of ancient civilization, its material production, as well as the moral and intellectual development of free citizens. Aristotle identified a man with a statesman. The highest principle, according to Plato and Aristotle, is the good of the state. The value of the state also lies in the fact that it sets a goal for which it is generally worth living and engaging in specific activities.
Plato was the ideologist of the restoration of obsolete state forms on the basis of slaveholding relations, although in his utopia the social and political forms that actually existed underwent a peculiar and complex transformation.
The formation of ancient Greek slave-owning morality and polis consciousness is connected in the Constitutions of Lycurgus and Solon. Homer does not yet have the concept of law (nomos). The law of Nemesis (revenge, retribution), the old law of religious and political morality, is giving way to a civilized concept of justice (Dicke). Dike defeats Nemesis. She now sits next to Zeus, the supreme deity of the Greek pantheon, as his assistant and wise adviser. Slave-owning class morality (civil morality) is based on the ideas of law. The general ideas of morality and law are the ideas of justice and the public good. The unity of legal consciousness and the desire for moral perfection is noted.
Each ancient Greek city-polis had its own legislator or legendary founder who created certain public institutions. In Athens there were even two such legislators - Drakon and Solon, and in Sparta - Lycurgus.
Solon's laws are laws against poverty. They respond to the ost of social and property inequality. Poverty was very often proud (for example, Socrates and Diogenes), wealth was customary to despise. A prudent and virtuous husband should not seek wealth. According to polis morality, virtues are knowledge, health, beauty, prudence, courage, justice, shame, valor, pride, patriotism. According to Aristotle, wealth is not an end in itself. Moderate prosperity was considered the norm of material security in Athens, while in Sparta they imitated poverty and were proud of the low quality of life, which was compensated by moral values.
The laws of Draconta date back to the 7th century. BC. In Athens in 621 BC. for the first time, a record was made of the laws in force - the norms of customary law, as it looked in the 9th - 7th centuries. BC. despotism and the discipline of the law are opposed to the exclusive rights of the aristocracy. The excessive cruelty of these laws made them purely nominal, unenforceable in practice. They were supposed to inspire fear of punishment.
The Draconian laws against murder were never revised and after many years were incorporated unchanged into the Athenian law of 409-498. BC. They restrict the right of blood feud (talion) - the ideology and custom of an earlier time and introduce a trial of such circumstances.
An outstanding Athenian politician and legislator of the 7th-6th centuries. BC. was Solon (640/635 - 559 BC). He is considered one of the Seven Wise Men.
594 BC Solon carried out important economic and political reforms in Athens, created the ideology of polis life and morality, laid the foundation for an unprecedented and authoritative tradition that established a system of universal social justice. The laws of Solon contributed to the formation of patriotism and civic consciousness. Solon threatened with deprivation of civil rights those who do not participate in political life, public affairs, are indifferent to the troubles of the fatherland. He made an attempt to link various social groups with common state interests.
Solon's sayings contain the standards of behavior of a polis individual: “Believe the beautiful and kind more than those who swore. Do not lie. Take care of the important. Don't rush to make friends, but once you do, don't quit. Before you command, learn to obey. Do not advise anything, advise the best. The mind is your leader. Don't associate with fools. Honor to the gods, honor to parents. The hallmark of an Athenian citizen is moderation (nothing too much).
A balanced, economic, reasonable and free owner, alien to sentimental prejudices (not vilifying the dead, but not donating to the dead, not allowing unnecessary expenses and unnecessary tears at the funeral), valuing property, not approving deceit and violence, defending his interests according to the law, openly - such is the portrait of an Athenian citizen, as Solon wanted to see him.
Lycurgus, the legendary creator of all the institutions of Spartan society, belonged, as they say, to the royal family. He lived presumably in the IX-VIII centuries. BC (perhaps in the XI - early X century BC) and starved himself to death so that his fellow citizens would not have a chance to break the promise given to him - never to repeal the laws he introduced.
The legislation of Lycurgus was required in connection with the danger of civil war. The threat to the state came from the mass of the poor and the poor, the arrogant crowd. It was a moral and legal reaction to social polarization (wealth was in the hands of a few) and political conflict (kings, aristocracy, on the one hand, and the people, on the other). The legislation of Lycurgus is directed against luxury. Lycurgus championed the ideal of poverty.
Sparta had a system of state slavery. Slaves were forcibly attached to the land. The Spartans were brought up in contempt for work. The ratio between free citizens and dependent population was 1:3 or more. Slavery was therefore supported by cruelty and violence. This required enhanced military training of the entire free male population. Courage, endurance, self-sacrifice, patriotism were highly valued. The Spartan society was a military organization.
The legendary Spartan morals and civic ethos belong to the civil community, or slave-owning union, which has retained the remnants of the tribal organization of society. Religion played no role in the way of life of the Spartans. They were not fond of speculative moral ideals and sophisms, they were alien to philosophical activity.
Normative behavior, which ancient philosophy traditionally associated with the mind of an educated person, in the light of ancient legislation is an objectively necessary behavior of an individual in a particular state. Even Aristotle realized the social aspect of morality. Under the influence of social antagonisms, the relationship "individual - society" begins to be regulated by law, social ethics is located within the boundaries of law. Outside these boundaries and in peculiar niches, a more subtle and melancholy subjective-personal morality develops, a special ethical sensitivity that eschews the public sphere, public duties.
Fate as a problem of the ancient worldview
Fate has always been in antiquity one of the first and most necessary subjects for reflection. Ancient people, contemplating their sensual-material cosmos, perfectly saw in it both the ideal and eternal order in the movement of the heavenly vault, as well as disorder and extraordinary chance, which could not be explained by any mind and which was called fate.
In the pre-philosophical period, that is, during the reign of absolute and pre-reflective mythology, fate either merged with the general idea of the cosmos, or was also interpreted as one of the mythological details. But the logical and structural meaning of fate was inexorably simple and inexorably imperative.
In the period of Greek philosophical classics, when the objective side of reality was fixed first of all, fate was, of course, recognized, but it was also given a corresponding objective place. Plato in his “Tim” speaks not of fate, but of “necessity”, which is interpreted as an objectively meaningful cosmological category that enters into a dialectical relationship with the Mind, that is, with the world of ideas for building the cosmos as a whole.
For the first time - and already as a philosophically thought-out category - fate appears only in stoicism. Since subjective well-being was brought to the fore here and its subjective well-being was emphasized in the cosmos itself, fate appeared in a particularly sharp form, because the primacy of rational subjective well-being could in no other way explain the entire area of \u200b\u200bthe random and unreasonable that is present in space, despite any subjective sensible intelligence. The primacy of subjective rationality was so strong that the original fiery pneuma was already interpreted by the Stoics as a kind of providence. But, as we saw above, everything unreasonable and random that happened in space was just attributed to fate, so that stoicism turned out to be both providentialism and fatalism.
But even this state of affairs could not remain in antiquity for long. As we saw above, Posidonius, a representative of middle Hellenism, began to interpret the fiery pneuma of the former Stoics as the world of Platonic ideas, which is why he is called the founder of Stoic Platonism. Fate was deprived not only of the rational dispensation of the cosmos, but also of its substance. And yet fate has an advantage, namely, to determine by itself the unity of both the rational and the unreasonable in the cosmos. It remained to interpret this unity in a purely human way, in order to part forever with the principle of fate as the inexplicable principle of all explanations. This happened in connection with the Neoplatonic doctrine of the First Unity.
First, the Neoplatonic First Unity was above reason, since it was declared the principle of both everything rational and everything unreasonable. For this reason alone, it was no longer necessary to give fate a primary place.
Secondly, this Neo-Platonic Primary Unity was itself a demand for nothing else but, first of all, the mind itself. Just as any thing is irreducible to its individual properties, and the mind demands to recognize, in addition to these properties of a thing, the presence of its carrier, which predetermines individual properties. things, in exactly the same way, on the cosmic plane, everything that had been formed had to be headed by something that was already higher than any rational form and higher than everything unreasonable. In other words, the neoplatonic supramental First Unity turned out to be a requirement of the very mind itself.
And finally, thirdly, the Neoplatonists also developed a special way of human ascent to this First One, based on intensely experienced subjective delight in the sensations of this higher principle, that is, on such a concentration of the rational sphere, when a person began to represent all being in general in the form of only one indivisible and therefore supramental point.
I would like to cite one reasoning of Proclus, which is a true and final picture of the ancient understanding of fate. In Proclus, as in all ancient Neoplatonists, the supramental First Unity, of course, contains everything that was called fate in antiquity. But that's not all. Since the supramental First Unity permeates everything that exists among the Neoplatonists, it is thereby not only an abstract principle, but also a really perceptible structure, that is, that routine, without which neither the rational region itself, nor the entire cosmic region subordinate to it, is inconceivable. According to Proclus (Tim. III 272, 5-25), fate (heimarmene) is neither a particular feature of things, nor the general following of cosmic periods, nor simply the soul in its relation to the environment, nor simply nature, nor simply the reason of everything. Fate is above all these definitions. On the other hand, however, it is also impossible to say that it is simply something supra-substantial, supra-existential or over-rational. Fate is the order and structure of things themselves; but it is not just reason, but also something above reason, something divine. Proclus very clearly distinguishes between adrastia (inevitability), ananku (necessity) and heimarmenu (destiny) (274, 15-17). All these three categories treat, according to Proclus, only one thing, namely, the structure (taxis) of everything that exists.
The first category characterizes the eternal order of the entire noumenal area and is characterized by Proclus as an "intellectual" moment. The second category already takes us beyond the limits of the mind and forces us to characterize it as "supracosmic", that is, as one that represents a generalization of all cosmic life. And finally, Proclus refers to his third category of fate as "intracosmic". Thus, according to Proclus, what is characteristic of all types of fate in general is the order of things, the structure of being. This structure has its own hierarchy. Its highest stage speaks of the necessary sequence in the sphere of pure thought, the other stage is the structure of the cosmos in general, and the third is the structure of everything that actually takes place within the cosmos.
Thus, fate is neither the mind, nor the soul, nor the cosmos, nor nature. This is the inseparable identity of the rational and extra-rational principles, but given not only in the form of a general principle, but also in the form of the structure of all being, that is, in the form of an artistic concept.
Thus, the concept of fate, in fact, never disappeared in ancient philosophy. Since ancient philosophy was always based on the intuitions of the thing, and not of the person, no matter how this thing was exalted, it still left the reason and structure of its formation for an extramaterial and supramental fate. The slave owner, as we said above, is also not yet a person, but only the formation of impersonal and non-initiative people-things. And this means that the unity of slave owners and slaves is also a condition of their existence, understood impersonally. It turned out that the ultimate design of the unity of slave owners and slaves in the form of a sensual-material cosmos also required an ultimate fate for itself, and since nothing beyond the sensual-material cosmos existed and since it itself was based on itself and was itself its own its own absolute (a thing always claims to be the only and universal absolute), insofar as it turned out to be the fate of itself. His structure, rational or accidental, was for him his own destiny.
Therefore, fate is a purely slave-owning idea. However, when both the entire objective and the entire subjective fate of the sensuous-material cosmos had been experienced, the need arose to understand this entire object and this entire subject as something definitively unified and indecomposable. Fate remained, but the Neoplatonists found a way to understand and feel it not as an external compulsion, but as an internal necessity to think out the philosopher's subjective state to its logical conclusion. And just as at the end of antiquity, all the same ancient and primordial mythology triumphed sharply, but already in a reflected form, already in the form of a systematic dialectic of myth, in the same way, in Neoplatonism, the general ancient idea of fate also triumphed, but already in the form of a dialectically thought out and carefully constructed system. .
a) There is, however, a circumstance which for many is a denial of universal fatalism for antiquity. The fact is that ancient art, and especially in the period of its classics, is usually characterized as the dominance of the sculptural primacy. Classical art has really become famous throughout history for its sculpture, and even sculpture that is not specifically psychological. All these doryphoros and discus throwers depict only the way the human body holds itself. Architectural historians prove that the columns of Greek temples were also built according to the principle of the structure of the human body. What does fate have to do with it, and what does the extra-rational principle have to do with it, if in art it is precisely something reasonably constructed that comes to the fore, and moreover, as something purely human, namely, no more and no less than the most ordinary human body? This question, however, is a profound misunderstanding which must necessarily be dispelled if we are to understand ancient fatalism in its essence.
b) The fact is that from the very beginning we put forward the intuition of a material-material body as the starting point for the entire ancient worldview. But this kind of body can be understood both in itself, that is, as such, and in its formation, when it enters into one or another connection with other bodies. If the body is considered as such, that is, compared with itself, then it is clear that with such an approach to the body and to the thing, the construction of such a thing is necessarily fixed; and since antiquity meant a living body capable of doing expedient work, it is clear that the human body, both in its construction and in its expedient functions, has always become the subject of close attention. And if a certain socio-historical formation was to arise from these intuitions of a purposefully built and purposefully acting human body, then, obviously, slavery could only be such a formation, since it was based on an understanding of man not as a person, but precisely as a thing. Consequently, the necessity of the human-sculptural principle becomes clear both for all ancient art and for the whole ancient worldview. There were many historical shades and complications, inevitable for the thousand-year existence of ancient culture; but in this place, of course, there is neither the possibility nor the need to go into all these historical details.
c) But every thing exists not only in itself. It is still moving, changing and, generally speaking, becoming. And this makes us consider every given thing not only as existing independently, but also as connected with all other things. But even if we take all things that exist in general and get a sensual-material cosmos, then in this case the question “why?” will require an answer as necessary. And since nothing but the sensuous-material cosmos exists, then everything reasonable that exists in it, and everything unreasonable, of which there is no less than a reasonable order in it, all this is explained only by itself, finds a reason in it. himself. And this means that the intuition of a thing, devoid of elements of personality, necessarily leads to the recognition of fate in space along with its rational construction.
d) To all this it must be added that the principle of a rational structure opposed to fate had an even broader meaning in antiquity, when it applied not to a thing, but to the human realm. Here this principle of structure became the principle of heroism, and this heroism also coincided in antiquity with fatalism, as we have discussed elsewhere. A real, genuine ancient hero not only did not deny fate, but, on the contrary, considered himself an instrument of fate. Fluctuations in this respect became possible only during the period of the decomposition of the classics and in the post-classical period.
e) But from this the conclusion follows by itself that absolute sculpturality and absolute fatalism necessarily presuppose one another. Both are the result of the absence of a personal worldview. And therefore, all our previous discussions about ancient fatalism not only do not exclude the sculptural nature of the ancient worldview and the ancient worldview of art, but also necessarily presuppose it. One primacy of fatalism without sculpture is typical, perhaps, for some peoples, countries and periods of the East. As for the principle of sculpture without any fatalism, then such a principle is characteristic, perhaps, only for the new and latest Europe, and even then rather only in the styles of consistent naturalism. In this regard, antiquity has its own independent and indestructible specificity, which cannot be ignored in the modern development of historical science.
Conclusion
If we consider the philosophy of the ancient world as a whole, we should appreciate the great importance of ancient philosophy. The spiritual civilization of the West turned out to be more open to changes, the search for truth in various directions, including atheistic, intellectual, and practical ones. In general, the philosophy of the ancient world had a huge impact on subsequent philosophical thought, culture, and the development of human civilization.
An appeal to the history of philosophical thought shows that the theme of man is, firstly, enduring. Secondly, it is comprehended from various worldview positions, due to concrete historical and other reasons. Thirdly, in the history of philosophy, questions about the essence and nature of man, the meaning of his existence, remain unchanged.
The main ancient problematics has as its content the sensual-material cosmos as an absolute, that is, as expediently controlled by the soul and mind, and if everything cosmically inappropriate is included, then controlled by the primordial one, that is, by fate. In all this ancient philosophical problematics, the original slave-owning material-corporeal intuition manifests itself both in everything large and in all the little things. It is very important to note that the ancient philosophers are not very fond of talking about fate, since the popular idea of destiny fixes it as something too external and superhuman. Ancient philosophers wanted everything inexpedient and everything inhuman to function on the same plane with everything expedient and with everything human, which is why fate was interpreted not as an object of unaccountable human faith, but also as a purely human concept, as a purely cosmic force. And then it became necessary to interpret such an impersonal and extrahuman force on the same plane with all human and cosmic expediency, with all human and cosmic orderliness. And this meant interpreting such a principle, interpreting fate as a philosophical category, that is, interpreting it as the highest primordial unity, or as a rational and non-rational principle at the same time.
Thus, taken in its most general form, the ancient problems were reduced to the dialectic of idea and matter, developed in the form of a sensual-material cosmos, driven by the cosmic soul, controlled by the same cosmic mind and created by the over-soul and over-mental primordial unity.
Such is the purely philosophical, that is, theoretical, basis of ancient philosophy.
Bibliography:
1. Ancient philosophy / T. N. Stukanov / / Didactic material on the discipline "Philosophy" - Novokuznetsk, 2004.
2. Asmus V. F. Antique philosophy / V. F. Asmus. - M., 1976.
3. Bogomolov A. S. Antique Philosophy / A. S. Bogomolov. - M., 1986.
4. Losev A. F. History of ancient philosophy / A. F. Losev. - M., 1989.
5. Plato. State/ Plato// Works. - M., 1971. In 3 volumes. - T. 3.
6. Chenyshev A. N. Philosophy of the ancient world / A. N. Chenyshev. - M., 1999.
Man, according to ancient philosophers, is a part of the Cosmos. She is an imitation of the Cosmos, she is a microcosm, which in all its features repeats the macrocosm. The difference between macrocosm and microcosm is not qualitative, but only quantitative. But since man only repeats the Cosmos, it is in everything subject to the actions of those forces that govern the Cosmos. And such forces are the Logos, destiny. And fate is even higher than the Logos. If the Logos personifies the reasonable, natural beginning of the Cosmos and its "personified carriers" are the gods, then fate personifies the unity of the rational and the irrational, the regular and the random. She is higher than the Logos, higher than the gods, and the goddesses of fate Moira are not subject even to Zeus, the king of the gods. From this follows an important conclusion in the understanding of the Greeks of man, of human life. A person in his life is completely subject to fate, which he cannot change. Man is only an appendage of the Cosmos, and not a self-sufficient, original personality. Greek philosophy does not know the concept of "personality" in the modern sense. The Greek individual is not characterized by psychological experiences, torments and doubts. Of course, the Greek myths speak of the exploits of heroes, the Greeks glorify their kings, philosophers and Olympians, but their activity is perceived not as a personal merit, a manifestation of physical and intellectual identity, freedom and aspirations, but as the personification of fate, a manifestation of higher actions, cosmic in their own way. the nature of forces. And if we take into account that in ancient culture, both in the Greek and Roman periods, the widespread Pythagorean doctrine of the transmigration of souls, it becomes even more clear that great deeds are not the merit of people, but only a manifestation of destiny. But the Greek does not experience psychological restraint and depression on this occasion. The Greek worldview is not characterized by a pessimistic view of the world and one's own life. The ancient worldview, in the words of the Russian researcher of ancient culture A.F. Losev, is "heroically fatalistic." According to the Greek, as well as the Roman, since such a fate is determined for me (however, no one can fully know fate, because it is the unity of necessity and chance), then I must bring it to life. This should be seen as a manifestation of a more general ancient principle that is cosmic in nature - the share is subject to the general, the single. Only the latter has true existence and has perfection.
But the faith of the ancient world in fate does not mean that the philosophy of Antiquity is not interested in meaningful, ethical problems. Although a person's life is subject to fate, he is not given to know. Therefore, a person has a choice in their actions. True, pre-Socratic philosophy has little interest in the problems of ethics. But, beginning with Socrates, in ancient Greek philosophy there is a turn to ethical problems that come to the fore in the Hellenistic period of ancient philosophy.
The main goal of philosophy, according to Socrates, is the knowledge of man himself. But the knowledge of oneself for him means the knowledge of the general, unchanging principles of goodness, virtue, justice. Only knowing what virtue is, what is good and beautiful, a person can be virtuous. And only action in accordance with virtue contributes to bliss, life happiness. Socrates considered moderation (knowing how to curb one's passions), courage (knowing how to overcome dangers) and justice (knowing how to keep the laws of divine and human) as the three main virtues. "He said that there is only one good - knowledge and only one evil - ignorance."
The ethical problems posed by Socrates continue to be developed by the philosophers of the Socratic schools, primarily of the Cynic and Kerenian schools. The founder of the cinematic school was the Athenian Antisthenes, and one of its most famous representatives -
Diogenes Sinodsky. The very name of the school comes from the fact that Antisthenes conducted his talks in the gymnasium of Kіnosarzі (literally - "Sharp Dog", from the word "Pythagoreans" the Latin "cynics" was later formed). Like Socrates, the Pythagoreans believed that human happiness coincides with virtue. But, unlike him, they saw the meaning of happiness in autarky - complete moral autonomy of the individual, independence from society with its norms, the world around them in general. "The sage does not need anything or anyone, because everything that belongs to others belongs to him." We must live according to nature and in unity with it. Honor, wealth, pleasure are not good things. Science, art, morality, family, homeland are empty words. A person needs only what she urgently needs, without which she cannot do. The ideal for the Cynics is Hercules. Culture and civilization do not bring a person closer to true happiness, but lead away from it. At the same time, the Pythagoreans are convinced that virtue can be learned. Diogenes speaks of two types of exercise: one for the soul, the other for the body, and he is sure that no success in life is possible without exercise. Therefore, for the Cynics, philosophy is not so much the science of comprehending the truth, although virtue is impossible without knowledge, but rather a way of life, and Antisthenes, and especially Diogenes, and their followers affirmed their philosophy, first of all, by their way of life, although they were distinguished by their extraordinary strength of verbal persuasion. Diogenes, as we know, lived for some time in a clay barrel, used only the bare necessities, and taught that the very contempt for pleasure, through habit, becomes the highest pleasure.
The founder of the Cyrene school was Aristip from Cyrene, hence the name of the school. Aristipus and his followers - the Cyrenaics proceeded from the fact that there are two states of the soul - pleasure and pain. Slow movement is pleasure, sharp movement is pain. People, like all living things, strive for pleasure and avoid pain, because pain is disgusting. The Cyrenaics understand pleasure as sensual pleasure, and therefore their teaching laid the foundation for hedonism - the position according to which sensual pleasure is the highest good and all the variety of moral requirements is reduced to it. "Pleasure is a blessing, even if it is generated by the most disgusting things: even if the deed is unworthy, nevertheless, pleasure remains a blessing, and one should strive for it for its own sake." Happiness is only the totality of private pleasures, which is the highest good. Therefore, it is worth striving for pleasure for its own sake, and fortunately not for its own sake, but for the sake of private pleasures. Wealth has no independent value, but it makes it possible to enjoy, although, in the end, wealth has nothing to do with enjoyment, because there is no difference between the enjoyment of the rich and the poor.
Pleasure is perceived as a feeling, which, however, does not mean that Aristipom underestimates knowledge and philosophy. Aristipus declares that it is better to be a beggar than an ignoramus, because if the first is deprived only of money, then the second is deprived of the image of a man. Proclaiming enjoyment as the goal of life, the Cyrenaics spoke of reasonable enjoyment, that a person should not be a slave to enjoyment. "The best share is not to abstain from pleasures, - said Aristipus, - but to rule over them, not obeying them."
In the Elinistic-Roman period of ancient philosophy, the problems of morality were considered in the most detail by Epicurus and his followers and the Stoics.
Epicurus in his concept of ethics proceeds from the fact that man is a sensual being. And so he considers bliss, pleasure, to be the highest good. Virtue is important not in itself, but because it contributes to the achievement of pleasure. "Pleasure is both the beginning and the end of a blissful life, we recognize it as the first good ...". The views of Epicurus on the subjects of ethics are close to those of the Cyrenaists, but differ from them in two points. Firstly, the Cyrenaics do not recognize pleasure at rest, only in motion, while Epicurus recognizes both one and the other pleasure, both the pleasure of the soul and the pleasure of the body. Secondly, Cyrenaics believe that mental pain is worse than mental pain. "Epicurus considers mental pain to be the worst, because the body is tormented only by the storms of the present, and the soul is tormented by the past, the present, and the future. Likewise, spiritual pleasures are greater than bodily ones."
But Epicurus is far from the idea that one should strive for any pleasure. Some pleasures are true, others are imaginary, depending on the result of the satisfaction of the desires of which they are. After Epikur, there are natural desires, and there are empty ones, and among natural ones, some are necessary, while others are simply natural. Therefore, Epicurus believes that although pleasure is the goal of life, it is not always worth avoiding pain. If for greater pleasure it is worth enduring pain, then a person should go for it. “Therefore, when we say that pleasure is the ultimate goal,” Epicurus writes in a letter to Menekey, “we do not mean at all the pleasures of debauchery or sensuality, as those who do not know, do not share or poorly understand our teaching believe, no we mean freedom from pain of the body and from the turmoil of the soul, For it is not endless drinking and feasting, not the enjoyment of boys or women, or the fish-table and other pleasures of a sumptuous feast, that makes our life sweet, but only sober reflection, which examines the causes of our every preference and avoidance and that they expel thoughts that place great anxiety in the soul. Therefore, to live sweetly means, first of all, to live wisely, avoiding unnecessary desires, and striving for equanimity of spirit - ataraxia. Epicurus assigns a large role to knowledge in achieving pleasure, because pure pleasure cannot be achieved without studying nature.
The ethics of Epicurus, in contrast to the main ancient tradition, is purely individualistic. Natural law, in his opinion, is a contract of benefit, the purpose of which is not to cause or endure harm. Moreover, according to Epicurus, justice is connected not only with the contract, but also with circumstances. "Where, with a change in circumstances, the previously established justice turns out to be useless, there it was fair while it was useful in the communication of fellow citizens, and then it ceased to be fair, ceasing to be useful."
The founder of Stoicism at the end of the 4th century. BC e. was Zeno from Kri-tia - a city in Cyprus. Stoicism goes through three stages in its development:
Ancient Stoa, whose outstanding representatives were the heir of Zeno-na cleanthes, Chrysip, Ariston, Sfer, and others; The Middle Stoa, from which the Roman period of Stoicism begins, represented by the teachings of Panetius and Posidonia, and the Late Stoa, the most prominent representatives of which were Seneca, Epictetus and Emperor Marcus Aurelius. Until the fall of the Roman Empire, Stoicism was an influential philosophical movement.
In their ethical teaching, the Stoics proceed from the fact that the ultimate goal is defined as life, meets its own nature and the nature of the whole, and the first impulse of the living is self-preservation. But the impulse to self-preservation is common to all animals. "But rational beings, as perfect leaders, have been given reason, and for them to live according to nature means to live according to reason, because reason is the corrector of motivation." "What is the best thing about man?" Seneca writes. Therefore, the pursuit of happiness is the pursuit of virtue, through which life becomes in harmony with nature, and not just in accordance with nature. And this is possible only if life is built in accordance with reason, not only according to human, but cosmic reason, since the first is only a particle, a spark of the last, Divine reason.
Among the virtues of the Stoics, first of all, understanding, courage, justice, and sanity are distinguished. Among the vices - misunderstanding, fearfulness. injustice, unruliness. Everything in between is irrelevant. This includes life and death, wealth and dishonor, sickness and health. They do not depend on us, because human life is subject to fate. We can only choose between virtue and vice, good and evil. Good and virtue, evil and vice are close in meaning. Good is everything that benefits, and virtue itself and good deeds, as well as evil - and vices and vicious deeds.
The Stoics are strongly opposed to considering pleasure as the highest good. “Virtue is something majestic, sublime, invincible, indefatigable, while pleasure is something low, servile, weak, transient, such that lives and nests in unnecessary places and taverns.” The main difference between a wise man and unreasonable people lies in his impartiality, although we often call impassive people, in particular callous, cruel ones, impassive. There are four main passions: sorrow, fear, desire and pleasure. "... Life is happy if it is consistent with its nature. Such a life is possible only if, firstly, a person constantly has common sense; then, if his spirit is courageous and energetic, noble, enduring and prepared for all circumstances, if he, without falling into anxious suspiciousness, takes care of satisfying physical needs, if he is generally interested in the material aspects of life, without being tempted by any of them; finally, if he knows how to use the gifts of fate without becoming their slave, writes Seneca in letter to brother Gallion.—...The result of such a state of mind is constant calm and freedom in view of the elimination of all causes of irritation and fear.Instead of pleasures, instead of insignificant transitory and not only vile, but also harmony of the spirit, greatness, is connected with meekness. After all, any cruelty comes from weakness ".
The sage, according to the Stoics, will also deal with public affairs, if nothing interferes with him. After all, a person's life is not dependent on communication with other people. Society and the state are an integral part of human nature. Therefore, to live in harmony with nature, to strive for self-preservation means for the Stoics concern for the welfare of the state, which for a sage is higher than a separate human life.
The image of man in the era of antiquity and the Renaissance. (Common and difference). Lesson on MHK grade 10.
Lesson Form: lesson-research (through dialogue).
Target: students' understanding that the Renaissance is not a simple repetition of ancient traditions.
Tasks:
Identification of the differences between the portrait art of antiquity and the Renaissance.
The development of students' abilities to analyze works of art.
Lesson scheme:
Formulation of a hypothesis.
Step-by-step analysis of the works of antiquity and the Renaissance through discussion with students:
A) identification of external features common to portraits of antiquity. Filling in the table;
B) Identification of features common to Renaissance portraits. Filling in the table;
C) Characteristics of the content content of works of ancient art and Renaissance art;
D) Summing up the results of the discussion by the teacher. Filling in the table.
The final part of the lesson (conclusion).
During the classes.
The cultural center of the Renaissance is Italy, for which the term "Renaissance" had its original meaning - the revival of the traditions of ancient culture.
Let's put forward a hypothesis: the Renaissance is not a simple repetition of ancient traditions. The Renaissance is their new understanding.
Let's conduct a study, the purpose of which is to reveal the difference in the embodiment of the image of a person in the ancient art of the Renaissance.
Video sequence: 1. Leonardo da Vinci. "Portrait of Mona Lisa".
2.Raphael "Self-portrait".
3.Andrea del Sarto "Portrait of a young man."
Question: What do you notice in common in Renaissance portraits? (As a result of the discussion, the teacher formulates the final answer: in Renaissance portraits, faces are always given in close-up. They are beautiful, sometimes with irregular facial features, but very individual.)
Video sequence:one. Lysippos. "Portrait of Alexander the Great".
The result of the discussion is formulated by the students: in antiquity there is a portrait genre, but this is rather not a portrait of a given person, but an image of a certain human type. He is impersonal (impersonal).
Video sequence: 1. Polykleitos "Dorifor"
2. Praxiteles. "Hermes with the Infant Dionysus".
3. Phidias "Athena Parthenos".
Question: How can one characterize the harmony of ancient art? (after discussion, the final answer is formulated by the teacher: The harmony of ancient art is calm and contemplative).
Video sequence: 1. Michelangelo "David".
2. "Bound Prisoner".
3. "Mourning for Christ."
4. "Moses".
After the discussion: in the works of the Renaissance, the colossal will of man was expressed and realized, sometimes immeasurable, but demonstrating the possibility of independence and independence.
RENAISSANCE
ANTIQUITY
1. Face portraits are always close-ups, they are beautiful, sometimes with irregular features, but very individual.
1. There is a portrait genre, but this is rather not a portrait of a given person, but an image of a certain human type. He is impersonal.
2. A colossal will was expressed and realized in the works, sometimes excessive, but demonstrating the possibility of independence and independence.
2. Harmony is calm and contemplative.
3. Elevation of individuality.
Thus, we see that for antiquity and the Renaissance, the image of man plays an important role. This is the basis of their commonality, but the Renaissance refers to man as an independent being, with free will and therefore entitled to individuality. In antiquity, a person feels himself to be only a particle of the Universe, depending on the gods, external forces.
Homework:
Based on the table, make a description of one of the works of art of antiquity or the Renaissance presented at the lesson.
Independently summarize general information about the art of the Proto-Renaissance, using the Encyclopedia of Art or other sources.
Questions to the topic:
What is the originality of portraits of the era of antiquity?
What are the features of the portrait art of the Renaissance?
What is common and what is the difference between the attitude towards a person in the era of antiquity and in the era of the Renaissance?
