Transcript Sophies World by Jostein Gaarder

FOUNDATIONS OF CIVILIZATION
CLASSICAL PHILOSOPHY IN SOPHIE’S WORLD
BY: JOSTEIN GAARDER
Directions: Will
read the novel and prepare to take a
comprehensive test over their reading the first week they
return from summer break. Listed is a PowerPoint covering
main points from the novel which will be on the test. It
targets specific points. Please use the information in this
presentation to help you better understand the material. Be
prepared to discuss ideas in class over the novel the first
couple of days when school begins.
Evaluation Guidelines:
Express a Specific Viewpoint. “Materialism
is good,” is not specific.
 Topics: Democritus’ Philosophy, Fate/Stoicism,
Socrates' Philosophy, Plato’s Philosophy (Platonic
Ideas), Realism, Aristotle’s Philosophy,
Hellenism, Descartes' Philosophical Ideas,
Dualism, Parallelism/Epiphenomenalism,
Spinoza’s Rationalism, Empiricism, Locke’s
Philosophy, Hume’s Ideas, Berkeley’s Subjective
Idealism, Enlightenment, Rationalism,
Skepticism, Kant’s Copernican Revolution in
Philosophy, Romanticism, Hegel’s Absolute
Idealism, Kierkegaard’s Point of View
(Existentialism), Marx (Materialism), Darwin
(Evolution), Freud’s Philosophy, Mysticism,
Humanism, Epicureans, The Myth of the Cave


Sophie’s World
by
Jostein Gaarder
Who are you? Where does the world come from? These are two questions
Sophie, a fifteen year-old Norwegian girl, receives in her mailbox one day from
an unknown stranger. Thus begins a mysterious adventure for Sophie, and an
adventure for any person of any age who reads her story. For Sophie becomes
the student of a fifty year old philosopher, Alberto, who proceeds to teach her the
history of philosophy.
She gets a very creditable and understandable review of the ideas of major
philosophers from the Pre-Socratic Greeks to Jean-Paul Sartre. Mixed in with
the philosophy lessons is a wonderful story complete with a mysterious cabin in
the woods, a magic brass mirror, a marvelous messenger dog named Hermes,
and even brief appearances by Little-Red-Riding-Hood and Winnie-the-Pooh.
And it is something of a shock to find out who Sophie and Alberto really are although it should have been completely obvious to anyone from the very first
page of the book.
The philosophy is wonderful and wonderfully presented. Sophie learns about Medieval
philosophy while being lectured by a monk in an ancient church, and she learns about
Jean-Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir in a French café. It all begins with a quotation
from Goethe: “He who cannot draw on three thousand years is living from hand to
mouth.” Could the world have come from nothing? It all seemed so illogical until
Democritus invented the most ingenious toy in the world. Next we see Socrates standing
in front of a market stall packed with various goods. “What a wonderful number of things I
have no use for.”
We learn about Plato and his theories about the existence of an ideal world of which we
see only the dim reflection. But many mathematicians and scientists think they can catch
a glimpse of that ideal world. Alberto then takes Sophie through Hellenism to the rise of
Christianity and its interaction with Greek thought and on into the Middle Ages. We even
learn about Hildegard of Bingen, a 12th century Catholic Nun who was a preacher,
physician, botanist, biologist, and composer. (You can even buy compact disks of her
music.) He covers the Renaissance, Baroque, Enlightenment and Romantic periods.
Other important figures presented are Descartes (“he wanted to clear all the rubble off
the site”),
Spinoza (“God is not a puppeteer”), Locke, Hume, Berkeley (“we exist only in the mind of
God”), Bjerkely (How did that get in here?), Kant (“the starry heavens above me and the
moral law within me”), Hegel, Kierkegaard (“it’s one thing to collect Barbie dolls, but
worse to be one”), Marx, Darwin and Freud.
The book approaches its’
conclusion at a philosophical
garden party which Sophie
throws to celebrate her
birthday. But alas, it turns
into a rather sordid affair
where Alberto finally speaks
the plain truth and then he
and Sophie use the
confusion to escape to their
true identities. The book has
other wonderful features, but
to mention them would give
away too much in advance.
Democritus
460–c.370 B.C.,Greek philosopher of Abdera.

He held that all things were
composed of atoms; these
he asserted to be tiny
particles, imperceptible to
the senses, composed of
exactly the same matter but
different in size, shape, and
weight. They were
undermined, indivisible, and
indestructible. Democritus
postulated the constant
motion of atoms and, on this
basis, explained the creation
of worlds.

He held that the whirling
motion caused by the falling
of atoms resulted in
aggregations—the heavier
atoms forming the earth and
the lighter ones the
heavenly bodies. He taught
that what the senses
perceive as quality is merely
the result of a specific
quantitative distribution of
atoms. Sense perception
yields only confused
knowledge, telling us
merely how things affect us;
Thought alone can
apprehend the nature of
things. Democritus’ ethics
were moderately hedonistic,
teaching that the true end of
life is happiness achieved in
inner tranquility.
Fate/Stoicism
In physics the foundation of the Stoic doctrine was the dogma that all true
being is corporeal. Within the corporeal they recognized two principles,
matter and force -- that is, the material, and the Deity (logos, order, fate)
permeating and informing it. Ultimately, however, the two are identical.
There is nothing in the world with any independent existence: all is bound
together by an unalterable chain of causation. The agreement of human
action with the law of nature, of the human will with the divine will, or life
according to nature, is virtue, the chief good and highest end in life. It is
essentially one, the particular or cardinal virtues of Plato being only
different aspects of it; it is completely sufficient for happiness, and
incapable of any differences of degree. All good actions are absolutely
equal in merit, and so are all bad actions. All that lies between virtue and
vice is neither good nor bad; at most, it is distinguished as preferable,
undesirable, or absolutely indifferent. Virtue is fully possessed only by the
wise person, who is no way inferior in worth to Zeus; he is lord over his
own life, and may end it by his own free choice. In general, the prominent
characteristic of Stoic philosophy is moral heroism, often verging on
asceticism.
Socrates-469–399 B.C., Greek
philosopher of Athens.
Socrates' contributions to philosophy were a new
method of approaching knowledge, a conception of the
soul as the seat both of normal waking consciousness
and of moral character, and a sense of the universe as
purposively mind-ordered. His method, called dialectic,
consisted in examining statements by pursuing their
implications, on the assumption that if a statement were
true it could not lead to false consequences. The
method may have been suggested by Zeno of Elea, but
Socrates refined it and applied it to ethical problems.
His doctrine of the soul led him to the belief that all virtues
converge into one, which is the good, or knowledge of one’s
true self and purposes through the course of a lifetime.
Knowledge in turn depends on the nature or essence of
things as they really are, for the underlying forms of things
are more real than their experienced exemplifications. This
conception leads to a teleological view of the world that all the
forms participate in and lead to the highest form, the form of
the good. Plato later elaborated this doctrine as central to his
own philosophy
Socrates' view is often described as holding virtue and
knowledge to be identical, so that no man knowingly
does wrong. Since virtue is identical with knowledge, it
can be taught, but not as a professional specialty as the
Sophists had pretended to teach it. However, Socrates
himself gave no final answer to how virtue can be
learned.
Plato-427?–347 B.C., Greek
philosopher
Plato was always concerned with the fundamental philosophical problem of
working out a theory of the art of living and knowing. Like Socrates, Plato
began convinced of the ultimately harmonious structure of the universe,
but he went further than his mentor in trying to construct a comprehensive
philosophical scheme. His goal was to show the rational relationship
between the soul, the state, and the cosmos. This is the general theme of
the great dialogues of his middle years: the Republic, Phaedo,
Symposium, Phaedrus, Timaeus, and Philebus. In the Republic he shows
how the operation of justice within the individual can best be understood
through the analogy of the operation of justice within the state, which Plato
proceeds to set out in his conception of the ideal state. However, justice
cannot be understood fully unless seen in relation to the Idea of the Good,
which is the supreme principle of order and truth.
It is in these dialogues that the famous Platonic
Ideas (see realism) are discussed. Plato argued
for the independent reality of Ideas as the only
guarantee of ethical standards and of objective
scientific knowledge. In the Republic and the
Phaedo he postulates his theory of Forms. Ideas
or Forms are the immutable archetypes of all
temporal phenomena, and only these Ideas are
completely real; the physical world possesses only
relative reality. The Forms assure order and
intelligence in a world that is in a state of constant
flux. They provide the pattern from which the
world of sense derives its meaning.
The supreme Idea is the Idea of the
Good, whose function and place in the
world of Ideas is analogous to that of
the sun in the physical world. Plato
saw his task as that of leading men to
a vision of the Forms and to some
sense of the highest good. The
principal path is suggested in the
famous metaphor of the cave in the
Republic, in which man in his
uninstructed state is chained in a
world of shadows. However, man can
move up toward the sun, or highest
good, through the study of what Plato
calls dialectic. The supreme science,
dialectic, is a method of inquiry that
proceeds by a constant questioning of
assumptions and by explaining a
particular idea in terms of a more
general one until the ultimate ground
of explanation is reached.
Realism
Held that universals exist independently of both the human
mind and particular things—a theory closely associated with
that of Plato. Some other philosophers rejected this view for
what can be termed moderate realism, which held that
universals exist only in the mind of God, as patterns by which
he creates particular things.
In epistemology realism represents the theory that particular
things exist independently of our perception. This position is in
direct contrast to the theory of idealism, which holds that reality
exists only in the mind. Most contemporary British and
American philosophy tends toward realism.
Aristotle-384–322 B.C., Greek
philosopher, b. Stagira. He is sometimes
called the Stagirite.
Logic and Metaphysics Aristotle placed great emphasis in
his school on direct observation of nature, and in science he
taught that theory must follow fact. He considered
philosophy to be the discerning of the self-evident,
changeless first principles that form the basis of all
knowledge. Logic was for Aristotle the necessary tool of any
inquiry, and the syllogism was the sequence that all logical
thought follows. He introduced the notion of category into
logic and taught that reality could be classified according to
several categories—substance (the primary category),
quality, quantity, relation, determination in time and space,
action, passion or passivity, position, and condition.
Aristotle also taught that knowledge of a thing, beyond its
classification and description, requires an explanation of
causality, or why it is. He posited four causes or principles
of explanation: the material cause (the substance of which
the thing is made); the formal cause (its design); the
efficient cause (its maker or builder); and the final cause (its
purpose or function). In modern thought the efficient cause
is generally considered the central explanation of a thing,
but for Aristotle the final cause had primacy.
He used this account of causes to examine the relation of
form to matter, and in his conclusions differed sharply from
those of his teacher, Plato. Aristotle believed that a form,
with the exception of the Prime Mover, or God, had no
separate existence, but rather was immanent in matter.
Thus, in the Aristotelian system, form and matter together
constitute concrete individual realities; the Platonic system
holds that a concrete reality partakes of a form (the ideal)
but does not embody it. Aristotle believed that form caused
matter to move and defined motion as the process by
which the potentiality of matter (the thing itself) became the
actuality of form (motion itself). He held that the Prime
Mover alone was pure form and as the “unmoved mover”
and final cause was the goal of all motion.
Hellenism
The term is also applied to
the ideals of later writers and
thinkers who draw their
inspiration from ancient
Greece. Frequently it is
contrasted with Hebraism—
Hellenism then meaning
pagan joy, freedom, and love
of life as contrasted with the
austere morality and
monotheism of the Old
Testament
Rene Descartes- born in 1596
René Descartes (1596-1650) is one of the most important
Western philosophers of the past few centuries. During his
lifetime, Descartes was just as famous as an original
physicist, physiologist and mathematician. But it is as a
highly original philosopher that he is most frequently read
today. He attempted to restart philosophy in a fresh direction.
For example, his philosophy refused to accept the
Aristotelian and Scholastic traditions that had dominated
philosophical thought throughout the Medieval period; it
attempted to fully integrate philosophy with the 'new'
sciences; and Descartes changed the relationship between
philosophy and theology. Such new directions for philosophy
made Descartes into a revolutionary figure.
The two most widely known of Descartes' philosophical ideas are
those of a method of hyperbolic doubt, and the argument that,
though he may doubt, he cannot doubt that he exists. The first of
these comprises a key aspect of Descartes' philosophical method.
As noted above, he refused to accept the authority of previous
philosophers - but he also refused to accept the obviousness of
his own senses. In the search for a foundation for philosophy,
whatever could be doubted must be rejected. He resolves to trust
only that which is clearly and distinctly seen to be beyond any
doubt. In this manner, Descartes peels away the layers of beliefs
and opinions that clouded his view of the truth. But, very little
remains, only the simple fact of doubting itself, and the
inescapable inference that something exists doubting, namely
Descartes himself
His next task is to reconstruct our knowledge piece by
piece, such that at no stage is the possibility of doubt
allowed to creep back in. In this manner, Descartes
proves that he himself must have the basic
characteristics of thinking, and that this thinking thing
(mind) is quite distinct from his body; the existence of
a God; the existence and nature of the external world;
and so on. What is important in this for Descartes is,
first, that he is showing that knowledge is genuinely
possible (and thus that skeptics must be mistaken),
and, second, that, more particularly, a mathematicallybased scientific knowledge of the material world is
possible.
Dualism
The term "Dualism" was originally coined by Thomas
Hyde around the beginning of the eighteenth century. As
a metaphysical theory, dualism states that the world is
made up of two elemental categories which are
incommensurable. This includes distinctions between
mind and body, good and evil, universal and particular,
and phenomena and nominal. Dualism contends you
must have both of the two components in question,
rather than one or the other. In contrast to dualism two
other philosophical positions concerned with the
number of substances: monism and pluralism. Monism
is the view that there is one elemental whereas
pluralism maintains that there are many things which
constitute the world.
A major problem faced by dualists is the inability to resolve the
rift created between the two opposing elements. Typically the
motivation for resolving conflicts between these two realms is
to make the world more understandable. For instance, how is
the interaction between mind and body explained? Descartes,
for example, claimed that the pineal gland is the point of
contact between the bodily and spiritual realm. The inability to
rectify these two realms has inclined some to adopt monism.
Science, for example, offers a monistic account of reality
(physicalism) which eliminates the mental altogether. removes
any problems of relatedness between mind and body by
eliminating the spiritual all together. Mental events are reduced
to brain states, thus leaving only the bodily realm, thus
monism.
Attempts have also been made to
resolve the tension within
mind/body dualism rather than
eliminate either of the two
components. Parallelism contends
that the mind and body interact
independently of one another.
Thus having separate existences,
they have no causal connection
and have no interaction.
Epiphenomenalism contends there
is only a one-way causal
connection from the body to the
mind, but none from the mind to
the body. Consciousness is just a
byproduct of the body, much like
smoke from a steam engine train.
Spinoza, Baruch
1632–77, Dutch philosopher, b.
Amsterdam.
Spinoza’s philosophy is deductive, rational, and monist. He
shares with Descartes an intensely mathematical
appreciation of the universe: Things make sense when
understood in relation to a total structure; truth, like
geometry, follows from first principles with a logic accessible
and evident to man’s mind. Whereas for Descartes mind and
body are different substances, Spinoza holds that the two are
different aspects of a single substance, which he called
alternately God and Nature. Just as the mind is not
substantially alien to the body, so Nature is not the product or
agency of a supernatural God. The universe is a single
substance, capable of an infinity of attributes, but known
through two of them: physical “extension” and “thought.”
God is not the creator of a Nature
beyond himself; God is Nature in
its fullness. Spinoza’s rationalism,
unlike that of later idealists, does
not proceed at the expense of
empirical observation. “Adequate
ideas” are a coherent logical
association of physical
experiences. When ideas are
confused or contradictory it is not
because they are false (in the
sense of contrary to fact) but
because they are incomplete or
improperly related to the totality of
experience
Empiricism
It is a philosophical doctrine that all knowledge is derived
from experience. For most empiricists, experience includes
inner experience—reflection upon the mind and its
operations—as well as sense perception. This position is
opposed to rationalism in that it denies the existence of
innate ideas. According to the empiricist, all ideas are
derived from experience; therefore, knowledge of the
physical world can be nothing more than a generalization
from particular instances and can never reach more than a
high degree of probability. Most empiricists recognize the
existence of at least some a priori truths, e.g., those of
mathematics and logic. John Stuart Mill was the first to treat
even these as generalizations from experience. Empiricism
has been the dominant but not the only tradition in British
philosophy.
John Locke- 1632-1704
Philosophy
In the Essay Concerning Human Understanding Locke
examines the nature of the human mind and the process by
which it knows the world. Repudiating the traditional doctrine
of innate ideas, Locke believed that the mind is born blank, a
tabula rasa upon which the world describes itself through the
experience of the five senses. Knowledge arising from
sensation is perfected by reflection, thus enabling humans to
arrive at such ideas as space, time, and infinity.
4
Locke distinguished the primary qualities of things (e.g.,
solidity, extension, number) from their secondary
qualities (e.g., color, sound). These latter qualities he
held to be produced by the impact of the world on the
sense organs. Behind this curtain of sensation the world
itself is colorless and silent. Science is possible, Locke
maintained, because the primary world affects the sense
organs mechanically, thus producing ideas that faithfully
represent reality.
David Hume - 1711-1776
In 1763, Hume returned to Paris as secretary to the British
embassy. It was at that time that he became a friend of
Jean Jacques Rousseau, to whom he later gave refuge in
England. In philosophy Hume pressed the analysis of John
Locke and George Berkeley to the logical extreme of
skepticism for which he is famous. He could see no more
reason for hypothesizing a substantial soul or mind than for
accepting a substantial material world. A complete
nominalist in his handling of ideas of material objects, he
carried the method into the discussion of mind and found
nothing there but a bundle of perceptions.
Causal relation derives solely from the
customary conjunction of two
impressions; the apparent sequence of
events in the external world is in fact the
sequence of perceptions in the mind.
From this statement Hume argued that
our expectation that the future will be like
the past (e.g., that the sun will rise
tomorrow morning) has no basis in
reason; it is purely a matter of belief.
However, he also asserted that such
theoretical skepticism is irrelevant to the
practical concerns of daily life. Hume’s
attack on rationalism is also evident in his
two works on religion; in these he rejects
any rational or natural theology.
George Berkeley- 1685-1753
Berkeley in his subjective idealism went beyond Locke, who had argued
that such qualities as color and taste arise in the mind while primary
qualities of matter such as extension and weight have existence
independent of the mind. Berkeley held that both types of qualities are
known only in the mind and that therefore there is no existence of matter
independent of perception (esse est percipi). The observing mind of God
makes possible the continued apparent existence of material objects.
God arouses sensations in us in a regular coherent order. Selves and
God make up the universe. Berkeley felt that his argument constituted a
complete disproof of atheism. He believed that qualities, not things, are
perceived and that the perception of qualities is relative to the perceiver.
He denied the existence of a material world beyond the mind.
Enlightenment

1. Opposition to Authority- It is essential to
remain skeptic to all inherited truths, the idea
being that the individual must find his own
answer to every question.
 2. Rationalism- Faith in God and certain moral
norms are inherent in human reason. (common
sense, what everybody knows, what is obvious)

3.
Enlightenment movement- Became the
foundation for morals, religion, and ethics in
accordance with man’s immutable reason. Example,
people thought poverty and oppression were the fault
of ignorance and superstition. Therefore, they began
stressing education of children and the people.
4. Cultural Optimism-Once reason and knowledge
became widespread, humanity would make great
progress. It could only be a question of time before
irrationalism and ignorance would give way to an
“enlightened” humanity.



5.
Return to nature- It was observed that the so-called
primitive peoples were frequently both healthier and
happier than Europeans, and this, it was said, was because
they had not been ‘civilized.’ “We should return to nature
because nature is good, and man is ‘by nature’ good; it is
civilization which ruins him.
6.
Natural religion- Religion had to be brought into
harmony with ‘natural’ reason, which led to deism. A belief
that God created the world ages and ages ago, but has not
revealed himself to the world since. Thus god is reduced to
the ‘Supreme Being’ who only reveals himself to mankind
through nature and natural laws, never in any ‘supernatural’
way.
7. Human Rights- Certain rights everyone was entitled to
by simply being born. Such as; matters of religion, morals,
and politics, the individual’s right to freedom of thought
and utterance. It also bought for the abolition of slavery
and for a more humane treatment of criminals.
Kant, Immanuel
1724–1804, German metaphysician,
According to Kant, his reading of David
Hume awakened him from his dogmatic
slumber and set him on the road to
becoming the “critical philosopher,” whose
position can be seen as a synthesis of the
Leibniz-Wolffian rationalism and the
Humean skepticism. Kant termed his basic
insight into the nature of knowledge “the
Copernican revolution in philosophy.”
Instead of assuming that our ideas, to be true, must
conform to an external reality independent of our
knowing, Kant proposed that objective reality is known
only insofar as it conforms to the essential structure of
the knowing mind. He maintained that objects of
experience—phenomena—may be known, but that
things lying beyond the realm of possible
experience—noumena, or things-in-themselves—are
unknowable, although their existence is a necessary
presupposition. Phenomena that can be perceived in
the pure forms of sensibility, space, and time must, if
they are to be understood, possess the characteristics
that constitute our categories of understanding. Those
categories, which include causality and substance, are
the source of the structure of phenomenal experience.
The scientist, therefore, may be sure only that the natural events
observed are knowable in terms of the categories. Our field of
knowledge, thus emancipated from Human skepticism, is nevertheless
limited to the world of phenomena. All theoretical attempts to know
things-in-themselves are bound to fail. This inevitable failure is the theme
of the portion of the Critique of Pure Reason entitled the “Transcendental
Dialectic.” Here Kant shows that the three great problems of
metaphysics—God, freedom, and immortality—are insoluble by
speculative thought. Their existence can be neither affirmed nor denied
on theoretical grounds, nor can they be scientifically demonstrated, but
Kant shows the necessity of a belief in their existence in his moral
philosophy.
Kant’s ethics centers in his categorical imperative (or moral law)—“Act
as if the maxim from which you act were to become through your will a
universal law.” This law has its source in the autonomy of a rational
being, and it is the formula for an absolutely good will. However, since we
are all members of two worlds, the sensible and the intelligible, we do not
infallibly act in accordance with this law but, on the contrary, almost
always act according to inclination. Thus what is objectively necessary,
i.e., to will in conformity to the law, is subjectively contingent; and for this
reason the moral law confronts us as an “ought.”
In the Critique of Practical Reason Kant went on to state that
morality requires the belief in the existence of God, freedom,
and immortality, because without their existence there can be
no morality. In the Critique of Judgment Kant applied his
critical method to aesthetic and teleological judgments. The
chief purpose of this work was to find a bridge between the
sensible and the intelligible worlds, which are sharply
distinguished in his theoretical and practical philosophy. This
bridge is found in the concepts of beauty and purposive ness
that suggest at least the possibility of an ultimate union of the
two realms.
Frederick Schelling- 1775-1854
He had already differed somewhat in holding that
nature cannot be subordinated to mental life. The
difference between the forces of nature and mind
must be only a matter of degree or level, and the
problem of knowledge is absorbed in the ultimate
unity of mind and matter in the Absolute. In his
later period, Schelling maintained that history is a
series of stages progressing toward harmony from
a previous fall and that differences are aspects of
this development. He argued that God also
partakes of this process of development; that deity,
to have personality, must hold within itself the
limiting factors that define personality.
Romanticism
Universal Romanticism-they were preoccupied with nature,
world soul, and artistic genius.
National Romantics-mainly interested in the history of ‘the
people,’ in general. And ‘the people’ were seen as an
organism unfolding its innate potentiality-exactly like nature
and history.
Romantic Irony-a writer could remind his reader that it was
he who was manipulating the fictional universe. Basically,
the writer will not end the main character’s life in the middle
of the story, when he needs to do more in later chapters.
George Wilhelm Friedrich
Hegel- 1770-1831
Hegel’s absolute idealism envisaged a world-soul that
develops out of, and is known through, the dialectical logic. In
this development, known as the Hegelian dialectic, one
concept (thesis) inevitably generates its opposite (antithesis),
and the interaction of these leads to a new concept
(synthesis). This in turn becomes the thesis of a new triad.
Hegel regarded Kant’s study of categories as incomplete. The
idea of being is fundamental, but it evokes its antithesis, not
being. However, these two are not mutually exclusive, for they
necessarily produce the synthesis, becoming. Hence activity is
basic, progress is rational, and logic is the basis of the world
process
The study of nature and mind reveal reason as it
realizes itself in cosmology and history. The world
process is the absolute, the active principle that does
not transcend reality but exists through and in it. The
universe develops by a self-creating plan, proceeding
from astral bodies to the world, from the mineral
kingdom to the vegetable, from the vegetable
kingdom to the animal. In society the same progress
can be discovered; human activities lead to property,
which leads to law.
Out of the relationship between the individual and law
develops the synthesis of ethics, where both the
interdependence and the freedom of individuals
interact to produce the state. The state thus is a totality
above all individuals, and since it is a unit, its highest
development is rule by monarchy. Such a state is an
embodiment of the absolute idea. In his study of
history, Hegel reviewed the history of states that held
sway over lesser peoples until a higher representative
of the absolute evolved. Though much of his
development was questionable, the concept of the
conflict of cultures stimulated historical analysis
Hegel considered art a closer approach to the absolute than government. In
the history of art he distinguished three periods—the Oriental, the Greek,
and the romantic. He believed that the modern romantic form of art cannot
encompass the magnitude of the Christian ideal. Hegel taught that religion
moved from worship of nature through a series of stages to Christianity,
where Christ represents the union of God and humanity, of spirit and
matter. Philosophy goes beyond religion as it enables humankind to
comprehend the entire historical unfolding of the absolute.
The world spirit first becomes conscious of itself in the individual. There are
three types: the subjective spirit, objective spirit, and the absolute spirit.
The subjective spirit reaches a higher consciousness in the family, civil
society, and the state. The objective spirit appears in interaction between
people. Finally, the absolute spirit is the highest form of knowledge
because in philosophy, the world spirit reflects on its own impact on history.
So the world spirit first meets itself in philosophy
Soren Kierkegaard – 1813-1855
Kierkegaard argued that in religion the important thing is not
truth as objective fact but rather the individual’s relationship to it.
Thus it is not enough to believe the Christian doctrine; one must
also live it. He attacked what he felt to be the sterile
metaphysics of G. W. Hegel and the worldliness of the Danish
church. His writings fall into two categories—the aesthetic and
the religious. The aesthetic works, which include Either/Or
(1843), Philosophical Fragments (1844), Stages on Life’s Way
(1845), and The Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), were
all published under pseudonyms and interpret human existence
through the eyes of various poetically delineated characters.
In those works Kierkegaard developed an “existential
dialectic” in opposition to the Hegelian dialectic, and
described the various stages of existence as the aesthetic,
the ethical, and the religious. As the individual advances
through these stages he becomes increasingly more aware
of his relationship to God. This awareness leads to despair
as the individual realizes the antithesis between temporal
existence and eternal truth.
Existentialism
Centered on the individual and his relationship to the universe or
to God. Kierkegaard. In his concern with the problem of the
individual’s relationship to God, Kierkegaard bitterly attacked the
abstract metaphysics of the Hegelians and the worldly
complacency of the Danish church. Kierkegaard’s fundamental
insight was the recognition of the concrete ethical and religious
demands confronting the individual. He saw that these demands
could not be met by a merely intellectual decision but required
the subjective commitment of the individual. The necessity and
seriousness of these ethical decisions facing man was for
Kierkegaard the source of his dread and despair. Kierkegaard’s
analysis of the human situation provides the central theme of
contemporary existentialism.
Following him, Heidegger and Sartre were the major thinkers
connected with this movement. Both were influenced by the
work of Edmund Husserl and developed a phenomenological
method that they used in developing their own existential
analyses. Heidegger rejected the label of “existentialist” and
described his own philosophy as an investigation of the
nature of being in which the analysis of human existence is
only the first step. Sartre was the only self-declared
existentialist among the major thinkers. For him the central
idea of all existential thought is that existence precedes
essence. For Sartre there is no God and therefore no fixed
human nature that forces one to act. Man is totally free and
entirely responsible for what he makes of himself. It is this
freedom and responsibility that, as for Kierkegaard, is the
source of man’s dread. Sartre’s thought, as expressed in his
novels and plays as well as in his more formal philosophical
writings, strongly influenced a current in French literature,
best represented by Albert Camus and Simone de Beauvoir.
Karl Marx – 1818-1883
He became known as a historical materialist. He was not only a
philosopher; he was a historian, a sociologist, and an
economist. He thought it was the material factors in society
which determined the way we think. He emphasized that it was
the economic forces in society that created change and thus
drove history forward. Marx had three levels in the bases of
society. Conditions of production which is the natural conditions
or resources that are available to society. Next is society’s
means of production. By this he meant the various kinds of
equipment, tools, and machinery as well as the raw materials to
be found there. Finally the mode of production is a society
which determines which political and ideological conditions are
to be found there. Society’s rulings class is the one that sets
the norms for what is right and wrong.
He believed that in all phases of history there has bee a
conflict between two dominant classes of society. Slave
society , the free citizen and slave. The feudal society
between feudal lord and serf, then later on the aristocrat
and citizen. Finally the capitalist society, upper class
and lower class. The worker and and elitist. The basic
tenets are that everything is material and that change
takes place through “the struggle of opposites.”
Because everything contains different elements that are
in opposition, “self-movement” automatically occurs; the
conflict of opposing forces leads to growth, change, and
development, according to definite laws Use of these
principles in history and sociology is sometimes called
historical materialism. Under these doctrines the social,
political, and intellectual life of society reflect only the
economic structure, since human beings create the
forms of social life solely in response to economic
needs.
Men are divided into classes by their relations to the means
of production—land and capital. The class that controls the
means of production inevitably exploits the other classes in
society; it is this class struggle that produces the dynamic
of history and is the source of progress toward a final
uniformity. Historical materialism is deterministic; that is, it
prescribes that history inevitably follows certain laws and
that individuals have little or no influence on its
development. Central to historical materialism is the belief
that change takes place through the meeting of two
opposing forces (thesis and antithesis); their opposition is
resolved by combination produced by a higher force
(synthesis). Historical materialism has had many advocates
outside the Communist world.
Charles Darwin
The concept of evolution developed in the mid-19th cent. by Charles
Robert Darwin. Darwin observed (as had Malthus) that although all
organisms tend to reproduce in a geometrically increasing ratio, the
numbers of a given species remain more or less constant. From this
he deduced that there is a continuing struggle for existence, for
survival. He pointed out the existence of variations—differences
among members of the same species—and suggested that the
variations that prove helpful to a plant or an animal in its struggle for
existence better enable it to survive and reproduce. These favorable
variations are thus transmitted to the offspring of the survivors and
spread to the entire species over successive generations. This
process he called the principle of natural selection (the expression
“survival of the fittest” was later coined by Herbert Spencer).
In the same way, sexual selection (factors influencing the choice of
mates among animals) also plays a part. In developing his theory
that the origin and diversification of species results from gradual
accumulation of individual modifications. Darwin’s evidence for
evolution rested on the data of comparative anatomy, especially the
study of homologous structures in different species and of
rudimentary (vestigial) organs; of the recapitulation of past racial
history in individual embryonic development; of geographical
distribution, extensively documented by Wallace; of the immense
variety in forms of plants and animals (to the degree that often one
species is not distinct from another); and, to a lesser degree, of
paleontology. As originally formulated, Darwinism did not distinguish
between acquired characteristics, which are not transmissible by
heredity, and genetic variations, which are inheritable. Modern
knowledge of heredity—especially the concept of mutation, which
provides an explanation of how variations may arise—has
supplemented and modified the theory, but in its basic outline
Darwinism is now universally accepted by scientists.
Sigmund Freud – 1859-1939

He practiced
psychoanalysis which is a
description of the human
mind in the general as well
as a therapy for nervous
and mental disorders. Our
actions are not always
guided by reason. Irrational
impulses often determine
what we think, what we
dream, and what we do.

Freud showed these
basic needs can be
disguised or
‘sublimated’ thereby
steering our actions
without our being aware
of it. When we come
into the world we live
out our physical and
mental needs which he
called the pleasure
principle or id. He
worked with the ego,
superego (consists of
guilt, learning wrong
from society).
He focused on the
subconscious or the
unconscious. Which leads
to the idea of projection.
When we project, we
transfer the characteristics
we are trying to repress in
ourselves onto other people.
He developed a technique
called free association. In
other words, he let the
patient lie in a relaxed
position and just talk about
whatever came into his or
her mind.