Traditionally, this year will open on January 27 in Moscow with the International Christmas Readings. For many years, one of the sections - Science and Christianity - has been co-chaired by Archpriest Kirill Kopeikin, associate professor of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy, director of the Scientific Theological Center for Interdisciplinary Research, St. Petersburg State University. His section, which, as usual, is held at the Faculty of Physics of Moscow State University, is perhaps one of the most important platforms where the relationship between faith and scientific knowledge is discussed. We present to the readers' attention our correspondent's conversation with him.

Why do we need knowledge

Yes, I graduated from the physics department of St. Petersburg State University, then graduate school, defended my dissertation, then worked in the special design bureau "Integral" at the university.

- Why do many physicists become priests? It seems to be a distant sphere ...

Not that far, actually. Francis Bacon, who can be called the founder of modern science, argued that God gave us Revelation in two forms. The first is the Bible, and the second is the world itself, which is the Creator's book. At the same time, Bacon believed that reading the book of nature gives us the keys to a deeper understanding of the Bible. Probably, it is, because, as we can see, this idea of ​​cognition of the Creator through creation is still latently present in physics. This is on the one hand. On the other hand, it must be said that it was physics that allowed us to develop a theoretical view of the world. And the essence of the theoretical vision is as follows. In physics, the world is drawn not as a collection of certain facts, objects, in it we describe the laws governing these bodies. The laws discovered by physics have a primary ontological (existential) reality. That is, when we are engaged in physics, we, as it were, take the position of the Lawgiver, the Creator. It seems to me that this is what leads many physicists to the fact that they begin to perceive their occupation in physics as a kind of sacred action, and then become priests.

- People come to the Church in different ways, and this leaves an imprint on people. What imprint does physics leave?

I think, first of all, the habit of disciplined thinking. And also - freedom of judgment, lack of fear of novelty, courage that allows one to overcome common stereotypes.

But in the systematic there is schematism, which can narrow the living experience of faith. Some believe that a believer does not even need theology, they say, why think, learn something, when it is enough to be with God.

Yes, the Apostle Paul said that in the world of the age to come, knowledge will be abolished, only Love will remain. When we see Him face to face. But until that happens, we need theology, physics, and much more.

The Monk Maximus the Confessor, one of the greatest Byzantine theologians, believed that the knowledge of the fluid, created nature is a kind of game that ultimately leads us to the knowledge of God. And as a child leaves toys, parting with childhood, so a person in the future will move to some higher level of knowledge. Everything has its time. In the meantime, you just need to go through your period of development.

About rationalism

In one of your articles you write: "Only by making science its ally, the Church will be able to attract the intelligentsia, which could bear witness to the faith to all educated people." But how to do that? After all, the Church will then have to adjust to the rationality of science.

Is the church environment irrational?

- But faith is against rationality.

Who told you that? Look at the Scriptures. The Apostle Paul says that our ministry is a rational ministry (Rom. 12: 1). In the Greek original, the words are used there λоγικηλατρια (pronounced "logics"), and in Latin it was translated as "ration". Our service to God is intelligent service. Reason is a gift from God, a sin to refuse it. Another thing is that everything is not reduced to only one mind.

- Meanwhile, our intellectuals-atheists call themselves rationalists and are kind of proud of it.

Well, that's what they just think to themselves. In fact, the nature of their atheism is irrational. Because this is the result of the dominance of 70 years of so-called scientific atheism, about which Berdyaev wrote well: there is no rationality behind this, behind this is the struggle for power over souls and the desire of the totalitarian state to completely subjugate everything and everyone. You see, this is a disaster that needs to be overcome. And this is gradually happening.

Now science itself inevitably comes to overcoming atheistic materialism. The remarkable Russian physicist David Nikolaevich Klyshko, who was engaged in quantum optics and quantum informatics, wrote in one of the last works published in the most authoritative journal Uspekhi Fizicheskikh Nauk, that we still do not have a materialistic interpretation of the state vector, which is a mathematical representative of elementary micro-objects ... Do you understand? We cannot describe the particles that make up matter in a materialistic way. Nothing new in terms of their description has yet been invented, but it is already clear that this will not be materialism in the usual sense of the word. And many scientists are talking about this. The late Academician Ginzburg, in his Nobel lecture, named the interpretation of quantum mechanics among the three great problems of physics. Until now, no one can understand what reality is behind the mathematical constructions with which we describe the world - and this is important in order to move further in the study of elementary particle physics.

Nevertheless, he understood that the world was on the verge of the emergence of some kind of new physics. Once I showed him my work on Jung and Pauli. Wolfgang Pauli was an outstanding physicist, Nobel laureate, one of the founders of quantum mechanics. And Carl Gustav Jung was an outstanding psychologist, the creator of analytical psychology. And they jointly tried to understand how the physical and mental interact in this world. Vitaly Lazarevich was initially surprised that "some priest" was writing a work on this topic. But then he showed it to his colleagues, they found no mistakes, and Ginzburg, being an honest person and seeing the scientific conscientiousness of the work, posted it on the podium of the site of the journal Uspekhi Fizicheskikh Nauk.

- And what kind of psyche can there be in the physical world? After all, atoms are inanimate ...

This is the mystery. In fact, the quantum world often behaves as if it were alive.

Living world

By "live" you mean the so-called observer effect? This is when the very fact of observing quantum particles by a scientist changes their physical parameters. That is, the particles, it turns out, react to what a person measures them.

Yes, including this. The most unexpected thing we encounter when in our exploration of the world we reach the fundamental level, to quantum mechanical objects, is that objects are more like something mental than physical, in the ordinary sense of the word. We are used to thinking that an object exists by itself. And then suddenly it was discovered that quantum objects interact with us and, as it were, answer our questions. It is so surprising that the English physicist Charles Galton Darwin wrote an article in 1919 in which he argued that quanta are very similar to living organisms. And he even thought that perhaps the electron would have to ascribe free will.

- He is not related to another Charles Darwin, the founder of soulless mechanical evolutionism?

This is his grandson. And, unlike his grandfather, he was already in another world of scientific ideas - he was a direct witness to the birth of the quantum theory of the structure of the atom, he himself left a noticeable mark in experimental physics. For example, scientists know the Darwin-Fowler method. At one time, his book "The Modern Concept of Matter" was very popular.

And the German philosopher Alois Wenzel, who wrote the book "Metaphysics of Modern Physics", went even further. He argued that the world of elementary objects is similar to the world of elemental spirits. Although I would call it "elementary logoi". You see, in a sense, the whole reality that we face in the Kantian world is alive. And we interact with this reality.

- Isn't there a temptation to pantheism in such a view of physical reality? Like, the whole world is the living God?

There will always be dangers if you fantasize thoughtlessly. It is clear, however, that from the very fact of "living matter" it does not follow in any way that this is God. It's just that the Creator created such materiality. And this does not contradict Orthodox teaching.

Metropolitan Anthony of Sourozh, in my opinion, one of the greatest theologians of the twentieth century, said that the only true materialism is Christianity. What did he mean? That we believe in matter not as something inert, dead, but as something called by God to be transformed. And Vladyka Anthony remarks very accurately: this is what happens in the Church. When we celebrate the Liturgy, a miracle of transformation takes place - God unites with bread and wine. Vladyka Anthony explains that this is not a magical violence against matter, but, on the contrary, it is the raising of matter to the level to which it was called by God, to the state about which the Apostle Paul writes: “God will be all things in all” (1 Cor. 15, 28). The whole world must be deified, brought into union with God. And the Vladyka says wonderfully: God does not create anything dead, since He Himself is life.

- But we, ordinary people, still live in the world of dead, inert matter. Only scientists see the quantum world.

Why only scientists? It is in the miracles that sometimes occur that this innermost life of matter is revealed.

This is the picture. What we observe in our macrocosm is a consequence of the Fall, our fallen world. But if we try to see what the fallen, inert matter consists of, then at the elementary level we see signs of some other, “living” state? Or, as it were, borderline with the "living"? At the elementary level, particles have quantum uncertainty - they are simultaneously localized and not localized in space. There is an effect of entanglement, when the state of one particle can be instantly transferred to another, even if they are at a great distance from each other. That is, there are signs of the existence of a world with different laws. Maybe further, beyond this level, there is a subtle world?

In my opinion, it is wrong to oppose the "thin" and "not thin" worlds. This is done by those who have an old Newtonian picture of the world in their heads: they say, there is space and time as a repository of events, and material bodies are in them. In fact, the universe is completely different. Space and time in it arise as a result of a very complex system of relations between elements that themselves have a certain, I would say, internal dimension of being. And the fabric of reality is very tightly intertwined, it is alive, and the world consists of elementary particles, which are more like logos, like monads, like something living. And we interact very closely with this. This is our reality, not some "subtle" world.

- It is difficult to imagine such an interaction. We are big, we are in the macrocosm, and there are the smallest particles ...

What does “we are big” mean? All this happens in ourselves, including at the genetic level. Back in 1943, one of the founders of quantum mechanics, Erwin Schrödinger, developed ideas about the connection between genetics and quantum mechanics. And our compatriot, the outstanding geneticist Timofeev-Resovsky, said that the discreteness (separation, discontinuity) of our bodies is a manifestation of the quantum nature of the world. It can be assumed that genes are like amplifiers that transfer “life” from the quantum microscopic level to the macroscopic level. And at the same time, the property of discreteness is transmitted. That is, we have separate bodies precisely as a result of the quantum nature of the world. And if the world at a fundamental level was arranged differently, then life could look, for example, like a continuous ocean.

- How in the movie "Solaris"?

Like that. There would be not a discrete world, not separate beings, but one community.

The fact that matter at its elementary level behaves like "living", does not confirm the evolutionist theory, according to which life and mind arose by themselves? Previously, atheists argued that living things arose from inert, inorganic matter, and this was easily refuted. But what if matter is originally "living"?

Just like that, without creative Reason, one cannot be transformed into another. In addition, the idea of ​​spontaneous emergence of intelligent life refutes the phenomenon of "silence of the universe." You probably know: in the 60s and 70s, scientists were actively looking for extraterrestrial life. And this program still works. At the same time, note that recently astrophysicists have begun to detect a lot of exoplanets in space. As of December 2013, the existence of 1,056 planets has been reliably confirmed. In the Milky Way galaxy alone, according to new data, there should be more than 100 billion planets, of which 5 to 20 billion are possibly "Earth-like". Also, according to some estimates, about 34 percent of sun-like stars have planets close to them, comparable to the Earth. Here are all the conditions for the "spontaneous emergence of life" and the development of civilizations. But they somehow do not make themselves felt.

- And should they?

The likelihood of this can be estimated. Professor of the Department of Astrophysics and Stellar Astronomy of the Physics Faculty of Moscow State University Vladimir Mikhailovich Lipunov proposes to do this as follows. We agree with astrophysicists that the universe has existed for about 10 billion years. Let's accept the fact that over the last century our civilization has been developing exponentially, with acceleration. Then the number characterizing the growth of a technological civilization during the existence of the universe will be of the order of exp (10,000,000 / 100), that is, 10 42,000,000. This is a colossal number. For comparison: the number of all elementary particles in the universe is only 10 80. That is, the likelihood of the emergence of civilizations like ours is as great as the existence of matter itself is obvious. They should be, period. And astrophysicists should see traces of the activities of these civilizations in space.

Once the great physicists who participated in the Manhattan Project started talking about whether extraterrestrial civilizations exist. Enrico Fermi said: "They are definitely not there." He was asked: "Why?" He replied: "If this kind of civilization existed, then our entire sky would be in flying saucers." This is now called the "Fermi paradox".

How can this paradox be explained? One of the brightest Russian astrophysicists Viktoriy Favlovich Shvartsman believed that perhaps there are signals from another civilization, but we do not understand their meaning. This is akin to the most important thing in art - the understanding that we are really a work of art. And here everything rests on the person himself. The astrophysicist was convinced that the knowledge of the external world is a more primitive task than the knowledge and construction of the inner world of man, the spiritual and ethical world; the technological age will soon end, humanity will understand that it has lost its way, and, finally, it will completely occupy itself with the soul in the broad sense of the word.

Poem of God

Father Kirill, and yet it is not clear how in matter, albeit in "living", mind can be enclosed. These are different things, aren't they?

What does it mean? And what is matter in general?

Look: the world as we know it consists mainly of emptiness. What is an atom? If the nucleus of the hydrogen atom, the most abundant element in space, is enlarged to the size of a soccer ball, then the electrons around it will revolve at a distance of about a kilometer. Can you imagine? And if the distance between electrons and nuclei in the human body is removed, then the person will turn into the smallest speck of dust. The world, which, as it seems to us, is filled with solid matter, is in fact almost nothing. The effect of hardness in it is due to the electromagnetic interaction that keeps the particles at a certain distance. What is electromagnetic interaction? Its manifestation is a stream of photons, that is, light. And when the Apostle Paul says that everything that appears is light (Eph. 5:13), then this can be understood literally. That is, the material world is actually very ephemeral, on the verge of reality. This is the first thing.

Now the second. If we remember that the world was created by the Word of God, then the question arises: what is the reality of the word? If we are created in the image and likeness of God, when we create a poetic work, then where does this reality exist? The Monk Maximus the Confessor calls the material world "the whole-woven tunic of the Logos." Saint Gregory Palamas, in which Orthodox theology probably reaches its peak, calls this world "the writing of the self-hypostatic Word." In the Creed, we confess God to be the "Creator of the universe", and in Greek there is literally "poetis". If the world is a poem of God, then where does it exist? When a person creates a poem, where does he create it?

- In some kind of information field.

What other field? Here I am sitting, making up a poem. In what information field does it exist?

- Eh ... well, in consciousness, I guess.

In your mind, in your psyche, right? So where does the world exist?

- In the mind of God?

This conclusion can be made based on the data of modern science. Realizing that this so-called material world consists of almost nothing materially, we see that the world is the psychic of the Creator. Thought is born out of nothing, so our world was created out of nothing.

- So, we are all thoughts of God? At any moment, God can think differently and ... we will disappear?

No. Here is a poet, he created a poem out of nothing with the forces of his soul. And she, the poem, lives her own life. Although there is a piece of the author's soul in it.

- That is, our mind is like a part of God?

No, I'm speaking figuratively. To put your soul into a work is to create from yourself, in your own image and likeness. And we received this from the Lord. The proof of this is that we can be aware of both ourselves and His presence.

There is such a famous physicist, Aleksey Burov, who is now working in the United States, at Fermilab, at the Enrico Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory. In one of his works, he writes that today 45 orders of the universe are open before us - from 10 -19 meters (this is the order studied at the Large Hadron Collider) to 10 26 meters (this is the distance at which galaxies visible through the Hubble telescope ). Can you imagine what it is? 10 with 45 zeros meters - this is what the scale of the universe is open to us. And he asks: the ability to see the universe on such a scale does not mean that our mind is similar to the mind of the Creator?

Belief is usually considered to be something subjective, in the realm of illusion. But now, says physicist Burov, the most concrete proof of our faith is science, the ability of man to encompass the universe with his mind and penetrate into its essence. He writes: “It is customary to regard religious experience as strictly subjective, as opposed to scientific. The words "religious experience" give rise to an association of unique, indescribable personal experiences, visions and revelations. Isn't there a delusion here, isn't there an unjustified narrowing of religious experience? .. In the history of mankind there is no experience of faith, more majestic and at the same time completely objective, like the experience of fundamental science, like the experience of the cosmic growth of man himself ... Science itself with cosmic power testifies to divine sonship, as a real relationship between man and God. "

That is, the very fact that we, being inside a closed system, are able to mentally go beyond it, speaks of the transcendence of our mind?

Yes, this is an absolutely amazing fact, although we take it for granted without hesitation. But imagine this picture: Pierre Bezukhov and Andrei Bolkonsky are discussing the structure of the novel War and Peace and the idea of ​​Lev Nikolaevich Tolstoy. But we are in the same position - being a part of this world, we make a claim to understand its laws and even the meaning of its existence, that is, the Creator's plan. Einstein said so bluntly: “I want to know how God created the world. I am not interested here in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to comprehend His thoughts, everything else is details. "

In the last years of Einstein's life, his collaborator was the famous American physicist John Archibald Wheeler. And, reflecting on what place a person occupies in the universe, he came to the following conclusion: “He who thinks of himself simply as an observer turns out to be a participant. In some strange sense, this is participation in the creation of the universe. This is the central conclusion for the problem “quantum and the Universe” ”. Wheeler saw that the nonlocality of quantum physics, coupled with the influence of the observer on the observed system, directly indicates that we are co-creators of the Creator and participate in the ongoing creation of the universe.

The Bible says that Adam was God's co-worker in paradise because he was assigned to tend God's garden. But this cooperation ended after the Fall and expulsion from paradise? We are punished, as it were, "put in a corner."

Not certainly in that way. We have been given the opportunity to correct. And the possibility of co-creation with God is still present in us. Not to the same extent, of course, as it was in paradise - and thank God, because, being in our current depraved state, we could destroy a lot. Actually, this is what we do often. Nevertheless, this gift of God remained and imposes a great responsibility on us.

Looking to the future

You said that the world is on the verge of a new physics. What is changing in science now, what trends are being traced?

Now the question of what is consciousness is becoming relevant, programs for the study of a person, his psyche are emerging. A lot of money is spent on this. In Europe, for example, the Human Brain Project has been launched, in which more than 130 European research institutions are involved. He has funding of 1 billion 2 million euros. The media report that it has already managed to obtain the most detailed computer image, or, as they say, the most detailed map of the human brain. Scientists are trying to figure out how the structure of the brain affects the behavior and abilities of a person, how individual differences in the structure of the brain are associated with differences in personal abilities. And in the United States launched a grandiose project BRAIN, which stands for "Study of the brain through the development of innovative neurotechnologies." Its funding - $ 3 billion - is enormous, especially in the context of the financial crisis and the curtailment of many scientific programs.

- And what can it give?

I believe that the question of the nature of consciousness cannot be resolved outside the theological context. Because the very concept of personality, consciousness - it arises only in the context of the biblical Revelation. And research projects launched today will inevitably lead to an understanding of this.

And one more question, in conclusion. And in the people themselves, something is changing? I mean the atheistic mood among the intelligentsia. You are the rector of the church at St. Petersburg University and you constantly communicate with students, future scientists.

There are a lot of believers among the students, and even more seekers. Studentship is, after all, a time of active search for the meaning of life, for its own way of life.

- Do they go to church?

The services are mainly attended by teachers and graduates. And for students, the university is the place where they study, and then there's the temple, on Sundays they go to the university again.

- Scrap, as the youth say.

Yes, but at the same time I have never encountered their negative reaction.

These guys organized themselves and hold meetings at the Church of St. Tatiana. We have two temples at the university. The first, the Apostle Peter and Paul, is located in the building of the Twelve Colleges. We started serving there back in 1996. At first, there is a prayer service once a month, then - once a week. Now the service is every Sunday and on holidays - usually about a hundred people come, but on Easter it is simply not possible to enter the church, everything does not fit. And the church of St. Tatiana is in the building of the former Larinsky gymnasium on the 6th line of Vasilyevsky Island, which now belongs to the Faculty of Philology and the Faculty of Arts.

- You probably read lectures in the community?

Yes, lectures are held constantly, I also read, and I invite someone.

- As soon as you have time ...

With difficulty and with the help of God!

- Let me wish you God's help in the coming year, and thank you for the interesting conversation.

Recorded by Mikhail Sizov

Philosophical foundations

Philosophical principles of psychology.

Living organism.

Evolution of the psyche of living organisms

The psyche of the simplest living organisms (1st generation).

The psyche of living organisms of the 2nd level of development.

INSTALLATIONS OF SUBCONSCIOUSNESS.

The psyche of living organisms of the 3rd level of development.

The psyche of living organisms of the 4th level of development.

The psyche of living organisms of the 5th level of development.

The psyche of living organisms of the 6th level of development.

The psyche of living organisms of the 7th level of development.

CONSCIOUSNESS.

Once again about subjective images.

How consciousness works.

Transfer of information at the level of consciousness.

Transfer of information at the subconscious level.

How the subconscious mind affects the work of consciousness.

How information is stored in the psyche.

What role do feelings play in the psyche?

How art affects the human psyche

Mental illnesses and their causes

Stages of development of consciousness.

What the immaterial world consists of.

The psyche is like a program in a computer. The information in a computer is made up of programs and the data that programs use. Both program and data are intangible objects. But programs exist to serve an external operator (human). Therefore, we cannot say that there are programs similar to computer programs in the psyche. Since the programs in the computer are not self-sufficient, that is, their functioning is provided by an external operator. But it should be recognized that the psyche consists of programs that ensure the vital activity of a living organism. In order to emphasize their difference from computer programs, let us call them information structures.

In the psyche there are information structures (programs), as well as information data used by information structures. Information structures and data will be called information objects.

Any computer program has a certain size, measured in bytes. In the psyche, any information structure takes a certain size (they have a certain information capacity).

Information structure and information data are non-material objects that can exist only on a material medium. They occupy a certain information capacity in the psyche of a living organism. The psyche consists of these two types of information objects.

Definition 1: Information object- This is an intangible object that can exist only on a material medium, occupying a certain information capacity.

With this definition, we introduce the basis for the use of mathematical methods in the description of mental processes: when describing an information object, one can indicate its information capacity.

In addition, looking ahead, I want to say that for the existence of an organism with a certain level of development, a certain minimum information capacity is needed. Similarly, the more complex a computer program is, the larger it occupies in the information domain. Although it is possible to create a primitive program that takes up a lot of information space, it is impossible to create a complex program that will take up less than a certain level of information space. It follows from this that for the existence, for example, of consciousness in a living organism, its information capacity must be no less than a certain size. So, if scientists know the minimum information volume required for the existence of consciousness and meet some living creature whose brain information capacity is less than the required level, then scientists can conclude that the living being does not have consciousness.

Based on axiom 1, we assert that the psyche exists only on material carriers. That is, if we recognize the movement of the soul in space, then we will have to look for material carriers of information that move it. This axiom will allow us to make scientific reasoning, not mystical. That is information cannot move without the medium of tangible media, and it can only be stored on tangible media... This statement is as important for the informational (non-material) world as the law of conservation of energy for the material world.

A program in a computer consists of commands that make up a specific algorithm. That is, any program consists of algorithms. The information structure also consists of algorithms that implement specific needs. The need to perform certain calculations arises in computer programs, after, for example, after the operator has pressed a key. After pressing a key, the program needs to display the symbol on the monitor. Of course, comparing the work of the psyche with the work of a computer is an oversimplification that I use to explain the essence of the theory using simpler examples.

It can be said that one of the goals of each information structure is to satisfy certain needs of a living organism. The satisfaction of the need is provided by a certain algorithm.

From all that has been said, the following definition of an information structure follows:

Definition 2: Information structure(IS) is an information object consisting of algorithms, that is, having needs.

Necessity is the focus of IP on achieving a certain result.

The most primitive virus contains a single information structure with the need to multiply. A more complex virus has a need to defend itself (self-preservation program). In certain situations, the need to persist can dominate the need to reproduce. That is, the information structure of such a virus consists of two information structures that fight among themselves for a dominant position. A colony of living things can successfully exist either through effective survival or through effective reproduction. And if both IS (information structures) work effectively, then such a colony will simply oust other colonies in the struggle for material resources.

The presence of needs distinguishes information structure from information data. Similarly, a computer program differs from an information store.

Just as a computer has a processor for executing instructions, there is a processor that executes instructions of information structures in living organisms.

Such a processor exists in every cell of a living organism, in every virus.

Analogy of the work of the psyche with the work of a computer.

When explaining more complex things, we use analogies with the principle of the structure of simpler things. Such a simpler device is a computer. Therefore, I will briefly focus on explaining the basic principle of its operation. Then I will reveal an analogy with the basic principle of the psyche of a living organism.

The center of any computer is the processor. It is a device that is capable of executing a specific set of commands. The programmer builds various algorithms based on this small set, which allow creating a huge variety of software.

The principle of the processor is as follows: the processor receives a command, and the processor performs the action that corresponds to the given command.

Similarly, there are reflexes in the psyche: a certain algorithm is executed according to a certain stimulus.

1. 1. Yakov Feldman Theory of man 1. Philosophy 1. 1. What is the world made of? September 2011 Russia
2. 2. Ontology Ontology answers the questions - How does our world work or - What does our world consist of? Since we are inside the section "Philosophy", then our answer to this question will be formulated in the most general of all meaningful ways. But first, let's look at history
3. 3. Ontologies From Thales to Popper
4. 4. Thales of Miletus (ancient Greek Θαλῆσ ὁ Μιλήςιοσ, 640 / 624-548 / 545 BC) the founder of European science and philosophy He believed that "the whole world consists of water"
5. 5. Pythagoras of Samos (ancient Greek Πυθαγόρασ ὁ Σάμιοσ, Latin Pythagoras; 570-490 BC) - an ancient Greek philosopher and mathematician, the creator of the religiously believed that the philosophical school "everything is a number" of the Pythagoreans Founded - modern mathematics and - modern music theory
6. 6. Parmenides of Elea (Greek Παρμενίδης; c. 540 or 520 BC - He believed that "Being is, ao 450 BC) there is no nonexistence" - This is the most general of possible ontological formulations - This is rather not a logical but a value statement. Its meaning: it is necessary to study only the eternal, there is no point in studying "fluid things"
7. 7. Empedocles of Akragant (other Greek Ἐμπεδοκλῆσ) (c. 490 BC, Agrigento - c. 430 BC) -ancient Greek philosopher, physician, statesman He believed that the world consists of a quadruple, a priest. beginnings - Earth - Water - Air - Fire And two forces - Friendship and - Enmity
8. 8. Democritus of Abdera There are only atoms in the world (Δημόκριτοσ; c. 460 BC - c. 370 BC) - and the emptiness of the ancient Greek philosopher, one of the Atoms are the most founders of modern physics of different shapes and sizes. very different speeds. Everything that we observe in the world comes from this movement.
9. 9. Plato, in the spirit of Parmenides, asserts, Plato (ancient Greek Πλάτων) that it is only necessary to study "the eternal, (428 or 427 BC, behind things", then we understand Athens - 348 or 347 BC). e., and the things themselves. ibid) - the ancient Greek philosopher This eternal, behind things, he calls "ideas." Things are "realization of ideas in space" Ideas are hierarchically ordered. Among them there is one highest idea - the idea of ​​the Good. Later, Christians identified the idea of ​​Goodness with God. The human soul consists of three principles - rational, furious and passionate, which roughly corresponds to our concepts of "intellect", "will" and "emotions"
10. 10. Plato in the VI book of "States" divides everything that exists into two kinds: felt and thought. The felt is again divided into two kinds - the objects themselves and their assimilation. Taken together, these abilities make up perception. The imaginable is also divided into two kinds - these are ideas of things and their mathematical models Ideas are eternal and unchanging essences The ability to work with ideas is reason The second kind is mathematical models The ability to create and explore such objects is reason. Reason and understanding together constitute thinking.
11. 11. Aristotle believed that the consideration of "ideas" (ancient Greek Ἀριςτοτζλησ; 384 BC, Stagir - only interferes with the knowledge of things. 322 BC, Chalcis, Instead, he introduced the island of Euboea) - things ”, thus the ancient Greek philosopher and scientist. Disciple of Plato, laying the foundation for the "analysis of factors." He found four such reasons for each thing - Material (from what) - Formal (by what structure) - Acting (from what energy) - Target (for what) He believed that the soul is a function of the body, as sharpness is the function of a knife
12. 12. Nominalism and Realism Two Positions in Medieval Philosophy Nominalism: General Concepts - Names of Things or Names of Names of Things Realism: General Concepts - Independent Entities In scholastic philosophy, the reason for the dispute between realists and nominalists was Porfiry's book "on five voices". In 1092, Soissons Cathedral denounced Nominalism as a false doctrine
13. 13. Nominalism and Realism continued Nominalists Realists Bernhard of Tours Geyrik of Oxerr Roscelin Remigius of Auxerre Henry of Ghent Anselm of Canterbury Sereschal of William Champeau Peter of Spain Walter de Mortan Buridan John of Salisbury Okkam Nicholas of Otrekur ---------------- ------ Nikolay Orem Pierre Abelard took a compromise position
14. 14. René Descartes (fr. René Descartes postulates Descartes; Latin Renatus the existence of two independent Cartesius - Cartesias; substances 1596-1650) - - Long and French - Thinking mathematician, philosopher, The correspondence between them, the physicist and the physiologist, guarantees God. soul. Animals do not have a soul, in this sense they are indistinguishable from mechanisms A person's soul is mated with his body in his brain
15. 15. Charles Sanders Peirce (English Charles Sanders Peirce; 1839 - 1914) American philosopher, logician, mathematician Called for a special study of symbolic systems and coined the term "semiotics"
16. 16. Bertrand Arthur William Russell, 3rd EarlRussell; 1872 - 1970) - Author of Analytical English mathematician, philosopher and philosophy public figure Author (with Whitehead) of translation of all mathematics into modern formal logical language
17. 17. Bertrand Russell (1924) The world consists of a certain number, possibly finite, possibly infinite, entities that have different relationships to each other and, perhaps, of different qualities. Each of these entities can be called an event. Each event is related to a certain number of others that can be called compressed. From the point of view of physics, the entire set of squeezed events occupies a small area of ​​space-time. One of the examples of many compressed events can be what will be called the content of the consciousness of a certain person at a certain time, that is, all his sensations, images, memories, thoughts, etc., which can exist at one time. We will define the set of squeezed events as the minimum area. We will find that the minimal regions form a four-dimensional manifold and, through small logical manipulations, we can construct from them the space-time manifold that physics requires.
18. 18. Bertrand Russell continued We also find that certain regions of space-time have very special properties. These areas are said to be occupied by matter. Such areas can be united by the laws of physics in trajectories or paths that are much more extended in one dimension of space-time than in the other three. This path forms the history of a piece of matter. All types of matter to some extent, and certain types (nervous tissue), first of all, are able to form habits, that is, to change their structure in a given environment in such a way that when they subsequently find themselves in a similar environment, they react in a new way, but if a similar environment occurs frequently, the response eventually becomes more uniform, although differences in responses first occur. Consciousness is the trajectory of many compressed events in the area of ​​space-time, where matter exists, the features of which are due to the formation of familiar features. The more lability, the more complex and organized consciousness becomes. Thus, consciousness and the brain are really inseparable.
19. 19. Ludwig Josef Johann Early Wittgenstein Wittgenstein (German Ludwig Josef Johann - The world consists of facts, and Wittgenstein; 1889, Vienna - not of objects 1951, Cambridge) - Austro-English philosopher - Language reflects the world. Late Wittgenstein - Language is a collection of contexts and symbolic games
20. 20. Pointed out the connection between the subject of culture as Lev Semyonovich Vygotsky symbol and development (Lev Simkhovich Vygodsky; individual psyche 1896 - 1934) -soviet psychologist, The subject of culture as the founder of the cultural symbol for the consciousness of the historical school is psychology and - Tool = tool for mastering = understanding the external world - A tool for the development of the individual consciousness itself, since the mastered and newly discovered ways of understanding the world enrich this consciousness
21. 21. George Herbert Mead In parallel with Vygotsky (eng. George Herbert Mead) and independently of him (1863-1931) - an American philosopher and sociologist (apparently they did not know anything about each other) at the University of Chicago, put forward two key ideino did not publish a single (so far underestimated) book and did not have any titles. Thinking is born in His lectures were published in a dialogue with others, and after his death it turns into a dialogue with himself, which, in fact, is thinking Signs are born as tools of communication, and then gradually turn into tools of thinking
22. 22. Divided our world into three worlds - The world of objective knowledge (M-3) - The world of subjective knowledge or Karl Raimund Popper The world of mental states (M-2) (German Karl Raimund Popper; - Material facts (M-1) 1902 - 1994) - He believed that the M-3 Austrian and British philosopher and sociologist interacts with the M-1 not directly, but through the M-2 Popper believes that we do not discover mathematical systems, but invent, - although by inventing a system we automatically receive a gift (from whom?) mandatory properties of this system, which we still have to discover
23. 23. In his work "The role of labor in the process of transformation of a monkey into a man" (1876) he showed how in the struggle with the world of ngels of nature a modern one arose (Friedrich Engels; man 1820 - 1895) - Thus, the explicit German philosopher formulated the opposition "nature - culture" Engels (and Marx) understood this opposition as a transition from "natural man" to "man spoiled by civilization" (Jean-Jacques Rousseau)
24. Gumilev in detail Lev Nikolaevich Gumilyov analyzes (1912 - 1992) - the interaction of the historian-ethnologist, human society, the doctor of historical and geographic sciences (ethnos) with its natural habitat (biogeocenosis) And shows that ethnic groups arise in nature where a sustainable economic way of developing nature is developed
25. 25. About mathematics What is the nature of mathematical objects? There are three possible answers to this question1. Mathematical objects exist in the world - - They are the essence of this world (Pythagoras) - They are a special kind of ideas (Plato) - If you look closely, you can clearly see them (Descartes) 2. There are no mathematical objects in the world, but we can invent them (as we invented the wheel) - This is the point of view of K. Popper (see above) - This is the point of view of N. Lobachevsky, who called his book "Imaginary Geometry" 3. Mathematical objects make up a special world. We can study this world. Sometimes we can use parts of this second world to describe what happens in the first - the material world - This point of view penetrated into mathematics at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. - The first who clearly formulated it was Frege (1883)
26. 26. About mathematics What is the nature of mathematical objects? There are three possible answers to this question1. Mathematical objects are some properties of the physical world selected and recorded by man - Mathematicians: Gauss - Nematics: Ulyanov-Lenin 2. There are no mathematical objects in the world, but we can invent them (as we invented the wheel) - Mathematicians: Lobachevsky - Nematics: Karl Popper 3. Mathematical objects make up a special world. We can study this world. Sometimes we can use parts of this second world to describe what happens in the first - the material world - This point of view penetrated into mathematics in the late 19th century. - The first who clearly formulated it was Frege (1883)
27. 27. “A mathematician can create things of his own free will not at all Friedrich Ludwig Gottlob more than Frege the geographer can do; mathematician only (Friedrich Ludwig Gottlob discovers what already exists and Frege gives it a name "(1883) 1848 -1925) - German logician, mathematician and philosopher The meaning and meaning of the concept (sign) are not identical. (1892) According to Frege - Meaning is an object that a given sign points to (a set of objects). - The meaning is the procedure with which this set of objects was built
28. 28. Frege, Plato and I Some authors (for example, R. Collins) identify Frege's views on mathematical objects with those of Plato and believe that this proves the falsity of this position. Recognizing that Plato was strongly influenced by the Pythagoreans and, accordingly, impressed by the results obtained by contemporary mathematicians, I believe that 1. Frege is essentially right. Frege, unlike Plato, did not believe that - Our knowledge is a memory. The soul recalls the world of ideas, in which it was before entering the body - Ideas are behind things. Moreover, ideas are embodied in things3. On my own behalf, I want to add that one should not equate mathematical systems with symbolic ones. 4. Symbolic systems are part of culture. They are born and die along with the culture. Mathematical objects, like many physical (natural) ones, lie outside of culture5. Symbolic systems also represent mathematical objects as they represent physical objects.
29. 29. History of mathematics of the 19th century regarding the nature of mathematical objects 1826. Lobachevsky publishes his report "A Concise Exposition of the Principles of Geometry". In 1840 Lobachevsky published Geometry in German and sent two copies to Gauss. In a letter to Schumacher (1846) Gauss admits that the same ideas occurred to him, but he did not publish them. However, Gauss expressed his sympathy for Lobachevsky's ideas indirectly: he recommended that Lobachevsky be elected a foreign corresponding member of the Göttingen Royal Scientific Society in 1831. Boyai Sr. sends Gauss his son's work. Gauss replies, "These ideas have already crossed my mind." In the 1830-1840s, mathematicians actively discussed "whether it is possible to use in mathematical reasoning objects that cannot be observed in the physical world, for example, negative numbers and even zero" 1843. Hamilton discovers quaternions. (They certainly cannot be observed in any way) 1854. In the presence of Gauss, Riemann reads a historical lecture "On the hypotheses underlying geometry." The Commission does not approve the report. The report was published only in 1868. In 1879, Kantor publishes "Transfinite Numbers". This work meets with a sharp rebuff from Kronecker - for the study of that "which does not happen" 1879. Frege publishes his Calculus of Concepts. ALL.
30. 30. About Soviet philosophy Soviet philosophy (from 1930 to 1989) existed in special conditions - The threat of personal and collective repression. Therefore, the new authors - who entered the circle of researchers after 1930 - hid their ideas in the shadow of the great permitted names (Marx, Engels, Lenin) - The focus on the world philosophical classics remained, and at the same time, limited acquaintance with the world philosophy of the twentieth century - the knowledge of languages ​​was lost, there were few translations - Limited personal contacts with foreign colleagues. Limited publications abroad All this led to the fact that new ideas were “dragged into books” in the clothes of “the old, long-known among the classics of Marxism”. In this form, they did not attract the attention of world philosophy and were not assimilated by it. Synthesis of the results of Soviet philosophy and philosophy of the rest of the world is one of my tasks
31. 31. ONTOLOGY My version
32. 32. First dichotomy Our world splits into two parallel worlds. Nothing that exists lies in these two worlds at once. Nothing that exists lies outside these two worlds. Nothing that exists passes from world to world These two worlds could be called - MMF - the world of material (physical) facts and - MIC - the world of ideal (mathematical) constructions These worlds are equally real and equally primary Each of these worlds has its own given metric and its own set topology
33. 33. The first dichotomy (continuation) Any existing can be attributed to one of the two worlds according to the following rule - All that "here and now" or "there and then" lies in the MMF - That "everywhere and always" lies in the MIC First dichotomy can be called the Descartes Dichotomy
34. 34. First dichotomy Mathematical objects Descartes dichotomy Physical facts
35. 35. The second dichotomy Humanity lies in the MMF and everything that is made (or appropriated) by humanity lies in the MMF. The above can be called the "world of man" Everything that lies in the MMF, but does not lie in the "world of man", can be called the "world of nature" This dichotomy I would call the Engels-Gumilyov Dichotomy
36. 36. Second dichotomy Mathematical objects Descartes-Engels-Gumilev dichotomy Human world Dichotomy Natural world Physical facts
37. 37. The third dichotomy The human world is divided into what is “in the head” (Psyche) and what is “outside the head” (Culture) What is “in the head” coincides with the “world of mental states” or M-2 Popper To that "outside the head" coincides with Popper's M-3 This dichotomy I would call Popper's Dichotomy.
38. 38. Third dichotomy Mathematical objects Descartes dichotomy Popper's dichotomy Engels-Gumilev Psyche Dichotomy Culture Nature Physical facts
39. 39. The fourth dichotomy Culture is divided into - "objects in themselves" (material culture) and - "objects as symbols" (spiritual culture) This dichotomy I would call Vygotsky's dichotomy - Mead Comment. Obviously, Popper knew nothing at all about Vygotsky or Mead.
40. 40. The Fourth Dichotomy Mathematical Objects Vygotsky-Mead Dichotomy Descartes Dichotomy Popper Engels-Gumilev Dichotomy SYMBOLS Psyche Dichotomy Culture SUBJECTS Nature Physical facts
41. 41. Discussion Clarification of concepts through thought experiments
42. 42. Einstein-Gödel paradoxes No theory can be substantiated by remaining within this theory. Any sufficiently rich theory contains problems that cannot be solved by remaining within this theory. No sufficiently rich theory cannot be deeply understood without going beyond this theory. Comment. Now I have to go beyond ontology and even beyond philosophy. The inevitability of such a "violation of decency" and tried to justify the above
43. 43. Equivalence For mathematicians "equivalence" is any relation with three properties - Reflexivity - Transitivity and - Symmetry For all steel: "A and B are equivalent" means "for us, in a certain sense, A and B are the same." A certain “equivalence” is fixed to the “Universum” (the set of all considered “essences”), so the division of the “Universum” into equivalence classes is immediately fixed. The converse is also true: any division of the universe into classes sets some equivalence of the Essence - everything that stands for "nouns" in the language we use
44. 44. Observer Are data A and B equivalent? The answer to this question depends on the position of the observer. And the position of the observer is determined by two things - the Community, which includes the observer - the Problems that the observer solves at the moment Both of these circumstances refer to "epistemology". In the chapter "Epistemology" we will consider them in detail. And now suppose that these two circumstances are fixed for a time and therefore at the moment we know for sure about any two entities whether they are equivalent
45. 45. Entities What kind of entities do we need within the ontology? First, - "material facts" or simply "facts" and - "ideal constructions" Second, - "cultural objects" and - "mental states" Third - "Objects of material culture" or "objects" and - "Objects of spiritual culture" or "symbols" There are also "natural objects" that make up "facts" and - "mathematical objects" that make up "ideal constructions"
46. 46. ​​Symbols my interpretation A symbol is such an entity that is - Produced or appropriated by humanity and - It is not important in itself, but because of what it "indicates" The symbol can indicate any other entities listed above, including other symbols The first prerequisite is that the symbol itself acts as a representative of the class of equivalent symbols. The second condition is that the symbol points directly to the class of entities. - But this class can consist of one element
47. 47. Symbols (continued) The word "sunrise" can be typed in any font, it can be handwritten or spoken aloud. All these "material facts" will make up the same symbol. This symbol indicates a class of equivalent facts - "sunrise". "Sun" is a natural object, this object is included in the fact of "sunrise" as its element. In addition to the sun, this fact also includes objects, for example, "horizon line" and "sky"
48. 48. Meaning and meaning The word "sunrise" refers (although not so clearly) to other symbols, for example, the symbol "sunset", the symbol "sky" and even (for some observers) the symbol "spaceship" Voskhod " In addition, for a specific observer, this word may indicate his personal experience - - those actual ascents that he himself saw and - those mental states in which he fell in these situations. The totality of everything indicated by the symbol is called its "meaning" ... The meaning is called "subjective" if the personal experience of the observer is taken into account, otherwise it is objective. The value usually refers to the only - in this context - object that the symbol points to. Therefore, "meaning" is a part of the meaning, its temporary "center"
49. 49. Symbolic systems If it is very important to point these symbols to each other, they talk about "symbolic systems" In a particular case, symbolic systems taken as a whole indicate ideal constructions (mathematical systems) At the same time, indications of symbols on material facts, mental states and other entities may persist or be lost
50. 50. Mind Mental states can reflect 1. Material facts (directly from personal experience) 2. Ideal constructions (also from personal experience) 3. Symbolic constructions (which, in turn, can reflect all the above entities) The wealth of the psyche for each of the three points (taken statically - as experience - and in dynamics - as giftedness) are relatively independent. Accordingly, giftedness is manifested as 1. Impression 2. Mathematical ability 3. Learning (and as a result - education and culture) Artistic ability is impressionability supported by some sufficient level of education
51. 51. About realism and nominalism Nominalists are right Realists are right about symbolic systems of mathematical objects General concepts as General concepts as elements of symbolic ideal constructions of systems are real. are real. At the same time, they are; At the same time, they are NOT names are names of any things
52. 52. To be continued Send your opinion to me at [email protected] Yakov Feldman

What is the world made of?

Even in the early prehistoric eras of human history, about which we know very little, mental images appeared that went beyond the objects and processes that a person could observe in the world around him and familiar to him. First of all, they were simple totemistic ideas concerning the position of the genus in relation to the world of plants and animals, as well as to other human species. A totem is a creature (plant or animal) that is in a certain connection with a person or his kind; for example, the mythical founder of the clan may be the totem. J. Bernal says that these myths reflect in their first formulations the level of practical activity and forms of social organization. At a later stage, religious beliefs and, in particular, myths about the creation of the world by one or more gods arise from them. At the same time, the inanimate world was considered as a single complex; minerals, metals, etc. were parts of the earth, inseparably connected with it in the process of its origin.

As the primary vital needs of mankind were satisfied and social development progressed, people appeared who sought to fill the logical gaps in myths and religious beliefs in order to get a harmonious system of ideas about the world and the phenomena taking place in it. This system, or rather science, was called cosmology (the doctrine of the world). Its especially high level was achieved by the ancient Greek philosophers, who studied nature more than the sages of other countries. At the center of their teachings were not questions of the creation of the world, but questions about natural phenomena and their explanation. With this formulation of the question, they inevitably had to come to the problem of substance, differences and commonality between different substances. Although the works of most of these first philosophers are known to us only in fragments, and we are familiar with biographies mainly from dubious and often biased descriptions, nevertheless, their ideas still cause admiration and give us a vivid picture of the era and society in which they lived. ...

Copyright © 2005-2013 Xenoid v2.0

Use of site materials is possible provided that an active link is indicated.