|
|
||
 |
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||
|
The Great Thinkers of Western Philosophy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Comte, Mill, Spencer, Feuerbach, Marx and Engels Page 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS
General Notions The second half of the nineteenth century is marked by a broad new movement of thought called Positivism. This movement arose in opposition to the abstractionism and formalism of the transcendental Idealists, who had made nature a "representation" of the ego. The purpose of the new school of thought was to lay greater stress upon immediate experience, upon the positive data obtained through the senses. Positivism found a precedent for its doctrines in English Empiricism, which had acclaimed experience as the sole source of human knowledge. At the same time, however, because of the new interpretation it gives to reality, Positivism differs from Empiricism. The new school of thought held that the sole reality is matter which, through internal energy, is mechanically evolved from inferior forms until it attains consciousness in man. Thus, notwithstanding the intention it had of opposing Idealism, Positivism is closely allied to Idealism in its immanentist concept of reality. For this reason, Positivism, like Idealism, has a distinctly Kantian origin, although Positivism and Idealism went their separate ways in applying Kant's teachings to the problem under investigation. Idealism had developed the thinking ego and had transformed it into an ego endowed with the power of creating reality; Positivism starts with the concept of the thing in itself, divinizes it, and considers it a kind of energy which is able to create all reality, including man. Thus, although Positivism attempts a reversal of the Idealist position, both are occupied with the "creative force" of matter. This "force" Positivism utilizes in formulating its doctrine of evolution. The great advances made by the biological, social and economic sciences of the age, and particularly the discoveries concerning electrical energy, favored this movement. Certainly great progress was made in the physical and social sciences during this period. But it was a gross error to apply the methods of the physical sciences to philosophy and in effect to reduce philosophy to the status of a physical science. Philosophy should have limited itself to its task of coordinating the results or findings of the sciences in an over-all picture of reality. Of particularly great impact upon the development of thought during this period was the hypothesis of the origin of species of Charles Darwin (1809-1882). Darwin's theory is that matter, mechanically and without any intervention of superior forces, developed itself into a multiplicity of living beings by virtue of certain laws inherent in matter itself (the struggle for existence; natural selection). Darwin's theory, together with Mayer's law of the conservation of energy (work is transformed into motion without loss of energy), on being applied to the field of philosophical inquiry, gave rise to the belief that the sciences, through the concept of evolution, would at last solve the problem of reality. The result was a metaphysics limited to the field of physics, a thoroughly empiricist theory of knowledge, and a utilitarian and hedonistic ethics. Even politics and economics were influenced by Positivism. An extreme form of democracy arose, proclaiming the absolute rule of the people; freedom was understood as the full liberty of the individual so long as there was no lesion of the rights of others; the laissez-faire doctrine in economics led to Manchesterism, a theory based on a liberal principle of economic freedom which allowed the employer to pay the lowest possible wage without any moral responsibility toward the worker. Positivism had its beginnings in France, and Auguste Comte was its founder. It reached its fullest development in England under John Stuart Mill and Herbert Spencer. In Germany it was decidedly materialistic and atheistic. In Italy it met with little enthusiasm. The following discussion will cover only the main phases of Positivism.
AUGUST COMTE Life and Works Auguste Comte (picture), the founder of Positivism, was born in Montpellier in 1798. He studied in the Polytechnical School of Paris, where he later became a professor. His spiritual master was Claude Henri de Rouvroy, Comte de Saint-Simon (1760-1825), whose aspiration it was to reconstruct the social unity of the Middle Ages, which had been destroyed first by Protestantism and then by the French Revolution. The new social unity was to be built upon a different basis, namely, science. From his friendship with Saint-Simon, Comte gleaned certain radical ideas of social reform which animated his entire life. Comte died in 1857. The best works of Comte are: Cours de Philosophie Positive (Course of Positive Philosophy), and Systeme de Politique Positive (System of Positive Polity). Doctrine Comte undertook to reconstruct the social and political organization, not on a religious or political basis but with science as its foundation. His starting point is an observation or examination of historico-social reality. Humanity, according to Comte, possesses certain laws of evolution, according to which it passes, as it were, through three stages: theological, metaphysical and positive.
Comte also bases his classification of the sciences on the law of the three stages of humanity. All the sciences -- mathematics, astronomy, physics, chemistry, biology and sociology -- pass through the same three stages and finally reach the positive stage. They reach the positive stage in the order of their grade of complexity. Thus the first to reach the positive stage was mathematics; sociology, because it treats of more concrete and complex phenomena is the last to reach it. It is hence the task of philosophy to establish a "social physics" which will free the science of sociology from the theological and metaphysical prejudices that still corrupt it. The last years of Comte's life were marked by religious fervor. To be sure, his was a positivist religion which he established by aping Catholicism. This new religion had as its object the cult of the Great Being (humanity, made up of all men, past, present, and future), the Great Medium (world-space), and the Great Fetish (the earth). All three together form the positivist trinity. Positivist religion had its temple, its hierarchical priesthood, its positivist dogmas, organized worship, sacraments, and even its calendar -- all modeled on Catholicism. The new cult had Paris had its center; from there the cult spread to England, to Sweden, and to Brazil and Chile. Positivism spread from France to England, the classic land of Empiricism, which was thus disposed not only to accept the new current of thought, but also to give it a better systematization than had the land of its origin. Hence it was in England that the greatest representatives and systematizers of Positivism arose. We shall limit our examination of this development to John Stuart Mill, who is of interest to us because of his theory of knowledge; and to Herbert Spencer, who is important because of his evolutionist metaphysics. In The Radical Academy Elsewhere On the Internet
JOHN STUART MILL Life and Works John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) (picture) was a litterateur, philosopher and political scientist. From 1822 to 1858 he served in various capacities at India House, finally becoming head of the examiner's office. From 1865 to 1868 Mill was a member of British Parliament. He spent the remainder of his life at Avignon, where he died. At first a follower of Hume's empiricism, he later came into contact with Positivism and became one of its greatest representatives and exponents. Of interest to us is his gnosiological doctrine (theory of knowledge) because of the new interpretation it gives to Hume's principle of association. Mill's most important philosophical work is his System of Logic. Doctrine According to Mill, we know only the facts presented by experience. Inductive reasoning does not consist in passing from the particular to the universal (as Francis Bacon taught), but from particular to particular, by way of the analogical likeness which facts carry within themselves (analogical reasoning). Let us suppose that we notice the characteristics of A, B, C and D in a certain number of phenomena. If other phenomena similar to those already perceived and bearing the characteristics of A, B, C come under observation, we infer that characteristic D is also present, even though it is not observed. Thus, for example, if I know that some men have died, I shall infer by analogy that the Duke of Wellington will also die, although I have not yet witnessed his death. Evidently such a conclusion lacks absolute necessity. Mill does not recognize the value of the Aristotelian concept. For him, concepts are not a sign by which the intellect understands a particular thing in its essence, They are merely outlines summing up past experience. The Aristotelian syllogism also is devoid of value, because for Mill the major premise is nothing other than a record of particular experiences. These experiences are the only evidence on which the conclusion rests. Since Wellington is still living, his death is not recorded in the major: "All men die." In regard to metaphysics, Mill reduces all reality to sensible data alone. However, not all reality is experienced. Therefore, even when we have no sensations, there is in us the possibility of receiving them. From this it follows that things are either actual or possible sensations. The human spirit is nothing other than the permanent possibility of receiving sensations. In ethics Mill supports a utilitarianism which allows him to affirm the superiority of spiritual over sensible pleasures, and to convert egoism into altruism. Man, according to Mill, naturally tends to his own interests; he is an egoist. By living in society, however, man acquires the habit of associating his happiness with the happiness of others. At first he considers his fellow creatures as means to his own happiness. Then he confuses means with end, and finishes by regulating his conduct as if the sole and last end of his actions were the good of others rather than his own. Man is thus like a miser who first seeks money as a means to other goods, but who finishes by loving money as an end in itself. Notwithstanding these modifications, in Mill's utilitarianism there still remains confusion between the moral and economic values of a disinterested action. In The Radical Academy
Elsewhere On the Internet
HERBERT SPENCER Life and Works The son of an English schoolmaster, Herbert Spencer (picture) was born in Derby in 1820. During early manhood he was employed as a railway engineer. At the age of twenty-five he abandoned this occupation, to devote himself to writing. He died in 1903. Spencer possessed an encyclopedic culture, and this is mirrored in his works. Most of his writings are collected in A System of Synthetic Philosophy, which covers ten volumes; this work constitutes, as it were, an encyclopedia of Positivism. Doctrine Spencer is considered the systematizer of Positivism according to the principles of evolution. Mill had proposed the ego as a fully constituted being, endowed with the faculties of perception, association and memory. Spencer aimed at inquiring into the origin of the ego and its faculties, which Mill had not explained. Having established the origin of the ego, Spencer applied the considerations obtained from his study of the individual ego first to the human species, and then to the entire universe. To carry this our, Spencer accepted the principle of evolution. For Spencer, evolution means "concentration," that is, passage from a state of dissipation and instability of elements to a state of integration of these same elements. At the same time evolution means differentiation, passage from homogeneity to heterogeneity, from the simple to the complex. The solar system, organic life, conscious life, social life underwent a parallel transformation through the process of evolution. For example, the development of an organic body implies, first, the concentration of cells into tissues, then the progressive specification of organs, and finally the coordination of these same organs in the living body. In this process of evolution, energy remains constant; that is, the same force, acting in different directions and upon different objects, produces different effects. The quantity of energy, however, is found to be always constant. Even life is an effect of evolution. According to Spencer, it was rendered possible by an ever more perfect adaptation of interior to exterior conditions. In the struggle for conservation of existence, the fittest individuals survive; the others perish. All of this takes place according to the principle of natural selection. Consciousness and intelligence are also produced by the same process of evolution. Spencer admits knowledge only within the limits of experience. Nevertheless, he admits the presence within the mind of some general ideas, such as those of space and time, and the logical and moral principles which impose themselves absolutely on individuals. The value of such principles does not depend upon pragmatic utility. They are formed by the same universal law of evolution, and come to us through heredity. In matters of religion, Spencer is explicitly agnostic. He admits the existence of an "absolute reality," which he calls the "Unknowable," beyond the world of experience. But every time science attempts to penetrate the world of the Absolute, it falls into contradiction. So also, religion falls into contradiction every time it attempts to penetrate the world of science. With the affirmation of the existence of the Absolute and the distinction between the knowable (science) and unknowable (God -- mystery), it would seem that Spencer has justified both God and the sciences as regards their relationships with each other. But a God of whom we can know nothing (whether He is transcendent or immanent, spirit or matter, one or many) cannot be the object of any religion, not even of positivist religion. It would seem that for Spencer this God is nothing more than the immanent energy required as the foundation of evolution. In The Radical Academy
Enrich Your Life With a Philosophy Book...
|
||
|
Main Page & Index |
||
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
[Homepage] [Newsletter] [Search] [Support the Academy] [Link to Us] [Contact the Academy] [Citing Articles from Our Website] [Privacy Policy & Disclaimer]
Copyright 1998-99, 2000-01, & 2002-03 by The Radical Academy. All Rights Reserved.