Потаённые страницы истории западной философии

The article attempts a more in-depth analysis of the «polis». At the same time, it is not the agora that comes first, but the street as «the road to your home». Polis arises not as a migration of any population, especially a patriarchal one, but as a «class migration» (of craft people). In polis life, there was not a process of decomposition of tribal relations and the patriarchal family (this process was already a thing of the past at the time of migration), but a process of restoration of the family according to the patriarchal type on the basis of private household ownership and individual entrepreneurship. In the early polis, such a phenomenon as «slavery» did not exist «out of principle», but capitalist relations of the contractual (friendly) type were original.

A socio-political problem for the early polis was the loss of the friendly character of ancient capitalism, which was the transition of discussions to the street and the appearance of the «seven wise men» on it. The question «how to live correctly» in the conditions of self-organization of a settlement initiated the very discussions with which Western philosophy began. It was implied that one can live in different ways, but not in the same way as in the despotisms of the Ancient East. The Hellenes were motivated not by a love of freedom, but by a hatred of despotism, primarily in relations between neighbors. The ideas of sympathy, synergy, symphony, which Pythagoras spoke about, were aesthetically initially hidden in the polis – a craft settlement in free territories. All «teachings about nature» were aesthetic reflections within the framework of a craft worldview and craft terminology.

The problem of Pythagoras in the history of philosophy

The problem of Pythagoras in the history of philosophy is due to the fact that there are neither texts of Pythagoras, nor written evidence of his contemporaries about any philosophy. Actually, all knowledge about the philosophy of Pythagoras developed on the basis of oral creativity in subsequent centuries. The article argues that the absence of sources does not mean the absence of the possibility of a full reconstruction of conceptual aspects in the philosophy of Pythagoras. The reconstruction method is based, firstly, on the fact that the philosophy of Pythagoras influenced many representatives of philosophy and science for many centuries. Secondly, enough characteristic signs, «evidence», have come down about the life of Pythagoras and the features of his philosophy. With knowledge of the cultural context, the philosophy of Pythagoras is not knowable, but recognizable. Even if we assume that the philosophy of Pythagoras changed over many centuries to the point of caricature, it does not follow that in caricatures the original became unrecognizable. Particularly, recognition is available through a range of concepts such as empathy, sympathy, synergy, visioning, theory, problem. The article attempts to restore the original features of Pythagoras’ philosophy, without which a philosophy course cannot be complete.

Parmenides in the Shadow of Philosophy

From the review of opinions about the philosophy of Parmenides, it follows that philosophers avoid Parmenides, and historians of philosophy in their retellings lose the thread of presentation when trying to justify absurd theses. The article attempts to reconstruct the philosophy of Parmenides based on a different context of «being». The concepts of «being» and «non-being» in philosophy arise not as a result of abstraction and generalization, but as a result of the analysis of specific concepts. For Hegel, such a concrete concept is the concept of «beginning», logically decomposed into being and non-being, and then synthesized into «becoming»; in Parmenides, the context is given by the concept of «instant», which is also logically decomposed into being and non-being. The irrationality of the concept of «instant» (mathematically obvious) allowed Zeno to build a series of consistent aporias.

Plato’s logic as retold to artists

The article was written for the methodological collection of the St. Petersburg Academy of Arts with the aim not of introducing «Platonism», but with the aim of demonstrating logical analysis «according to Plato». In the article, such concepts as «drawing», «painting», «frame» are subjected to «platonic analysis». Throughout the article, the difference in «definitions» according to Socrates, according to Plato, according to Aristotle is shown. In all Plato’s dialogues the type of analysis is the same, «diaeresis». Socrates is credited with inventing the definition of the concept «through genus and specific difference». Aristotle’s approach to the definition of concepts goes far beyond the boundaries of formal logic, which in fact was created by him.

Word and sign in Aristotle’s philosophy