|
The truth of the value of culture
The truth and learning how to search, are not only relevant, useful, usable for humans. The truth is - this is not the only standard of learning and life. She - not only due, in contrast to the lies that is enshrined in the Bible did not lgi. " Search for truth could be a thinker and a desire to find it as something sverhtsennoe as the ideal man. But what of the truth can serve as the ideal? Indeed, not all the same! On some truths that: darkness low truths we expensive us vozvyshayuschy deception. For Socrates was not interested in such truths and not the banal truth of fact and the truth, the path of learning which elevates man. The question of Christ: What is truth? - Belongs to the truth of this kind.
Buddha spoke not of impersonal, objective, but a noble truths.
The truth, which people sometimes are willing to give life, it is not just "the subject line of thought (Descartes), not just that, as the Vl. Solovyov - is "in the formal respect." It is not formal, but essentially relates to heights of spiritual existence. This is not the truth of reason, the number of invoices and calculating, not true dogmatist.
This is true life, one that generally can not be found once and for all, but you can only breed in the search, the idea in action. And that truth, and seeking its science and philosophy - actually belong cultures in terms of their "chelovekoobrazuyuschego acts regulating the chaotic patterns of life." The truth in this, the only substantial her existence - one of the highest spiritual values, along with the values of culture as a faith, good, beauty, freedom, love, etc., with which it is organically linked.
Jose Ortega y Gasset, By faith and truth, wrote that the philosophy of trying to seek the truth (explore the question), so that lives regained authenticity, that the person was believed, the true faith (not necessarily the way, religious): Philosophy should not be an example to prove the truth of life, on the contrary, it must prove the truth so that our life has gained authenticity. " Here, the authenticity of life (not specified, and created human beings) is detected primarily implemented as the true religion, kindness, beauty in this world.
Truth as shown by the actual, rather than a false belief, this good, the true beauty rather than their false imitations.
Solovyov, studying it sought: "... to show good as the truth, that is the only right, correct its way of life in all and the end. " Because he was convinced that even morality is the way to true life, that life is good and true life - this is actually the same thing.
W. Heisenberg, P. Dirac, and many other scientists twentieth century were convinced of the relationship of beauty and truth. Heisenberg wrote about the beauty in the exact sciences as a warning siyanii, splendor of truth. Dirac asserted that the beauty of the formula certify its truthfulness. That is, they saw that the emergence of beauty as it reflects the truth. And this is so. And the essence is that (in the private sector, and in other cases) the truth creates a sense of beauty, a feeling, aesthetic delight, stimulate further movement of knowledge.
And, of course, the truth as the value of culture is not particularly in holistic human development, more and more and humanize himself and the world around them. Man is constantly changing and each time defining what - what it is and what it would be: "To live - is constantly decide what we will." After all, "a culture of peace itself was invented as a man of peace, through which a person becomes a man." The truth in this sense, which serves as a "... manpower, learning the internal substance of rights and indeed excretory it from a false identity - called love. " And love, according to Vl. Solovieva, is a real abolition of selfishness. And if the knowledge, science, education focused on the truth in this sense it, they have acquired the meaning of culture high on any basic human needs is a need for the life of another.
Therefore, if everything remains the same doubts that science - the phenomenon of culture, not only civilization, it is due, First, that science is often considered something that essentially it is not. MK Mamardashvili believed that the so-called applied science - this is not science. Secondly, science contrast the culture also because of its achievements can be used against the person, against the culture (atomic bomb, chemical, bacteriological weapons). But this is the fact that the very scientist may be inhumane - not an argument. For example, do not refuse, we take the art culture phenomenon due to the fact that the graceful bronze statuette can kill that form close to the art, can engage in propaganda, that even a real art can be used ideologically dirty, and that particular artist can be a man of low culture as a whole number of ways.
In history there are examples of darkness, like art, and science and philosophy have tried (and sometimes success!) Reduce the interest use (dikarskomu or civilized). And then they slip between the cracks of culture, that: "... have possession of what not to own the proprietary and consumer. " Culture can hold only in the sense that the exercise of its life, create, to be cultural, and foreign and indeed. And this is only possible when the culture is a very organic unity of the Faith, truth, kindness, beauty. Then she realized, and how freedom - freedom to fully identify the man outside of its domestic human individuality. Then the culture is embodied value as a form of humanity
|
|
