Some thirty years ago, any Soviet person knew firmly that Marx's teaching is omnipotent, because it is true. Now the truth of this statement is being disputed at every step. But true Marxists remain unshakable, which is why Marxism is often called faith in the West. And so in almost any field of human activity: science, art, religion, everyday life, politics, economics … Faith and knowledge are closely intertwined with each other in an eternal, never-ending struggle.
LET'S DEAL WITH TERMS
In order not to get confused in reasoning and conclusions, you should first understand what, in fact, will be discussed. The well-known British philosopher and mathematician, a staunch atheist, Bertrand Russell, said that faith is someone's firm belief in the absence of evidence. And he was right. The concept of faith refers primarily to the emotional sphere of a person, his feelings. Although the one who believes in something often seeks (and finds!) Evidence for his faith. That is, he acts like a person seeking not faith, but knowledge. But the latter cannot go anywhere without faith. We accept Einstein's theory of relativity or the principle of particle-wave dualism on faith! Although I have never personally observed time dilation with increasing speed, and I have not seen a photon in my eyes, which is both a particle and a wave. The same applies to faith as a religious phenomenon. Atheists think that Christians believe in the resurrection of Christ without any proof. But any Christian will tell you that the evidence of the evangelists is such proof. Historians consider the testimonies of chroniclers as irrefutable evidence of a particular historical event! It doesn't matter that from a scientific point of view, resurrection is impossible. Once upon a time science firmly knew that the Earth is in the center of the Universe, and stones cannot fall from the sky. And what happened?Once upon a time science firmly knew that the Earth is in the center of the Universe, and stones cannot fall from the sky. And what happened?Once upon a time science firmly knew that the Earth is in the center of the Universe, and stones cannot fall from the sky. And what happened?
But we got distracted. Knowledge, like faith, is also different. Scientific, non-scientific, religious, everyday-practical, intuitive … Conceptual difficulties arise precisely when the forms of knowledge are confused. For example, religious with the everyday practical or scientific with the extrascientific (esotericism). In any case, knowledge is either an image of reality that we understand and represent, or repeatedly confirmed information with the help of which one or another problem can be solved.
SON OF DIFFICULT ERRORS
In matters of knowledge and faith, experience is essential.
Promotional video:
A child licks a shiny metal doorknob in the cold with a firm belief that it is sweet candy. Immediately gains the experience of prioritizing knowledge over faith, but still deep down believes that next time everything will be different. An adult, an atheist, cries out in difficult times: "Lord, help!" Let's say help comes, asserting, it would seem, the primacy of faith. But an atheist most often does not become a believer, he knows for sure that there is no God anyway … How many times do you need to lick a doorknob in the cold and get help from God in order to be convinced of the primacy of knowledge over faith in the first case, and vice versa in the second? It is different for everyone. Someone has enough and one case, while someone remains in error all their lives. And this applies to our whole life, which, in fact, is an endless series of experiences,with the help of which we receive this or that knowledge or faith. Or we don't, because stepping on a rake is a favorite pastime of mankind for centuries.
CONVERSATION WITH THE WISE
The best minds pondered the supremacy of faith or knowledge. In fact, any of the prominent philosophers, writers or theologians who reflected on this topic agreed on one thing: the main stimulus of human life is the pursuit of happiness. But what it is and how to achieve it … Here opinions differed. And often radically. For example, the famous theologian and philosopher, minister of the Western Christian church, Aurelius Augustine, better known under the name of Blessed Augustine, proclaimed his famous “I believe in order to understand” and postulated the superiority of faith over scientific knowledge for one simple reason. Human happiness, in his opinion, consists exclusively in the knowledge of God, which in no way can be obtained scientifically (which is fair), but only by faith. But there were also those who disagreed with this thesis. "I understand in order to believe!"- exclaimed Pierre Abelard, the famous French philosopher, theologian and poet. And he won himself no less supporters. There were others. Immanuel Kant, who unconditionally believed in God, but could not agree with the shortcomings of everyday religious consciousness, came close to the conclusion that the religious faith inherent in the average man in the street (that is, the majority of believers) is, in fact, nothing more than a hope. consolation and has little to do with true and deep faith. As for reason, in the preface to the second edition of his famous Critique of Pure Reason, the great philosopher wrote: “So, I had to move away and first raise my reason in order to make room for faith.” Thus, making it clear that mixing reason (knowledge) and faith (in this case, religious) is a useless occupation. The Russian philosopher Vladimir Soloviev was even more categorical on this issue. In his opinion, the struggle for supremacy between faith and knowledge is impossible in principle, since these concepts are incommensurable. Based on today's realities, it’s like arguing who plays better: the Bolshoi Theater or Spartak, without specifying the meaning of the concept of “game”. But that's not all. For example, many positivist and neo-positivist thinkers completely denied the use of faith and even classical philosophy in achieving human happiness, relying only on strict scientific knowledge. But existentialists and adherents of phenomenology (the science of the experience of consciousness), on the contrary, asserted and continue to assert that it is impossible to understand anything truly without faith. And these disputes do not subside.the struggle for supremacy between faith and knowledge is impossible in principle, since these concepts are incommensurable. Based on today's realities, it’s like arguing who plays better: the Bolshoi Theater or Spartak, without specifying the meaning of the concept of “game”. But that's not all. For example, many positivist and neo-positivist thinkers completely denied the use of faith and even classical philosophy in achieving human happiness, relying only on strict scientific knowledge. But existentialists and adherents of phenomenology (the science of the experience of consciousness), on the contrary, asserted and continue to assert that it is impossible to understand anything truly without faith. And these disputes do not subside.the struggle for supremacy between faith and knowledge is impossible in principle, since these concepts are incommensurable. Based on today's realities, it’s like arguing who plays better: the Bolshoi Theater or Spartak, without specifying the meaning of the concept of “game”. But that's not all. For example, many positivist and neo-positivist thinkers completely denied the use of faith and even classical philosophy in achieving human happiness, relying only on strict scientific knowledge. But existentialists and adherents of phenomenology (the science of the experience of consciousness), on the contrary, asserted and continue to assert that it is impossible to understand anything truly without faith. And these disputes do not subside.without specifying the meaning of the concept of "game". But that's not all. For example, many positivist and neo-positivist thinkers completely denied the use of faith and even classical philosophy in achieving human happiness, relying only on strict scientific knowledge. But existentialists and adherents of phenomenology (the science of the experience of consciousness), on the contrary, asserted and continue to assert that it is impossible to understand anything truly without faith. And these disputes do not subside.without specifying the meaning of the concept of "game". But that's not all. For example, many positivist and neo-positivist thinkers completely denied the use of faith and even classical philosophy in achieving human happiness, relying only on strict scientific knowledge. But existentialists and adherents of phenomenology (the science of the experience of consciousness), on the contrary, asserted and continue to assert that it is impossible to understand anything truly without faith. And these disputes do not subside.that it is impossible to understand anything truly without faith. And these disputes do not subside.that it is impossible to understand anything truly without faith. And these disputes do not subside.
DEPENDS ON THE SITUATION
In the end, I would like to cite an episode from the 1969 Soviet film directed by Rezo Chkheidze "Well, Youth". Young heroes who do not yet know that the war will start tomorrow, and all of them, except one, will die defending their Motherland, lie on the Tbilisi roof under the summer sun. “What do you think,” someone asks. "Is one steam locomotive stronger or two?" “It depends on the situation,” the smartest one answers. Then the healthiest one gets up, takes the smart one by the breast and says with a threat: “But I say that two steam locomotives are always stronger than one. Well, so how? Is one steam locomotive stronger or two? " “Two,” the smart one obediently answers. Then he descends from the roof, steps away and shouts: "Hey, but still there are times when one locomotive is stronger than two!" The healthy one jumps to his feet in a rage and runs after the smart one. Clever runs away. Several useful conclusions can be drawn from this episode alone. Firstly,in a dispute, truth is not always born. Secondly, the one who is truly confident in his righteousness must be able to defend it. And, finally, indeed, the situation depends not only on what is stronger - one steam locomotive or two, but also what is more important to a person - faith or knowledge. At some point, one cannot do without the first, at another, without the second. And it also happens that you need everything at once. And it is right.
Akim Bukhtatov
