textfiles/reports/philos.rpt

philosophy
--------------------------------
Philosophy is the oldest form of systematic, scholarly inquiry.  The name comes
from the Greek philosophos, "lover of wisdom." The term, however, has acquired
several related meanings:  (1) the study of the truths or principles underlying
all knowledge, being, and reality; (2) a particular system of philosophical
doctrine; (3) the critical evaluation of such fundamental doctrines; (4) the
study of the principles of a particular branch of knowledge; (5) a system of
principles for guidance in practical affairs; and (6) a philosophical spirit or
attitude.

All of these meanings of philosophy are recognizable in the intellectual
traditions of ancient Greece.  The pre-Socratics (see PRE-SOCRATIC PHILOSOPHY)
sought to find fundamental, natural principles that could explain what
individuals know and experience about the world around them.  The pre-Socratics
and, later, PLATO and ARISTOTLE tried to develop a comprehensive set of
principles that would account for their knowledge of both the natural and the
human world.  In developing philosophies, these early thinkers saw that their
reflections could be used as a means of criticizing and often refuting
popularly accepted mythological views as well as the thoughts of their
predecessors and contemporaries.  SOCRATES, at his trial, proclaimed a basic
philosophical premise, that "the unexamined life was not worth living." By this
he meant that if people do not examine and critically evaluate the principles
by which they live, they cannot be sure that worthwhile principles exist.  As
the Greek thinkers codified their pictures of the world, they saw that for each
science or study of some aspect of the world there could be a corresponding
philosophy of this science or study, such as the philosophies of science, art,
history, and so on.  Each of these involves examining the fundamental
principles of a discipline to see if they are logical, consistent, and--most
important--true.  Because ancient philosophers questioned the various ways of
life by which people live and sought the most satisfactory one, they developed
their philosophical attitudes and theories as guides to practical living.  From
Socrates down to 20th-century thinkers like Bertrand RUSSELL and Jean Paul
SARTRE, a major element of the philosophical enterprise has been devoted to
trying to designate what constitutes the good life for humans both as
individuals and as social and political beings.

This kind of concern has contributed to the image of the philosopher as
standing aside from and impervious to all the ups and downs of everyday
existence.  Michel de MONTAIGNE declared that "to philosophize is to learn to
die," indicating that the philosopher can be philosophical even in the face of
death.	The Stoic thinkers (see STOICISM) are usually seen as the epitome of
this sense of philosophy.  They maintained their philosophical attitude of calm
reflection in the face of all sorts of temporary disasters.

philosophical questions

Because the term philosophy has various meanings, the nature of the field can
be most easily grasped by examining the kinds of problems and questions the
field deals with.  In the beginnings of Western philosophy, the pre-Socratic
thinkers dealt primarily with a metaphysical question:	What is the nature of
ultimate reality as contrasted to the apparent reality of ordinary experience?
They tried to determine whether some ultimate constituents of the world would
be the real and basic elements, whereas everything else would be ephemeral and
merely a surface appearance.  If such a reality existed, would it be permanent
and unalterable, or would it be subject to change or alteration like everything
else?  The pre-Socratics generated some of the basic problems involved in
defining reality, that is, in finding something so basic that it cannot be
explained by anything else.  They found their attempts to present logical
explanations of their metaphysical theories ran into paradoxical results.
Could a permanent, unchanging reality account for a changing world?  ZENO OF
ELEA became famous for working out his paradoxes, which claimed nothing could
really change or move.	Some of his paradoxes and some of those connected with
the Greek ATOMISM still play a role in modern theoretical physics.

Over time, some aspects of the attempt to delineate reality became separated
from the metaphysical quest and became the subject matter of the various
natural sciences.  This development has accelerated since the 17th century.
The areas of study that have been peeled off from philosophy and assigned to
the natural sciences include astronomy, physics, chemistry, geology, biology,
psychology, and others.  An example of this process may be seen in the
consideration of a major metaphysical question, the relationship of mind and
body.  Originally, Platonic metaphysics claimed that the body and the mind were
two separate and distinct entities.  Plato, in fact, claimed the body was the
prison house of the soul or mind.  In the 17th century, Rene DESCARTES
contended that mind and body were two separate and distinct substances that had
nothing in common although they interact.  Several Indian schools of philosophy
hold a similar view.  In the West this problem was gradually taken over by
psychologists and neurophysiologists.  The present tendency is to reduce mental
phenomena to brain phenomena and thereby reduce the problem from a mind-body
problem to a body problem.

Another constant philosophical question, from Greek times up to the present,
has been to try to establish the difference between appearance and reality.
Once people learned about sense illusions, the question arose of how to tell
what seems to be from what really is.  Skeptical thinkers have pressed the
claim that no satisfactory standard can be found that will actually work for
distinguishing the real from the apparent in all cases.  On the other hand,
various philosophers have proposed many such criteria, none of which has been
universally accepted.  Another type of question raised by philosophers is:
What is truth?	Various statements about aspects of the world seem to be true,
at least at certain times.  Yet experience teaches that statements that have
seemed to be true have later had to be qualified or denied.  Skeptics have
suggested that no evidence would be able to tell, beyond any show of doubt,
that a given statement is in reality true.  In the face of such a challenge,
philosophers have sought to find a criterion of truth, especially a criterion
of truth that would not be open to skeptical challenge.

Philosophers have also traditionally raised questions about values:  What is
good?  How can good be distinguished from bad or evil?	What is justice?  What
would a just society be like?  What is beauty?	How can the beautiful be
distinguished from the ugly?  These questions all deal with matters of
evaluation rather than fact.  Scientific investigation is of only slight help
in determining if abortion is bad or if Vermeer's Milkmaid is a beautiful
picture.  The values that are at issue are not perceived in the same way as
facts.	If they were, much more agreement would exist about the specific
answers to value questions.  The philosopher seeks to find some means of
answering these sorts of questions, which are often the most important ones
that a person can ask and which will exhibit the basis of a theory of values.

Philosophical methods

In view of the kinds of questions that philosophers deal with, what methods
does the philosopher use to seek the answers?  The philosopher's tools are
basically logical and speculative reasoning.  In the Western tradition the
development of LOGIC is usually traced to Aristotle, who aimed at constructing
valid arguments and also true arguments if true premises could be uncovered.
Logic has played an important role in ancient and modern philosophy--that of
providing a clarification of the reasoning process and standards by which valid
reasoning can be recognized.  It has also provided a means of analyzing basic
concepts to determine if they are consistent or not.

Logic alone, however, is not enough to answer philosophers' questions.  It can
show when philosophers are being consistent and when their concepts are clear
and unambiguous, but it cannot ascertain if the first principles or the
premises are correct.  Here philosophers sometimes rely on what they call
intuition and sometimes on a speculative reasoning process.  From their initial
premises, philosophers then try to work out a consistent development of their
answers to basic philosophical questions, following the rules of logic.
Irrationalist philosophers, however, such as the Danish thinker Soren
KIERKEGAARD, have contended that the less logical the solution to philosophical
problems, the better.  Philosophers such as these sometimes argue that the most
important elements of existence and experience cannot be contained by logic,
which is, after all, an element of experience itself.  The part, they argue,
cannot explain the whole.

Philosophy's relation to other disciplines

Philosophy is both related to most disciplines and yet different from them.
Almost from the beginning of both mathematics and philosophy in ancient Greece,
relations were seen between them.  On the one hand, the philosophers were
strongly impressed by the degree of certainty and rigor that appeared to exist
in mathematics as compared to any other subject.  Some, like the
philosopher-mathematician PYTHAGORAS OF SAMOS, felt that mathematics must be
the key to understanding reality.  Plato claimed that mathematics provided the
forms out of which everything was made.  Aristotle, on the other hand, held
that mathematics was about ideal objects rather than real ones; he held that
mathematics could be certain without telling us anything about reality.  In
more modern times, Descartes and Baruch SPINOZA used mathematics as their model
and inspiration for formulating new methods to discover the truth about
reality.  The philosopher-mathematician Gottfried Wilhelm von LEIBNIZ, the
co-discoverer (with Isaac Newton) of calculus, theorized about constructing an
ideal mathematical language in which to state, and mathematically solve, all
philosophical problems.  Similar views have been advanced in the 20th century
as ways of resolving age-old philosophical difficulties.  Attempts to
accomplish this have found far from unanimous approval, however.

Philosophy has both influenced and been influenced by practically all of the
sciences.  The physical sciences have provided the accepted body of information
about the world at any given time.  Philosophers have then tried to arrange
this information into a meaningful pattern and interpret it, describing what
reality might be like.	Western philosophers over much of the last 2,500 years
have provided basic metaphysical theories for the scientists to fit their data
into and as the data changed, their metaphysical interpretations have had to be
adjusted.  Thus the scientific revolution of the 17th century, encompassing the
scientific work of Johannes Kepler, Galileo, and Newton, was accompanied by a
metaphysical revolution led by such thinkers as Descartes, Spinoza, and
Leibniz.

In the late 18th and early 19th centuries, the prevailing philosophers in
England and France came to the conclusion that the sciences are, and ought to
be, completely independent of traditional metaphysical interpretations.
Instead, the sciences should just try to describe and codify observations and
experiences.  This approach has led in the last two centuries to a divorce of
philosophy from the sciences.  What has developed in response is a new branch
of philosophy, the philosophy of science, which examines the methods of
science, the types of scientific evidence, and the ways the sciences progress.
A third intellectual area that has been intimately involved with philosophy is
religion.  In ancient Greece some philosophers like ANAXAGORAS and Socrates
scandalized their contemporaries by criticizing aspects of Greek religion.
Others offered more theoretical approaches about the evidence for the existence
and nature of God or the gods.	Some denied the existence of a deity.  When
Christianity entered the Greek world, attempts were made to develop a
philosophical understanding of Christianity.  Finally, toward the end of the
4th and beginning of the 5th century, Saint AUGUSTINE achieved a synthesis of
some of the elements of Platonic philosophy with the essentials of
Christianity.  Throughout the Middle Ages, philosopher-theologians among the
Jews, Muslims, and Christians sought to explain their religions in rational
terms.	They were opposed by antirational theologians who insisted that
religion is a matter of faith and belief and not of reasons and arguments.
After the Reformation, philosophers like Spinoza and David HUME began
criticizing the traditional philosophical arguments used by theologians.  Hume
and Immanuel KANT sought to show that all of the arguments purporting to prove
the existence of God and the immortality of the soul were fallacious.
Philosophers sought to explain why people were religious on nonrational
grounds, such as psychological, economic, or cultural ones.  The defenders of
religion found themselves estranged from the philosophers, who kept using the
latest results of science and historical research to criticize religion.  Some,
like Kierkegaard, made a virtue of this estrangement, insisting that religious
belief is a matter of faith, and therefore not a matter of reason.  More
recently, since World War II, a group of theologians who are interested in
recent philosophical developments and in the relationship between religion and
contemporary culture have attempted to discover what religious statements can
be intellectually meaningful.  The history of the relation between philosophy
and theology is thus a long and mixed affair, running the gamut from clarifying
religion and providing a justification for it to tearing apart its intellectual
underpinnings and trying to see what is left that a 20th-century scientifically
oriented person can believe or take seriously.

branches of philosophy

The several different branches of philosophy correspond to the different
problems being dealt with.  One of the most basic is EPISTEMOLOGY, the theory
of knowledge (episteme is Greek for knowledge).  It deals with what can be
known, how it can be known, and how certain the individual can be about it.  It
has special branches like the philosophy of science.  The kinds of answers that
emerge from a particular epistemology usually structure its METAPHYSICS.
Metaphysics is the study of nature of reality, the study of what features of
experience are real and which are apparent.  Aristotle called metaphysics the
study of being as such; the term ontology is often used to describe this branch
of philosophy today.  How a person gets to know about pure being (an
epistemological problem) colors what it is that is known.  The reverse is also
the case.  What the individual thinks the world is really like colors what he
or she thinks can be known about it.  How the individual reasons about the
world and how he or she can certify knowledge belongs to the branch of
philosophy called logic.  Logic provides the rational framework for all
philosophical discussion, but is also itself open to metaphysical
interpretations about what sort of world it is explaining.

Other branches of philosophy such as ETHICS, AESTHETICS, and political
philosophy deal with evaluative aspects of the world such as what is good
conduct, what is beautiful, and what is socially and politically just.	The
proposed answers to these questions are much involved with the philosopher's
epistemological and metaphysical theories, and the values the philosopher
espouses color his or her epistemology and metaphysics.  Sometimes the pursuit
of particular aspects of experience (such as sensations) or the use of
particular tools (such as the analysis of language) will reorient philosophical
inquiry or give birth to new branches of philosophy.  Thus philosophy is never
reasoned in a vacuum.  It is concerned not only with abstract questions; it is
also conditioned by history.

history of western philosophy
-----------------------------

The Pre-Socratics.
Western philosophy began in Greece, in the Greek settlement of Miletus in
Anatolia.  The first known philosophers were THALES OF MILETUS and his
students, ANAXIMANDER and ANAXIMENES.  Present-day knowledge of this MILESIAN
SCHOOL is based on fragments attributed to them by later writers.  These first
philosophers were metaphysicians, seeking for an element or force behind
appearance that explained everything.  Thales said that all was ultimately
water, Anaximander that it was boundless or the infinite, and Anaximenes that
it was air.  Subsequent Greek philosophers, such as HERACLITUS and PARMENIDES,
argued about whether change or permanence was the basic feature of the world
and about whether one or more than one element was the fundamental constituent
of reality (see MONISM; PLURALISM).  Greek philosophy before Socrates was
principally concerned with these metaphysical questions.

Socrates.
Socrates, an Athenian, was primarily interested in value questions that
affected what a person should do.  At the time in Athens, the paid teachers,
the SOPHISTS, taught people how to live successfully; they did not raise the
Socratic question of what was the right way of life, however.  Socrates did not
write anything, but he is vividly portrayed by his pupil Plato in the Dialogues
as being the "gadfly" of Athens, forever asking people why they are doing what
they are doing and making people realize that general principles were necessary
to justify their conduct.  Socrates was finally arrested and accused of heresy
and corrupting the young of Athens.  Socrates used his trial, described in
Plato's Apology, as a final opportunity to make his general point.  His
accusers, he showed, did not know what the charges actually meant and had no
evidence for them.  He reported that the Delphic oracle had said that he,
Socrates, was the wisest of all of the Athenians.  Socrates said he was the
wisest because he alone knew nothing and knew that he knew nothing, whereas
everybody else thought they knew something.  In spite of his eloquence and
wisdom, Socrates was convicted and sentenced to death.

Plato.
After Socrates' execution, his disciple Plato developed the first comprehensive
philosophical system and founded the Academy, the first formal philosophical
school.  Plato contended that knowledge must be of universals (that is, of
general types or kinds) and not of particulars.  To know a particular cat,
Miranda, the individual must first know what it is to be feline in general.
Otherwise he or she will not be able to recognize the particular feline
characteristics in Miranda.  These universals, Plato claimed, were the basic
elements from which the world was formed.  They are called the Forms, or
Platonic Ideas.  Mathematics provides the most obvious cases of these Forms.
They are known not by sense perception but by reasoning.  They are known by the
mind, not by the bodily organs.  The world of Platonic Ideas is the unchanging
Forms of things.  The philosopher should turn away from this world of
appearance and concentrate on the world of Forms.  Plato, in his most famous
work, The Republic, said that the world would be perfect when philosophers are
kings and kings are philosophers.  He believed that the philosopher-kings would
know what justice really is, and, based on their knowledge of the Forms, they
could then achieve justice in all societies.

For Plato the ultimate Idea, which illuminated the rest of the pure ideas, was
the Idea of the Good.  As Plato grew older he became more mystical about this
idea.  The school of NEOPLATONISM, which began a few centuries after his death,
stressed these otherworldly and mystical elements, identifying the idea of the
Good with God.

Aristotle.
Plato's leading student, Aristotle, developed the most comprehensive
philosophical system of ancient times.	Aristotle broke with Plato, stressing
the importance of explaining the changing world that humankind lives in as
opposed to the Platonic Ideas.	Aristotle spent years studying the natural
sciences and collecting specimens, and about 90 percent of his writings are on
scientific subjects, mostly on biological ones.  Aristotle believed he could
account for the changes and alterations in this world without either having to
deny their reality or having to appeal to another world.  For Aristotle all
natural objects were composed of form and matter, and the changes that take
place in matter are the substitution of one form for another.  This
substitution takes place because every natural object has a goal, or telos,
which it is its nature to achieve.  Thus stones, because they are essentially
material, seek the lowest point, which is why they fall down.  Each species is
ultimately trying to achieve a state of perfection which for Aristotle was a
state of perfect rest.	The cosmos, as Aristotle saw it, is an ordered striving
for this perfection.  The pinnacle of the order is the Unmoved Mover, the
ultimate cosmic agent, which fully and perfectly realizes its essence of
eternal thought.  The heavenly spheres imitate the Unmoved Mover and by so
doing set the heavens in an eternal spherical motion; this process is repeated
by individual souls, and so on.  Aristotle's vision of the Cosmos remained
central to Western thought until the time of Nicolaus Copernicus.

Hellenistic and Roman Periods.
In the period from about 300 BC to AD 200 the central philosophical concerns
shifted to how an individual should conduct his or her life.  The Stoics, the
Skeptics (see SKEPTICISM), and the Epicureans (see EPICUREANISM), although they
dealt with the classical epistemological and metaphysical issues, emphasized
the question of how humans should conduct themselves in a miserable world.  All
these theories stressed withdrawal, whether physical, emotional, or
intellectual, from the turmoils of the day.

Medieval Period.
Greek philosophy was the major formative influence on the later philosophical
traditions of Judaism, Islam, and Christianity.  In all three, the theories of
the Greeks, particularly Plato and Aristotle, were employed to clarify and
develop the basic beliefs of the religious traditions.

PHILO OF ALEXANDRIA introduced Platonic ideas and methods into Jewish thought,
particularly into the interpretation of Scripture about the beginning of the
Christian era.	He exerted little influence on later Jewish thought, however,
and the Jewish philosophy of the Middle Ages seems to have developed as a
movement parallel to those in Islam.  Important figures in early medieval
Jewish thought include Isaac Israeli, SAADIA BEN JOSEPH GAON, and the
Neoplatonist Solomon IBN GABIROL.  The most important Jewish thinker of the
Middle Ages, however, was MAIMONIDES.  Maimonides developed a comprehensive
interpretation of religion and understanding based on Aristotelian principles
that was influential in the Christian West as well as among Jewish thinkers.

In Judaism, as in Islam and Christianity, religious speculation and philosophy
developed in close connection.	This development is particularly evident in the
Jewish mystical tradition, the KABBALAH.  The esoteric teachings of these
schools have influenced much later Jewish thought, including that of Spinoza,
the most important Jewish philosopher of the early modern period.  Drawing both
on his religious background and on the geometric method of Descartes, Spinoza
developed a philosophical PANTHEISM of great depth.

In the Islamic tradition as well the starting point was the work of Plato and
Aristotle.  The 9th-century Neoplatonist al-KINDI was followed by al-FARABI,
who drew on both Plato and Aristotle to create a universal Islamic philosophy.
The most important of the medieval Muslim philosophers, however, was Avicenna
(ibn Sina).  Starting from the distinction between essence and existence,
Avicenna developed a metaphysics in which God, the necessary being, is the
source of created nature through emanation.  Both his metaphysics and his
intuitionist theory of knowledge were influential in the later Middle Ages as
well as in the later history of Islamic thought.

The philosophical tradition did not go unchallenged, however.  The 11th-century
theologian and mystic al-GHAZALI mounted a critique of philosophy, specifically
Avicenna's, that is rich in argument and insight.  Al-Ghazali's Incoherence of
the Philosophers provoked a response by AVERROES ibn Rushd entitled the
Incoherence of the Incoherence, in which al-Ghazali's arguments are countered
point for point.  Averroes was best known, however, as an interpreter of
Aristotle and excited great influence on all subsequent thinkers in the
Aristotelian tradition.  In the later Middle Ages the historian and philosopher
IBN KHALDUN produced a trenchant critique of culture, and the elaboration of
metaphysics and epistemology was carried on in the theosophical schools of
Islamic mysticism.

The first systematic Christian philosophy was that of ORIGEN, but for the
European Middle Ages no authority could rival Saint Augustine.	Augustine
elaborated a Neoplatonist vision combining the metaphysics of PLOTINUS with an
elaboration of the Christian doctrine of the Trinity.  To this he added an
epistemology in which knowledge is achieved through illumination by grace.  No
substantial movement arose beyond Augustine until the 12th century, when new
interest arose in logic and theory of knowledge.  In this connection the most
important figures are Saint ANSELM and Peter ABELARD.

In the late 12th and early 13th centuries the writings of Aristotle were
reintroduced into the West, first in translations from the Arabic and later in
direct translation.  After some initial resistance Aristotle became the
dominant philosophical authority and remained so until the Renaissance.  First
Saint ALBERTUS MAGNUS and then Saint Thomas AQUINAS combined Aristotle's
philosophy with the tradition of Augustinian theology to produce a synthesis
holding that Aristotle was right about those things that are within the grasp
of reason, while what was beyond reason could only be known by faith.  Thus
reason could prove that God exists, but his nature could be known only by
faith.	More extreme Aristotelian schools developed and came into conflict with
the church, which, in 1277, issued condemnations of many positions held by
Aristotle and Aquinas, among others.  In the 14th century two figures dominated
the scene:  DUNS SCOTUS and WILLIAM OF OCCAM.  Scotus developed an extemely
complex philosophy based on a number of earlier positions, and Occam's
critiques of metaphysics and epistemology remain paradigms of philosophical
argument.

Rationalism.
The synthesis of Christianity and Aristotelianism was a major form of
SCHOLASTICISM, which dominated European philosophy into the 17th century.
During the Renaissance other forms of ancient philosophy began to be revived
and used as ammunition against the scholastics.  This involved the Renaissance
Platonists and the Skeptics, as well as others interested in esoteric doctrines
like that of the Kabbalah.  In terms of the future development of philosophy,
the revival of ancient skepticism played the greatest role.  This view,
popularized by Montaigne in the late 16th century, raised the fundamental
epistemological problem of what can be known.  The methods of the new
scientific schools conflicted with, and thus brought into question, the
principles inherited from the Middle Ages.  Rene Descartes proposed a method
for guaranteeing knowledge.  He argued that in order to provide a secure
foundation for knowledge it was necessary to discover "clear and distinct
ideas" that could not be doubted and could serve as a basis for deriving
further truths.  He found such an idea in the proposition "I think, therefore I
am." Using this as a paradigm, Descartes drew a distinction between thinking
substance and extended substance, or mind and matter.  He went on to draw
conclusions about God, nature, and mind that continue to be influential.  For
this reason Descartes is often considered the founder of modern philosophy.

A few years after Descartes's death, Baruch de Spinoza offered his theory to
improve on that of Descartes.  Spinoza insisted that only one substance, God,
exists, and that two of his attributes are thought and extension.  Everything
that is and that can be known about is an aspect of God.  Spinoza's God,
however, was the antithesis of the God of traditional religion.  God, or Nature
(as Spinoza put it), was the laws from which everything followed.  In Spinoza's
pantheistic world everything had to be what it was, and everything was to be
understood rationally.	The mind and body were two aspects of the same thing,
which was to be understood either logically or in terms of natural science.  A
third great 17th-century rationalist was Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz.  The
basic unit of his metaphysics, equivalent to a substance, was the monad, a
center of force or energy.  Each monad was internally determined by its
definition.  Monads could not interact, but, due to a "preestablished harmony,"
the action in one monad coincided with that in another.  God chose the monads
in the world so that it would be the best of all possible worlds.  (A world
with more or less or different monads would not be as good, or God would have
chosen it.) Leibniz believed that the truths about monads could be discovered
by rational analysis.

Empiricism.
Descartes, Spinoza, and Leibniz were all rationalists in their epistemologies;
they stressed a world of metaphysical truths that could be discovered by
reason.  In contrast to this kind of philosophizing, a quite different approach
developed in Great Britain, stressing the importance of sense experience as the
basis of knowledge (see EMPIRICISM).  Starting with Sir Francis BACON, the
empirical theory of knowledge was propounded both as a way of eliminating
various metaphysical and theological difficulties and as a way of genuinely
advancing knowledge.  The most important statement of this theory was made by
John LOCKE.  He claimed that all knowledge comes from sense experience.
Individuals are, however, forced to believe that underlying experience is some
indefinable kind of substance.	No one can be completely certain of direct
intuitive inspections of his or her ideas, less certain of demonstrations from
them, and still less certain of what Locke called "sensative knowledge,"
knowledge of the reality of experience.  In spite of the limitations on
knowledge, humans can know enough to function in this world.

Bishop George BERKELEY saw Locke's theory as having dangerous skeptical and
irreligious tendencies because of its reliance on a material substance for
ideas to belong to.  Berkeley insisted that the only things truly known are
ideas and that ideas can only exist in the minds that perceive them.  Matter is
simply complexes of sensations.  Nothing really exists except perceiving and
being perceived (esse est percipere).  What holds the world together is that
God perceives everything all of the time.  Berkeley's IDEALISM gained few
adherents.  If it is granted that all of our knowledge consists only of sense
experiences, no evidence exists that the world is any more than ideas and the
minds they are in.  In philosophy this position is called SOLIPSISM, the view
that the only reality is the self.

Berkeley was followed by David Hume, who showed that a thoroughly consistent
empirical theory of knowledge leads to a complete skepticism.  Hume's major
contribution was to show that an individual cannot gain any causal information
about experience, or about what is beyond immediate experience, from empirical
knowledge.  He or she can neither deduce nor induce the cause or the effect of
experience (see CAUSALITY).  Individuals thus have no basis for accepting that
the future must resemble the past.  It is only habit or custom that leads them
to expect and believe that the items found constantly conjoined in experience
will remain so in the future.  Hume also argued that from empirical data humans
could have no real knowledge of substance, mind, or even God.  They are reduced
to complete skepticism except that habits or customs make them unjustified
believers.

Kant and Hegel.
The German philosopher Immanuel Kant claimed that reading Hume awoke him from
his dogmatic slumbers and made him realize the depths of the problem of
knowledge that cried out for a solution.  Kant insisted that humans do possess
genuine knowledge.  The problem was to show how, in the face of Hume's
critique, knowledge was possible.  Kant first insisted that although all
knowledge begins in experience, this does not mean that all knowledge comes
from experience.  The human mind provides the forms and the categories which
can be used to describe experience.  Because these are the necessary conditions
of all possible human experience, experience will have certain characteristics.
But this knowledge cannot be extended to what is beyond all possible
experience--to real substances (things-in-themselves; see NOUMENON), to the
self, or to God.

After Kant a new metaphysical movement developed in Germany starting from
Kant's claim that the individual contributes the form of all possible
experience.  Georg Wilhelm Friedrich HEGEL advanced the idea that the basic
element of reality (The Real) is not a principle of organization interior to
the mind but a process that acts through individuals and unfolds itself in the
history of the world.  This universal reason has expressed itself in the
various forms of the world's development--from a purely physical stage, to a
biological one, to a human one.  In the human one, society is developing from
ancient tyranny toward freedom in a final rational state, in which all previous
contradictory developments will be resolved (see DIALECTIC).  Hegel worked out
a metaphysics in which all of human history was rational.  His ideas were
influential throughout Europe in the 19th century, particularly on the ideas of
Karl MARX.  Hegel's ideas were soon taken up in the United States by Josiah
ROYCE and others and in England by idealistic philosophers such as F.  H.
BRADLEY.

20th Century.
Twentieth-century philosophy has been characterized in part by its revolt
against Hegelianism.  PRAGMATISM in the United States and the modern empiricism
of Bertrand Russell, LOGICAL POSITIVISM, and linguistic philosophy in both
Britain and America all rejected Hegelian metaphysics.	The pragmatists wanted
an earthy theory--that the truth is that which works--as an expeditious way of
solving problems.  From William JAMES to John DEWEY pragmatism dominated
American thought in the first half of this century.  Logical positivism, based
on modern developments in logic and an empiricism like Hume's, was the joint
result of English thinkers like Russell and an Austrian group called the Vienna
circle, whose most influential member, Ludwig WITTGENSTEIN, had been a student
of Russell's at Cambridge.  The English and Austrian positivists and linguistic
philosophers challenged any form of metaphysical thinking and insisted that
something could be said to be true if (and only if) it could be verified by
logical or scientific procedures.  No metaphysical claim, they insisted, could
meet this test (see ANALYTIC AND LINGUISTIC PHILOSOPHY).

Quite different kinds of philosophy developed in France and Germany.  One of
the most extreme reactions to Hegel came from the Danish thinker Soren
Kierkegaard.  Kierkegaard believed that all metaphysical systems are
unsuccessful, but that to avoid despair an individual had to opt for some sort
of belief, by taking a "leap of faith." Kierkegaard's emphasis on subjectivity,
confrontation, and despair has greatly influenced the school of thought called
EXISTENTIALISM.  Although Kierkegaard was a religious Christian, many of those
who have used his basic approach are irreligious.

Among several important reactions to Kant, the most notable is PHENOMENOLOGY,
developed by Edmund HUSSERL.  Bracketing questions about the self and other
transcendental ideas, Husserl attempted to elaborate a method for the analysis
of experience as it presents itself.  His most important student, Martin
HEIDEGGER, developed a philosophy of "being-in-the world," which has also
influenced Jean Paul Sartre and other existentialists.	To tell in what
direction the mainstream of philosophy will move in the last quarter of the
20th century is impossible at this close range.  RICHARD H.  POPKIN

Eastern Philosophy
------------------

The Indian Tradition.
The philosophical traditions of India have their beginnings in reflection on the
VEDAS and specifically in attempts to interpret the UPANISHADS. A wide variety
of schools emerged including some that specifically reject the authority of the
Vedas. Thus the Indian philosophy is commonly divided in two traditions: the
orthodox schools of HINDUISM that accept Vedic authority, and the nonorthodox
schools that do not accept that authority. Within the first category are six
major schools: Samkhya, Yoga, Vaisheshika, Nyaya, Mimamsa, and Vedanta. The
second category consists of Charvaka, Jainism, and Buddhism.

Samkhya, one of the oldest and most influential of the schools, is
traditionally held to have been founded by Kapila, who may have lived as early
as the 7th century BC and to whom the Samkhya-sutra (Principles of Samkhya) is
attributed.  Samkhya metaphysics is based on the distinction between prakriti
and purusha, which may be rendered as the objective, or nature, and the
subjective, or self.  All objects in the world are essentially constituted by
the combination of atoms, which emerge from the eternal and uncaused prakriti.
Even the individual ego, or mind, is a result of the constant atomic flux of
prakriti.  Purusha, on the other hand, is not to be identified with the ego, or
mind.  It also is uncaused, eternal, and unchanging and underlies the perceived
ego.  There is a plurality of such selves, which are the loci of consciousness
and in conjunction with which prakriti evolves.  The bondage to suffering that
is the common starting point of all Indian philosophical thought arises from
the involvement of purusha with prakriti.  Release comes when ignorance is
overcome; that the attachment of purusha to the changing empirical world is
illusory becomes apparent.

The means by which this ignorance is overcome are elaborated by the YOGA
school.  While accepting much of the Samkhya position, Yoga, as developed by
Patanjali (2d century BC), believes in a supreme self or purusha, identified
with the god Isvara.  The method of Yoga is to bring the self to understanding
by meditation designed to curb the constant changes brought on by involvement
in the perceived world.  The knowledge acquired through meditation is an
intuitive, nonrational, and direct cognition of the nature of things.  This
intuition is the cessation of individuality and the identity of the self with
the eternal purusha.  Some form of Yoga is recognized as a practical method of
enlightenment by most of the other Indian schools.

The Vaisheshika system is thought to have been developed by Kanada in the 3d
century BC.  The essential aspect of Vaisheshika is a complex pluralistic
metaphysics that recognizes nine substances:  earth, water, fire, air, ether,
space, time, self, and mind.  The first four material substances are atomic and
give rise to material composite objects.  Mind is also atomic but does not give
rise to composite objects.  Vaisheshika tends to be theistic and sees God as
guiding the world in accordance with the law of KARMA.	Human action
perpetuates the workings of karma, and thus liberation is achieved through the
cessation of action, and achievement of a state beyond pleasure, pain, and
experience in general.

Nyaya is closely associated with Vaisheshika, and they are often grouped
together.  The emphasis in Nyaya is on methods of argument, and particularly on
the elaboration of logical theory, which is used to justify Vaisheshika
metaphysics.  Nyaya distinguishes various forms and origins of knowledge, as
originally put forward by the school's founder Gantama (2d century BC).  In the
course of time Nyaya developed a variety of arguments for the existence of God,
as conceived by Vaisheshika, some of which parallel the classic arguments in
the Western traditions.

The Mimamsa is often divided into two main branches, the Purva Mimamsa and the
Uttara Mimamsa.  The Mimamsa sutra of Jainini dates perhaps from the 4th
century BC and begins a tradition in which the two most important later figures
are Kumarila Bhatta and Prabhakara, both 7th century AD.  The Mimamsa in
general is concerned with establishing the nature and demands of religious law
or duty (DHARMA) as it is found in the Vedas.  As such it tends to emphasize
the practical, although Mimamsa thinkers have made important contributions to
logic and theory of knowledge.

The Mimamsa, particularly the Uttara Mimamsa, is closely associated with
VEDANTA and sometimes treated simply as a school within the Vedantic tradition.
Vedanta means "the end of the Vedas" and in general suggests analysis and
contemplation of the theory and vision of the Vedic material.  The point of
departure for Vedanta is Badarayana's Brahma sutras, also known as the Vedanta
sutras.  This represents the earliest attempt to organize and explicate the
Upanishads and is itself an extremely difficult text, which has served as the
object of commentaries by the major figures of later Vedanta schools.  Central
to these schools is the interpretation of Brahman (see BRAHMA AND BRAHMAN) and
its relation to atman (self).  The best known of the schools is the nondualist,
or advaita, Vedanta of Shankara (AD 788-820), for whom Brahman is
undifferentiated, eternal, and unchanging and the world is illusion, or maya.
The modified nondualism, or vishishtadvaita, of Ramanuja (1017-1137) argues for
the reality of individual self (atman) and the world but claims that they are
dependent on Brahman.  The dualist, or dvaita, Vedanta of Madhva (1197-1276)
insists on a sharp distinction between Brahman and atman, as well as between
Brahman and the world.

Of the three nonorthodox schools, the first two can be dealt with briefly.
Charvaka is known only from fragments referred to in the works of its
opponents.  It seems to have been an extreme materialist reaction to the Vedic
teachings and to have argued for the primacy of life in the world, the
extinction of the individual at death, and perhaps an ethic of personal
gratification.	JAINISM, on the other hand, is an ethical religion that arose
in the 6th century BC.	It insists on the distinction between matter and soul
and argues for a realistic atomism in the context of an atheistic universe.
Salvation is achieved through the three jewels of faith, knowledge, and
practice of the virtues, which are nonviolence, truth telling, not stealing,
chastity, and not being attached to worldly goods and concerns.

BUDDHISM originated as a sectarian movement in India in the 6th-5th century BC,
but it spread over much of China, Southeast Asia, and Japan.  In the course of
its history Buddhism has developed diverse philosophical traditions.  The
central teaching of Buddhism is the dharma.  This term can mean a variety of
things, including "the nature of things," "the law," and "the true view of
reality." Dharmas, in the plural, are usually held to be the genuine
constituents of reality as opposed to the mere appearance.  Common to almost
all schools of Buddhist philosophy is the view that all things in the world
have their origin in other things, a doctrine known as "dependent
coorigination." This doctrine leads in most cases to a metaphysics of flux,
usually joined to a pluralistic atomism.  Another doctrine common to almost all
schools is that of anatta, the denial of a metaphysical self.  The doctrine of
anatta is often seen as a consequence of dependent coorigination, and the
perceived self is analyzed as a bundle of skandhas, the five components of
personality.

The analysis of these doctrines differed from school to school, however, and
within a few centuries of the Buddha's death a variety of positions had
developed, traditionally held to have been 18.	The two most important
divisions were the Mahasanghikas and the Sthaviras, the former identifying with
the larger community and the latter claiming to continue the tradition of the
elders.  Out of these two groups developed Mahayana and Theravada Buddhism, a
division that continues to this day.

Among the philosophical schools of Theravada are the Pudgalavadins, the
Vaibhashika, and the Sautrantika.  For the Pudgalavadins the doctrine of anatta
proved unacceptable.  They themselves were divided into a number of sects but
were united in the view that some sort of unifying person (pudgala) must exist
as the subject of karmic rebirth and possible salvation.  The pudgala served as
a principle of identity through time in the context of which the various
religious and intellectual doctrines of Buddhism could be said to make sense.
The Vaibhashikas (a branch of the Saravastivadin sect), on the other hand,
argued that the dharmas, the actual constituents of reality, were identical
with those of perceived reality if properly analyzed.  The proposed analysis is
one of a plurality of events, coordinated by causal laws.  Essences and general
concepts are merely abstractions, with only a conceptual as opposed to an
actual reality.  Knowledge, on this view, is a direct perception of real events
and objects.  The Sautrantikas have much in common with the Vaibhashikas, but
they distinguish between a phenomenal world and the world as it really is.
Thus the Sautrantikas deny the reality of perceived dharmas.  This difference
is important in their respective theories of knowledge because, unlike the
Vaibhashikas, the Sautrantikas do not say that objects are directly perceived.
They are, rather, inferred from the representations of sense imprinted upon the
mind through contact with the world.

Among the Mahayana schools the Yogacara and the Madhyamika are the two most
important.  The Yogacara differs markedly from the three schools noted above in
arguing that only consciousness is genuinely real and that perceived objects
are ultimately illusory.  The claim is that, because objects are constituted by
instantaneous events, they have no duration and thus cannot be said to exist.
The unenlightened consciousness laboring under the law of karma does not
realize this, but through the practice of yoga and moral discipline liberation
can be achieved, and the identity of the perceived world with consciousness can
be grasped.

Many scholars hold the Madhyamika to be the central philosophy of Buddhism.
The name itself means "traveler on the middle way" and suggests a position that
attempts to mediate between the extremes of the other schools.	The founder and
leading intellect of Madhyamika was Nagarjuna (2d century AD).	Nagarjuna
mounted a detailed critique of the theory of knowledge that held knowledge to
be expressible only in terms of propositions.  These propositions are derived
from individual concepts and from perceptions and are in some sense a
construction of the individual rather than a genuine representation of reality
in itself.  Understanding is reached when the relativity of these conceptual
constructions is recognized and claims to absolute knowledge and truth are
given up.  The highest wisdom is in seeing this ephemeral relativity and
acquiring direct awareness of reality itself, unconditioned by concepts.  Many
later schools are related to the Madhyamika, including the Zen schools,
although the relations are difficult to uncover in many places.

The Chinese Tradition.
Philosophical thought in China has largely concerned itself with social and
political philosophy.  This assertion is not to say that cosmological and
metaphysical speculation has been absent.  The I CHING reflects a complicated
vision of the universe.  The oracles of the I Ching began to assume their
present written form perhaps as early as the 7th century BC, and the book as a
whole played an important role throughout the subsequent development of Chinese
philosophy.

The first recognized philosopher in China, however, was CONFUCIUS (541-497 BC).
Confucius taught that the goal of the philosopher was to become learned, but
this concept means more than merely knowing a large number of facts.  Rather,
on the basis of a broad learning in the classic texts, the canon of which he
essentially formulated, Confucius held that a person, regardless of his or her
social status, could become aware of the moral order of the cosmos and of his
or her proper place in it.  He taught the primacy of the family, and the duties
incumbent upon its various members, stressing harmony and unity and the
self-evident goodness of the ethical life.  This vision has in many ways
remained a dominant one in CONFUCIANISM.

The recorded sayings of Confucius do not present a systematic vision.  The
first figure in the Confucian tradition to move toward a philosophical system
was MENCIUS (4th-3d century BC).  Mencius argued for the essential goodness of
persons--that divergence in moral responsibility is a result of a bad
upbringing or environment.  The results of a poor moral training can be
overcome by education, and society is, thus, essentially perfectable.  The duty
of government is to foster the well-being of the people and bring society to
perfection, a goal with which the genuine ruler is in accord due to his inborn
goodness and moral sense.

A strain in Confucianism diametrically opposed to the idealism of Mencius arose
a generation later in the thought of Hsun-tzu (330-225 BC).  Hsun-tzu argued
that, far from good, the inborn nature of persons is evil, or uncivil.	Rather
than eliciting innate moral virtues through education, Hsun-tzu insists on the
need to impose them from without.  This doctrine has been variously
interpreted; such a position leads to the nonabsoluteness of ethical norms and
hence leads as much in the direction of liberalism as authoritarianism.  Yet
another facet of Hsun-tzu's thought is an acute logical sense, and he left a
penetrating essay on names and meaning.  Until the advent of Neoconfucianism in
the medieval period, Hsun-tzu was usually considered a superior thinker to
Mencius.  The Neoconfucians emphasized an essentialist moral striving based on
Confucius, Mencius, and two texts, the Great Learning and Doctrine of the Mean.
In its various forms, Neoconfucian thought dominated Chinese learning and
social life until the beginning of the 20th century.

The second important indigenous Chinese tradition is TAOISM.  The teaching of
the Tao Te Ching, a work attributed to the semilegendary LAO-TZU (6th century
BC), is elusive and complex and can perhaps best be characterized as teaching
the eternal principle of reality and the way in which all things are governed
by and find their true natures in it.  It implies a metaphysics of impermanence
and change, and the philosopher who attains a clear vision of the eternal Tao
(way) and its relation to this flux acquires happiness and peace.  The most
important later Taoist philosopher was Chuang-tzu.  In CHUANG-TZU the Taoist
divergence from, and rejection of, the Confucian ideals becomes pronounced.
Whereas the Confucian tradition believes in the molding of the person through
education, Chuang-tzu saw the classical teachings of the schools as tending to
lead the person away from an understanding of the nature of things, the Tao,
and thus away from a genuine awareness of his or her own nature and place in
the world.  This outlook sometimes led to Taoism being seen as antisocial.
Nevertheless, both Chuang-tzu and Mencius, who was perhaps his contemporary,
saw the goal of philosophy as attaining an awareness of the essential harmony
of things, although they disagreed on the origin of this harmony and how
awareness is to be attained.

Only the two main strands in Chinese thought have been mentioned.  The Moists,
who taught the existence of a Supreme Spirit that possessed equal and universal
love for all people; the Legalists, who advocated a practical philosophy of
political domination; and the Buddhists, who became important from the 4th
century AD on, also exercised wide influence in Chinese thought.  Within the
Neoconfucian tradition a variety of positions emerged.	In the last century
Western philosophical and political thought has entered the Chinese tradition,
most importantly Marxism.  In Chinese philosophy, as in the other traditions
examined, drawing any firm conclusions about the future is impossible.	G.  S.
DAVIS


Bibliography

Bibliography:GENERAL:  Edwards, Paul, ed., The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 8
vols.  (1967).

WESTERN PHILOSOPHY:  Armstrong, A.  H., ed., The Cambridge History of Later
Greek and Early Medieval Philosophy (1967); Blau, J.  L., The Story of Jewish
Philosophy (1962); Brumbaugh, R.  S., The Philosophers of Greece (1964);
Copleston, F.  C., A History of Philosophy, 9 vols.  (1946-74); de Boer, T.
J., The History of Philosophy in Islam (1901; Eng.  trans., 1903); Fakhry,
Majid, A History of Islamic Philosophy (1970); Flew, A.  G.  N., An
Introduction to Western Philosophy (1971); Gilson, Etienne, History of
Christian Philosophy in the Middle Ages (1955); Guthrie, W.  K.  C., A History
of Greek Philosophy, 5 vols.  (1962-78); Jones, W.  T., A History of Western
Philosophy, 2d ed.  (1969); O'Connor, T.  J., ed., A Critical History of
Western Philosophy (1964); Randall, J.	H., The Career of Philosophy, 2 vols.
(1962-65); Russell, Bertrand, A History of Western Philosophy, rev.  ed.
(1961); Windelband, Wilhelm, A History of Philosophy (Eng.  trans., 1905; repr.
1968).

ORIENTAL PHILOSOPHY:  Conze, Edward, Buddhist Thought in India (1962); Creel,
H.  G., Chinese Thought:  From Confucius to Mao Tse-tung (1953); Dasgupta,
Surendranath, A History of Indian Philosophy, 5 vols.  (1922-55); Fung, Yu-lau,
A History of Chinese Philosophy, 2 vols.  (1948); Guenther, H.	V., Buddhist
Philosophy in Theory and Practice (1972); Potter, K.  H., Presuppositions of
lndia's Philosophies (1963); Raju, P.  T., The Philosophical Traditions of
lndia (1971); Wright, A.  F., ed., Studies in Chinese Thought (1953).


pragmatism
--------------------------------
(prag'-muh-tizm)
Pragmatism is a philosophical movement, developed in the United States, which
holds that both the meaning and the truth of any idea is a function of its
practical outcome.  Fundamental to pragmatism is a strong antiabsolutism:  the
conviction that all principles are to be regarded as working hypotheses rather
than as metaphysically binding axioms.	A modern expression of EMPIRICISM,
pragmatism was highly influential in America in the first quarter of the 20th
century and assumed renewed importance in the 1970s.

Charles Sanders PEIRCE is considered the founder of pragmatism.  He developed
it as a theory of meaning in the 1870s, holding that an intrinsic connection
exists between meaning and action--that the meaning of an idea is to be found
in its "conceivable sensible effects" and that humans generate belief through
their "habits of action." William JAMES gave a further direction to pragmatism,
developing it as a theory of truth.  True ideas, according to James, are useful
"leadings"; they lead through experience in ways that provide consistency,
orderliness, and predictability.  The classical American pragmatists are, in
addition to Peirce and James, John DEWEY, George Herbert MEAD, and Clarence
Irving LEWIS.

Pragmatism has tended to criticize traditional philosophical outlooks in the
light of scientific and social developments.  The development in science most
influential on pragmatism is the theory of evolution.  Its impact can be seen
in the pragmatic emphasis on action rather than entity, emergent effect rather
than cause, process and development rather than finality and permanence.
Focusing on the fullness of experience and the richness of nature, pragmatism
sees humankind not as a spectator separated from nature but as a constant
creative interactor with it.  Pragmatism thus tends toward a NATURALISM in
which process plays an important role.

The influence of Darwinism on pragmatic thought is further seen in its
evolutionary approach, which holds that what is true for one time or place may
not be true for another--that reality, as well as human knowledge of it, is
constantly evolving, as is morality.  What is good or evil, as well as what is
true or false, is dependent on its practical outcome--in the case of ethics,
its effects on human behavior.	Pragmatists do not regard this relativism,
whether in epistemology, ethics, or metaphysics, as subjective.  Real, true, or
good ideas, they maintain, have developed in the course of humanity's
interactions with the environment, emerging because they work to lead humans
successfully through their experiences.  One major pragmatic criterion for
truth is agreement on the part of the community of investigators in the long
run.  Truth tends to be that which gets accepted in the free competition of
ideas.	Politically, pragmatists usually advocate democracy as the system best
suited to change with the needs of the majority.  SANDRA B.  ROSENTHAL

Bibliography:  Ayer, A.  J., The Origins of Pragmatism (1968); Edwards, Paul,
and Pap, Arthur, eds., A Modern Introduction to Philosophy, 3d ed.  (1973);
James, William, Pragmatism and Other Essays, ed.  by R.  B.  Perry (1965);
Morris, Charles W., The Pragmatic Movement in American Philosophy (1970);
Moore, Edward C., American Pragmatism:	Peirce, James, Dewey (1961); Smith,
John E., Purpose and Thought (1978); Thayer, Horace S., Meaning and Action
(1968).

Origen
--------------------------------
(ohr'-i-jin)
Origen, c.185-c.254, is generally considered the greatest theologian and
biblical scholar of the early Eastern church.  He was probably born in Egypt,
perhaps in Alexandria, to a Christian family.  His father died in the
persecution of 202, and he himself narrowly escaped the same fate.  At the age
of 18, Origen was appointed to succeed Clement of Alexandria as head of the
catechetical school of Alexandria, where he had been a student.

Between 203 and 231, Origen attracted large numbers of students through his
manner of life as much as through his teaching.  According to Eusebius, he took
the command in Matt.  19:12 to mean that he should castrate himself.  During
this period Origen traveled widely and while in Palestine (c.215) was invited
to preach by local bishops even though he was not ordained.  Demetrius, bishop
of Alexandria, regarded this activity as a breach of custom and discipline and
ordered him to return to Alexandria.  The period following, from 218 to 230,
was one of Origen's most productive as a writer.

In 230 he returned to Palestine, where he was ordained priest by the bishops of
Jerusalem and Caesarea.  Demetrius then excommunicated Origen, deprived him of
his priesthood, and sent him into exile.  Origen returned to the security of
Caesarea (231), and there established a school of theology, over which he
presided for 20 years.	Among his students was Saint GREGORY THAUMATURGUS,
whose Panegyric to Origen is an important source for the period.  Persecution
was renewed in 250, and Origen was severely tortured.  He died of the effects a
few years later.

Although most of his writings have disappeared, Origen's literary productivity
was enormous.  The Hexapla was the first attempt to establish a critical text
of the Old Testament; the commentaries on Matthew and John establish him as the
first major biblical scholar of the Christian church; the De Principiis (or
Peri Archon) is a dogmatic treatise on God and the world; and the Contra Celsum
is a refutation of paganism.

Origen attempted to synthesize Christian scriptural interpretation and belief
with Greek philosophy, especially Neoplatonism and Stoicism.  His theology was
an expression of Alexandrian reflection on the Trinity, and, prior to Saint
Augustine, he was the most influential theologian of the church.  Some of
Origen's ideas remained a source of controversy long after his death, and
"Origenism" was condemned at the fifth ecumenical council in 553 (see
CONSTANTINOPLE, COUNCILS OF).  Origen is one of the best examples of early
Christian mysticism:  the highest good is to become as like God as possible
through progressive illumination.  Despite their sometimes controversial
character, his writings helped to create a Christian theology that blended
biblical and philosophical categories.	ROSS MACKENZIE

Bibliography:  Bigg, Charles, The Christian Platonists of Alexandria (1886;
repr.  1970); Chadwick, Henry, Early Christian Thought and the Classical
Tradition:  Studies in Justin, Clement and Origen (1966); Danielou, Jean,
Origen, trans.	by Walter Mitchell (1955); Hanson, R.  P.  C., Origen's
Doctrine of Tradition (1954).


Locke, John
--------------------------------
John Locke, b.	Aug.  29, 1632, d.  Oct.  28, 1704, was an English philosopher
and political theorist, the founder of British EMPIRICISM.  He undertook his
university studies at Christ Church, Oxford.  At first, he followed the
traditional classical curriculum but then turned to the study of medicine and
science.  Although Locke did not actually earn a medical degree, he obtained a
medical license.  He joined the household of Anthony Ashley Cooper, later 1st
earl of SHAFTESBURY, as a personal physician.  He became Shaftesbury's advisor
and friend.  Through him, Locke held minor government posts and became involved
in the turbulent politics of the period.

In 1675, Locke left England to live in France, where he became familiar with
the doctrines of Rene Descartes and his critics.  He returned to England in
1679 while Shaftesbury was in power and pressing to secure the exclusion of
James, duke of York (the future King JAMES II) from the succession to the
throne.  Shaftesbury was later tried for treason, and although he was
acquitted, he fled to Holland.	Because he was closely allied with Shaftesbury,
Locke also fled to Holland in 1683; he lived there until the overthrow (1688)
of James II.  In 1689, Locke returned to England in the party escorting the
princess of Orange, who was to be crowned Queen MARY II of England.  In 1691,
Locke retired to Oates in Essex, the household of Sir Francis and Lady Masham.
During his years at Oates, Locke wrote and edited, and received many
influential visitors, including Sir Isaac Newton.  He continued to exercise
political influence.  His friendships with prominent government officers and
scholars made him one of the most influential men of the 17th century.

Locke's Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1690) is one of the classical
documents of British empirical philosophy.  The essay had its origin in a
series of discussions with friends that led Locke to the conclusion that the
principal subject of philosophy had to be the extent of the mind's ability to
know (see EPISTEMOLOGY).  He set out "to examine our abilities and to see what
objects our understandings were or were not fitted to deal with." The Essay is
a principal statement of empiricism, and, broadly speaking, was an effort to
formulate a view of knowledge consistent with the findings of Newtonian
science.  Locke began the Essay with a critique of the rationalistic idea that
the mind is equipped with INNATE IDEAS, ideas that do not arise from
experience.  He then turned to the elaboration of his own empiricism:  "Let us
suppose the mind to be, as we say, white paper, void of all characters, without
any ideas; how comes this to be furnished?  .  .  .  whence has it all the
materials of reason and knowledge?  To this I answer, in a word, from
experience." What experience provides is ideas, which Locke defined as "the
object of the understanding when a man thinks." He held that ideas come from
two sources:  sensation, which provides ideas about the external world, and
reflection, or introspection, which provides the ideas of the internal workings
of the mind.

Locke's view that experience produces ideas, which are the immediate objects of
thought, led him to adopt a causal or representative view of human knowledge.
In perception, according to this view, people are not directly aware of
physical objects.  Rather, they are directly aware of the ideas that objects
"cause" in them and that "represent" the objects in their consciousness.  A
similar view of perception was presented by earlier thinkers such as Galileo
and Descartes.	Locke's view raised the question of the extent to which ideas
are like the objects that cause them.  His answer was that only some qualities
of objects are like ideas.  He held that primary qualities of objects, or the
mathematically determinable qualities of an object, such as shape, motion,
weight, and number, exist in the world, and that ideas copy them.  Secondary
qualities, those which arise from the senses, do not exist in objects as they
exist in ideas.  According to Locke, secondary qualities, such as taste, "are
nothing in the objects themselves but powers to produce ideas in use by their
primary qualities." Thus, when an object is perceived, a person's ideas of its
shape and weight represent qualities to be found in the object itself.	Color
and taste, however, are not copies of anything in the object.

One conclusion of Locke's theory is that genuine knowledge cannot be found in
natural science, because the real essences of physical objects that science
studies cannot be known.  It would appear that genuine certainty can be
achieved only through mathematics.  Locke's view of knowledge anticipated
developments by later philosophers and exercised an important influence on the
subsequent course of philosophical thought.

Locke's considerable importance in political thought is better known.  As the
first systematic theorist of the philosophy of LIBERALISM, Locke exercised
enormous influence in both England and America.  In his Two Treatises of
Government (1690), Locke set forth the view that the state exists to preserve
the natural rights of its citizens.  When governments fail in that task,
citizens have the right--and sometimes the duty--to withdraw their support and
even to rebel.	Locke opposed Thomas HOBBES's view that the original state of
nature was "nasty, brutish, and short," and that individuals through a SOCIAL
CONTRACT surrendered--for the sake of self-preservation--their rights to a
supreme sovereign who was the source of all morality and law.  Locke maintained
that the state of nature was a happy and tolerant one, that the social contract
preserved the preexistent natural rights of the individual to life, liberty,
and property, and that the enjoyment of private rights--the pursuit of
happiness--led, in civil society, to the common good.  Locke's notion of
government was a limited one:  the checks and balances among branches of
government (later reflected in the U.S.  Constitution) and true representation
in the legislature would maintain limited government and individual liberties.

A Letter Concerning Toleration (1689) expressed Locke's view that, within
certain limits, no one should dictate the form of another's religion. Other
important works include The Reasonableness of Christianity (1695), in which
Locke expressed his ideas on religion, and Some Thoughts Concerning Education
(1693).   THOMAS K. HEARN, JR.

Bibliography:  Aaron, Richard I., John Locke, 3d ed.  (1971); Collins, James
D., The British Empiricists:  Locke, Berkeley, Hume (1967); Cranston, Maurice,
John Locke:  A Biography (1957); Dunn, John, Political Thought of John Locke
(1969); Gough, J.  W., John Locke's Political Philosophy:  Eight Studies, 2d
ed.  (1973); Mabbott, J.  D., John Locke (1973); Sahakian, Mabel L.  and
William S., John Locke (1975); Yolton, John W., John Locke and the Way of Ideas
(1956) and, as ed., John Locke:  Problems and Perspectives (1969).


social contract
--------------------------------
The social-contract theory concerns the origin of organized society, holding
that the state originally was created through a voluntary agreement entered
into among individuals living in an anarchical state of nature.  This contract
defines and regulates the relations among the members of society and between
the individual and the governing authority.  The social-contract theory
challenged the DIVINE RIGHT of kings as the basis for a state's legitimacy and
laid the foundation for theories of constitutional government.

The most influential proponents of social-contract theory were the English
philosophers Thomas HOBBES and John LOCKE and the French philosopher Jean
Jacques ROUSSEAU.  According to Hobbes, the individual's natural right to
self-government was surrendered by means of the social contract to an absolute
ruler.	Locke held that the state was brought into being to protect the
"natural rights" of the citizen to life, liberty, and property.  These rights,
however, remain with the individual.  According to Locke, citizens are entitled
to resist or rebel if the state abrogates the original contract by not
protecting these rights.  Rousseau extended the concept of rights to encompass
all the people and not the narrow propertied class of citizens included by
Locke.	In Rousseau's state, political authority reflects the "general will" of
the people.  RITA J.  IMMERMAN

Bibliography:  Barker, Ernest, ed., Social Contract:  Essays by Locke, Hume,
and Rousseau (1947; repr.  1960); Gough, John W., The Social Contract:	A
Critical Study of Its Development, 2d ed.  (1957; repr.  1978); Rousseau, Jean
Jacques, The Social Contract, trans.  by Maurice Cranston (1968).


Hobbes, Thomas
--------------------------------
(hahbz)
Thomas Hobbes, b.  Apr.  5, 1588, d.  Dec.  4, 1679, was an English
philosopher, scientist, and political theorist.  The son of an Anglican
clergyman, he entered Oxford University when he was 14 or 15 years old,
receiving a bachelor's degree in 1608.  He then became a tutor to the Cavendish
family and traveled with them a number of times to the Continent.  After 1621
he translated a few of Francis Bacon's essays into Latin, and in 1628 he
published an English version of Thucydides' works.

During his stay in France from 1629 to 1631, he studied Euclid and became
especially interested in mathematics.  On his third continental trip
(1634-1637), he met and was influenced by Galileo, Marin Mersenne, and Rene
Descartes.  In 1646 he became tutor to the prince of Wales, the future Charles
II, then exiled in Paris.  There Hobbes wrote his main work, Leviathan; or the
Matter, Form, and Power of a Commonwealth, Ecclesiastical and Civil (1651), a
philosophical study of the political absolutism that replaced the supremacy of
the medieval church.  Four years later he published his De Corpore (Concerning
Body), in which he restricted philosophy to a study of bodies in motion.  In
his Questions Concerning Liberty, Necessity, and Chance (1656), he elaborated a
theory of psychological DETERMINISM.  His writings provoked immediate
opposition.  Hobbes considered philosophy a practical study of two kinds of
bodies:  natural and civil.  The latter, "made by the wills and agreement of
men," he called "the Commonwealth." He declared that natural bodies include
everything for which there is rational knowledge of causal processes.  Hobbes
took a mechanistic view, explaining things in terms of the movement of bodies
through space.	He also considered human thought as an action of bodies.  Since
everyone is subject to physical and mathematical laws that allow no exceptions,
one's apparent freedom is simply the absence of external constraint.

Leviathan has been termed nominalist, materialist, absolutist, and
anticlerical.  The work's NOMINALISM lies in Hobbes's rejection of any
universal reality corresponding to universal concepts and words.  He considered
all reality as individual and all groupings as conventional.  In Leviathan,
Hobbes held that the natural state of humans is constant war with each other;
their lives are "nasty, brutish, and short." Society arises only by convention.
From self-interest, people make peace and obtain security inasmuch as they
delegate total power to the state, that is, ultimately to the monarch.	Once
that happens, the monarch's decrees are absolute in all areas of life,
including the family and religion.

Hobbes concluded that rebellion against the state breaks society's basic
contract (see SOCIAL CONTRACT) and is punishable by whatever penalty the
monarch may exact in order to protect his subjects from a return to the
original state of nature.  The ideas of Thomas Hobbes were challenged by both
the parliamentarians and churchmen of his day; some considered trying him for
heresy.  Nevertheless, he has been recognized as a great political theorist and
philosopher.  JOHN P.  DOYLE

Bibliography:  Goldsmith, M.  M., Hobbes's Science of Politics (1966);
Macpherson, C.	B., The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism, Hobbes to
Locke (1962); Oakeshott, M., Hobbes on Civil Association (1975); Watkins, J.
W.  N., Hobbes's System of Ideas (1965; 2d ed.  1973).


liberalism
--------------------------------
Liberalism, a political philosophy that emphasizes individual freedom, arose in
Europe in the period between the Reformation and the French Revolution.  During
the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries the medieval feudal order gradually gave way
as Protestantism, the nation-state, commerce, science, cities, and a middle
class of traders and industrialists developed.	The new liberal order--drawing
on Enlightenment thought--began to place human beings rather than God at the
center of things.  Humans, with their rational minds, could comprehend all
things and could improve themselves and society through systematic and rational
action.  Liberal thinking was hostile to the prerogatives of kings,
aristocrats, and the church; it favored freedom--a natural right--from
traditional restraints.  These notions did much to precipitate the American and
French revolutions and were important factors in various uprisings in the 19th
century.  Liberalism sought to expand civil liberties and to limit political
authority in favor of constitutional representative government and promoted the
rights to property and religious toleration.  In the economic sphere, classical
liberalism was opposed to direction by the state, arguing with Adam SMITH and
David RICARDO that the forces of the marketplace were the best guide for the
economy (see LAISSEZ-FAIRE).

One of the first thinkers to formulate a comprehensive liberal philosophy was
the Englishman John LOCKE.  As a political philosopher, Locke was widely
influential.  Thomas Jefferson drew upon his ideas in framing the Declaration
of Independence, and the French Enlightenment philosophers VOLTAIRE and
MONTESQUIEU were indebted to him.  Leading liberal voices in the 19th century
included Jeremy BENTHAM, John Stuart MILL, Alexis de TOCQUEVILLE, and Thomas
Hill Green (1836-82).

In its full flower in the 19th century, liberalism stood for limited government
with a separation of powers among different branches such as the legislative,
executive, and judicial and for free enterprise in the economy.  Because of the
reaction against the excesses of the French Revolution, however, liberalism
shed some of its reliance on rationalism and began to base itself on
utilitarianism.  A link was thus forged between early revolutionary
individualism and a new idealistic concern for the interests of society.

In England the Liberal party, which espoused liberal doctrines, came into being
(1846) under the leadership of Lord John Russell (later Earl Russell) and
William E.  GLADSTONE.	In France, liberalism developed in opposition to the
policies of the restored Bourbon kings and became a major force in the Third
Republic; leading French liberals were Leon GAMBETTA and Georges CLEMENCEAU.
In the United States the most characteristic representative of liberalism was
Woodrow WILSON.

By the 20th century, political and economic thinking among liberals had begun
to shift in response to an expanding and complex economy.  Liberals began to
support the idea that the government can best promote individual dignity and
freedom through intervention in the economy and by establishing a state
concerned about the welfare of its people.  With the rise of the WELFARE STATE,
the new liberals also looked to government to correct some of the ills believed
to be caused by unregulated capitalism.  They favored TAXATION, MINIMUM WAGE
legislation, SOCIAL SECURITY, ANTITRUST LAWS, public education, safety and
health laws, and other measures to protect consumers and preserve the
environment (see GOVERNMENT REGULATION).  Some liberals became socialists,
although opposing doctrinaire Marxism and communism.  The more traditional
liberals, who held to the ideas of Adam Smith and John Stuart Mill, found
themselves classed as conservatives.  LENNART FRANTZELL

Bibliography:  Bease, W.  Lyon, A Short History of English Liberalism (1976);
De Ruggiero, Guido, The History of European Liberalism, trans.	by R.  C.
Collingwood (1927; repr.  1977); Gerber, William, American Liberalism (1975);
Mileur, Jerome, The Liberal Tradition in Crisis; American Politics in the
Sixties (1974); Strauss, Leo, Liberalism, Ancient and Modern (1968).

Jainism
--------------------------------
(jy'-nizm)
Jainism is a religious faith of India that is usually said to have originated
with Mahavira, a contemporary of the Buddha (6th century BC).  Jains, however,
count Mahavira as the last of 24 founders, or Tirthamkaras, the first being
Rishabha.  The 1971 census of India counts 2,600,000 Jains, mostly concentrated
in the western part of India.  Jainism has been present in India since
Mahavira's time without interruption, and its influence has been significant.
The major distinction within Jainism is between the Digambara and Svetambara
sects, a schism that appears to date from about the 1st century AD.  The major
difference between them is that whereas the Svetambaras wear white clothes, the
Digambaras traditionally go naked.  Fundamentally, however, the views of both
sects on ethics and philosophy are identical.

The most notable feature of Jain ethics is its insistence on noninjury to all
forms of life.	Jain philosophy finds that every kind of thing has a soul;
therefore strict observance of this precept of nonviolence (ahimsa) requires
extreme caution in all activity.  Jain monks frequently wear cloths over their
mouths to avoid unwittingly killing anything by breathing it in, and Jain
floors are kept meticulously clean to avert the danger of stepping on a living
being.	Jains regard the intentional taking of life, or even violent thoughts,
however, as much more serious.	Jain philosophy posits a gradation of beings,
from those with five senses down to those with only one sense.	Ordinary
householders cannot help harming the latter, although they should strive to
limit themselves in this regard by refraining from eating meat, certain fruits,
or honey or from drinking wine.  In addition Jain householders are expected to
practice other virtues, similar to those in HINDUISM.  The vows taken by the
Jain monks are more severe.  They eventually involve elements of ASCETICISM:
fasting, peripatetic begging, learning to endure bodily discomfort, and various
internal austerities constituting a Jain variety of YOGA.  Jainism is unique in
allowing the very spiritually advanced to hasten their own death by certain
practices (principally fasting) and under specified circumstances.

Jain philosophy is based on a fundamental distinction between living and
nonliving matter.  Living souls are divided into bound and liberated; the
living souls are found in both mobile and immobile loci.  Nonliving matter is
composed of karman or very fine particles that enter a soul and produce changes
in it, thus causing its bondage.  This influx of karman is induced by activity
and has to be burned off by experience.  Karmans are of infinitely numerous
varieties and account for all distinctions noted in the world.	By
nonattachment, however, an individual can prevent influx of further karmans and
thus escape from the bonds of action.  A soul, which is thought of as having
the same size as its body, at liberation has lost the matter that weights it
down and thus ascends to the top of the universe, where it remains forever.

Jainism recognizes no supreme deity; its ideal is the perfection attained by
the 24 Tirthamkaras.  Numerous temples have been built celebrating the
perfected souls; a notable example is the temple at Mount Abu in Rajasthan.
KARL H.  POTTER

Bibliography:  Chatterjee, A.  K., A Comprehensive History of Jainism (1978);
Gopalan, Subramania, Outlines of Jainism (1973); Jain, J.  P., Religion and
Culture of the Jains (1976); Mehta, Mohan Lal, Outlines of Jaina Philosophy
(1954); Stevenson, S.  T., The Heart of Jainism (1915; repr.  1970); Williams,
R.  H.	B., Jaina Yoga (1963).


Gladstone, William Ewart
--------------------------------
(glad'-stuhn)
William Ewart Gladstone, four times Liberal prime minister of Britain, was an
Olympian figure in 19th-century British politics.  The son of a Liverpool
merchant, he was born on Dec.  29, 1809, and educated at Eton and Oxford.  He
entered Parliament in 1832 as a Canningite Tory.

An erudite classicist and High Church Anglican given to soul-searching,
Gladstone always sought to apply morality to politics.	He became (1843)
president of the Board of Trade under Sir Robert PEEL and with Peel began to
support more liberal positions, including repeal of the CORN LAWS in 1846.
After the ensuing split in the Tory party, Gladstone gradually moved into
Liberal circles, finding much in common with Richard COBDEN and John BRIGHT.
He served as chancellor of the exchequer in Lord ABERDEEN's coalition (1852-55)
and by 1859 was ready to assume the same office as a Liberal under Viscount
PALMERSTON, continuing tax reforms and securing a commercial treaty with
France.  By 1865 he had developed liberal views on the rights of
nonconformists, disestablishment of the Church of Ireland, and electoral
reform.  He was well on the way to becoming "the people's William" when the
death of Palmerston and resignation of Lord John RUSSELL gave him leadership of
the Liberals in 1866.

Gladstone's first and most successful government (1868-74) was marked by
disestablishment of the Irish church, the Irish Land Act (to protect the
peasants against abuses by their landlords), abolition of religious tests in
universities, open competition in the civil service, the Secret Ballot Act, and
other reforms.	However, a pro-Anglican bias in the Education Act of 1870
contributed to his electoral defeat in 1874.

Gladstone resigned the Liberal leadership in 1875, but he reentered the
political arena to chastise (1876) his Conservative rival Benjamin DISRAELI for
indifference to Turkish atrocities in the Balkans.  After vigorous
electioneering in the Midlothian campaign (1879-80)--the first such political
campaign in British history--Gladstone returned to power in 1880.  His second
government carried (1884) the third REFORM ACT but was discredited by colonial
setbacks, especially the failure to relieve Charles George GORDON at Khartoum,
and fell in 1885.

In his third, short-lived ministry (1886) Gladstone attempted unsuccessfully to
give Ireland home rule (see HOME RULE BILLS).  Not always adept in handling
colleagues and followers, he now split them on this issue; Joseph CHAMBERLAIN
led the defection of the Liberal Unionists, who favored the continuing union of
Britain and Ireland.  The home rule issue also dominated Gladstone's fourth
ministry (1892-94)--a second Home Rule Bill was defeated in 1893--and diverted
the Liberals from constructive domestic policies.  Gladstone finally resigned
in 1894, however, in a dispute over the naval budget, peace and retrenchment
remaining his strongest passions.

Gladstone died on May 19, 1898.  Though he had failed in two
ambitions--abolition of the income tax and settlement of the Irish
question--and showed an uncertain touch in foreign and colonial affairs, the
"Grand Old Man" had shaped the LIBERAL PARTY of the Victorian era.  DONALD
SOUTHGATE

Bibliography:  Feuchtwanger, E.  J., Gladstone (1975); Magnus, Sir Philip,
Gladstone (1954; repr.	1963); Morley, John, The Life of William Ewart
Gladstone, 3 vols.  (1903; repr.  1972).

nominalism
--------------------------------
Nominalism is the designation usually applied to any philosophical system,
ancient or modern, that denies all objectivity, whether actual or potential, to
universals; in other words, nominalists grant no universality to mental
concepts outside the mind.  In this sense, the philosophical systems of
EPICURUS, WILLIAM OF OCCAM, George BERKELEY, David HUME, John Stuart MILL, and
of contemporary linguistic analysis may be called nominalistic in that they
attribute universality only to words (nomina), mental habits, or concepts and
maintain the objective existence only of the concrete, individual thing.
Nominalism is simultaneously opposed to the philosophical IDEALISM of Plato and
to the moderate REALISM of Aristotle and Saint Thomas Aquinas.	The principal
objection of nominalists is to the attribution of objective existence to ideas
formally as they exist in the mind and fundamentally (or potentially) as they
exist in particulars having some similarity to each other in any given class or
species.  JAMES A.  WEISHEIPL

Bibliography:  Carre, Meyrick H., Realists and Nominalists (1961); Goodman,
Nelson, and Bochenski, Innocentius, eds., The Problem of Universals, A
Symposium (1956); Van Iten, R., ed., The Problem of Universals (1970); Veatch,
H., Realism and Nominalism Revisited (1954).


innate ideas
--------------------------------
Innate ideas are ideas or functions originating in the mind apart from sense
experience.  Different theories of innate ideas have appeared over the
centuries.  PLATO believed that people developed understanding in a previous
life but were born into their present life in a condition resembling
forgetfulness.	All learning, according to this theory, is remembering what one
once knew explicitly and still somehow knows despite having forgotten it.  For
the Stoics, all people have certain "common notions" that are the roots of
science and morality prior to any sense experience.  Saint AUGUSTINE adapted
the Platonic remembrance theory and spoke of a nonsensory source of knowledge
in a divine illumination.  Saint BONAVENTURE and his disciples repeated this
doctrine.  In the 17th century, Rene DESCARTES taught that ideas such as God,
the soul, and even geometrical axioms, are innate, having been implanted by
God.  Variations on this are found among Cartesian and rationalist thinkers in
the next century.  What may be regarded an an innate-ideas doctrine is also
present in the writings of Immanuel KANT, for whom space and time, "the
categories" of understanding, and the "pure ideas" of God, the soul, and the
world, all derived from the structure of the knower prior to sensation.  For
Kant, as for others accepting innate ideas, morality is not rooted so much in
experience as in common forms or rules possessed by everyone anterior to any
experience.  JOHN P.  DOYLE

Bibliography: Stich, Stephen P., ed., Innate Ideas (1975).