Dogmatism. What thoughts does a person operate with? This leads to the development of certain character qualities. A pattern of thinking has become commonplace, when a person operates with concepts that he has adopted from the world around him and cannot be verified or doubted. In philosophy and science this is called dogmatism.
Dogmatism comes from the ancient Greek language and denotes a way of thinking that operates and relies exclusively on dogmas - concepts that a person does not criticize and doubt, considers to be eternal provisions.
In dogmatism, a person does not think critically in relation to the dogmas with which he operates. He does not criticize them, does not test them, does not give in to doubts. He blindly believes in authorities. Has a conservative mindset when he does not want to accept new information that contradicts his beliefs.
Dogmatism
Dogmatism is often applied in philosophy, religion and politics:
- In religion, a person must blindly believe in what is told to him. He must believe in dogmas and follow them blindly.
- In philosophy, dogmatism is a direction of teaching or followers. It arises when a person begins to consider some belief to be true and does not subject it to change or verification by evidence. Opposite directions are criticism and skepticism. In philosophy, dogmatism is a one-sided judgment that requires blind faith and submission.
- In politics, dogmatism is used as a cliché concept that is not subject to change by an individual.
At the everyday level, many people are dogmatic - blindly believing in certain beliefs and being unable to change them, even if the world and those around them provide real evidence of the existence of something else.
What is dogmatism?
What is dogmatism? This concept implies a way of thinking in which a fact, belief, formulation is perceived as obvious and is not subject to doubt. A person operates with outdated data, ignoring everything new and changing. He does not criticize what he learns and blindly believes in certain dogmas. The dogmatic concept excludes the connection of human thinking with reality, avoids everything creative, ignores anything new and critical thinking. A person must accept the dogma as it appears and believe in it.
The concept of dogmatism originates in Ancient Greece, where the philosophers Pyrrho and Zeno perceived any philosophy as dogmatic. Today, this concept implies the uncritical perception of certain dogmas as true. Initially, dogmatism was used only in religion, where a person must believe in all religious teachings about God, his unity, infallibility and omnipotence.
Dogmatism flourished exclusively in religion, where every believer must believe the scriptures, interpret ideas unambiguously, without questioning them. Any dissent was considered heresy.
According to dictionaries, dogmatism is a method of thinking in which certain provisions are transformed into ossified conclusions that do not take into account changes in living conditions and are not subject to criticism and study by science. Dogma is perceived as an absolute. Its opposite is dialectics, which perceives all the diversity of circumstances and living conditions, the variability of nature, transformations and other changes.
Where blind faith becomes important, dogmatism flourishes. This direction is important in religion and politics. People must be blind in their beliefs to support those at the forefront of the movement. Otherwise, the movement will disintegrate, people will disperse and will not be able to reinforce the dogmas of those who want to control the crowd.
Methods by time periods
Naturally, philosophical methods differ depending on the historical era in which they were used. In particular, special attention should be paid to the methods used in the teachings of medieval philosophy, as well as the philosophical methods of modern times.
Methods of medieval philosophy
If we talk about the methods of medieval philosophy, they were directly related to the Christian religion. First of all, Christian preachers needed to substantiate their own positions. Therefore, Christianity was the main reference point for philosophical thought of that time.
The close connections of medieval philosophical movements with monotheistic religious views were considered one of the most significant differences between medieval philosophy and the teachings of other eras.
We can distinguish the following periods through which medieval philosophy passed in its development:
- Patristics;
- Scholasticism.
In particular, patristics presupposes a system of theological views held by the founders of the church and those who developed Christian ideas. Scholasticism is a medieval school of thought that was associated with the Western educational system. The basis of scholastic teachings was patristic literature.
Representatives of Western patristics compiled their works in Latin, and representatives of Eastern patristics - in Greek. The most famous representatives are considered to be John Chrysostom, Clement of Alexandria, and so on.
Method in modern philosophy
If we talk about the methods of modern philosophy, they are associated with the transition of the economy from feudal to capitalist relations. One of the founders of such methods was the thinker Francis Bacon, who proclaimed that knowledge is real power.
The direction of the methods used is associated with identifying the causes of all phenomena that can occur in the surrounding world through scientific methods (natural sciences received particular development at this time).
Science was considered the main force capable of conquering nature and dominating its laws. In particular, Bacon emphasized the existence of two main scientific methods:
- Dogmatic;
- Empirical.
Thinkers who adhere to dogmatic methods begin their work with some general provisions and strive to subsume all other phenomena under this provision. Scientists, relying on empirical methods, are engaged in the maximum accumulation of various facts.
According to Bacon, methods of knowledge should begin with the study of individual positions and facts and approach general results. Actually, this is an inductive method, which can be:
- Full;
- Incomplete.
Complete induction involves the study of phenomena of one class, and incomplete induction is associated with the study of even those facts that are not within the scope of the phenomenon and may even deny it.
Dogmatism in science
Dogmatism in science is seen as a necessity, when certain conclusions and views should not be subject to criticism and doubt. The epistemological point of view defines dogmatism as an unconscious ignorance of changes and dynamics of development, an exaggerated perception of the true assertion, and avoidance of logical explanation and verification.
Psychology views dogmatism as the tendency of the brain to remain inert - it will quickly perceive an idea rather than seek to explain it. This leads to stereotypical thinking and conservatism, when it is better to preserve the past (understandable and predictable) rather than lean towards the unknown and creative present and future.
Sociology views dogmatism as the desire to maintain the current state of affairs, to preserve an individual or group status that has already been acquired. Dogmatism is opposed to thinking in which facts and conclusions are drawn on the specificity of truth, conditions of formation, goals, place and time of applicability, its functioning within a certain framework.
Dogmatism is inherent in the conservative mind, which is more inclined to believe in the stability of moral and universal ideas. He doesn't question them. Here a perversion of morality occurs when, for example, good becomes evil if a good deed led to a crime and was not punished. Any changes and alterations, conditions and circumstances are completely excluded here. This type of thinking is ideal in circles where blind faith is required, such as religion.
Various crises that occur in the life of any person are based on dogmatic thinking. A person is faced with situations or circumstances that do not fit into the norms and rules he has accepted. Psychologists note that the cause of dogmatic thinking is opportunism and unprofessionalism.
Dogmatism forms a certain quality of character in a person (conservatism), in which he becomes prone to assertion without discussion, using the concepts given once and for all, and ignoring all changing circumstances and living conditions.
A person is forced to accept any information as true, without subjecting it to analysis, without considering it in various circumstances. This is a belief that has been implanted in the head and which the person may not have tested in any way. Examples of dogmas include:
- "Money gives power."
- “There are no decent men.”
- “All women are fools.”
- “Fate is predetermined”, etc.
Dogmatism is based on ignorance and ignorance. In order to somehow survive in the world, a person is ready to accept any idea as truth, and then build on it when making decisions and taking actions.
Dogmatism presupposes fear and avoidance of independent thinking, accepted traditions and authorities. Examples of such thinking can be found everywhere, for example, in the expression “A mother always wants the best for her child.” This does not take into account various circumstances and situations where mothers simply physically and mentally destroyed their own children and made them sick.
Dogmatism thrives where people need to be given some knowledge that they will accept as true. A person does not know something, so he is ready to receive information. He has neither the time, nor the desire, nor the ability to check it. He does not subject the information to criticism and doubt, and does not check its truth. He simply believes in it, makes it his conviction. As a result, a person begins to think and act, to live on the basis of this dogma.
Nominal methods of philosophy
Bacon's philosophical methods
Francis Bacon is a famous English thinker , politician and pioneer of empiricism. When Francis was 23 years old, he was elected to parliament. At 56, he became Lord Seal and was later given the position of Lord Chancellor. In addition, Bacon held the titles of Baron of Verulam and even Viscount of St. Albans.
In old age, he was convicted of bribery and removed from office, and although the king subsequently pardoned Bacon, he never returned to public service. The last years of his life were devoted to scientific work.
According to Bacon, scientific methods must meet the real goals of philosophy related to ensuring human well-being, as well as dignity. Practical power is impossible without the possession of truth. That is, it was knowledge that Francis Bacon considered the only real and effective force.
One of the methods he used was experimental-inductive. It consisted of the formation of new definitions through the interpretation of phenomena after their observation and subsequent analysis. Only this method can contribute to the discovery of new truths.
Bacon's deduction was not denied, but had to be used together with inductive methods, which in turn could be:
- Full;
- Incomplete.
Full inductive methods are associated with the ideal of knowledge, that is, the regular repetition of one or another property of a phenomenon. However, they are used quite rarely, since there is almost nothing permanent in the world around us.
Incomplete inductive methods involve drawing conclusions based on a partial analysis of empirical materials. This does not exclude the possibility of the nature of the conclusions drawn.
Philosophical Methods of Socrates
Socrates is considered the first Athenian thinker, whose father was an ordinary artisan, and whose mother was a midwife. In his youth, Socrates participated in the Athenian wars with Sparta, participated as a chairman in the post-war court, where he firmly stood on not rushing to execute all the Spartan strategists (however, they did not listen to him).
It is believed that Socrates was not the best family man, as he did not show any concern for his wife and three sons. He devoted most of his time to various disputes and conducting philosophical conversations, since he had a large number of students (although he did not take money).
At the age of seventy he was accused of atheism, refused to escape from prison (although such an opportunity was provided) and drank plant poison to commit suicide.
As for the philosophical method of Socrates, he himself called it maieutics. This technique consisted of extracting hidden knowledge through the right leading questions. Special importance was attached to the meaning of virtue. Moral people must have virtue, and morality coincides with knowledge.
In essence, such a technique can safely be considered the beginning of idealistic dialectics, since the truth was discovered through the fact that contradictions were revealed and subsequently overcome. Socrates' "irony" was to lead the interlocutor to contradict himself, from which his admission of ignorance followed.
Kant's philosophical methods
Immanuel Kant is a great German thinker and the founder of the classical philosophical teachings of the German school , which operated at the junction of the Enlightenment and Romantic eras. He was born into a rather poor family, and his father was an ordinary artisan. From his youth, Immanuel showed particular talent, managed to successfully graduate from prestigious educational institutions and worked as a home teacher for a long time.
At the age of 30, he managed to develop a cosmogonic hypothesis suggesting the origin of our galaxy from a nebula. This hypothesis is still relevant today. At the same time, Kant received his doctorate and taught at the university for 40 years. At the age of 46, he began writing his famous “critical” works and paid a lot of attention to political philosophy.
Kant's philosophical methodology is associated with transcendental thinking, and the purpose of such a methodology is to determine the conditions of knowledge. Such conditions turn out to be related to the conditions of judgment.
Consciousness itself plays an objective role and is necessary. Moreover, these judgments should not be analytical, but synthetic, that is, those that go beyond the boundaries of concepts and connect concepts with moments that go beyond its boundaries. Moreover, such judgments are based not only on experience, but also on the results of intuition.
Dogmatism in philosophy
Dogmatism in philosophy is a direction in teaching where certain information is taken and perceived as true without preliminary analysis and without the possibility of changing it.
Zeno and Pyrrho perceived all philosophy as dogmatic. However, other philosophers had a different attitude towards dogmatism:
- I. Kant considered dogmatism a way of knowledge in which new information does not explore conditions and possibilities.
- Hegel perceived dogmatism as abstract thinking.
Dogmatism in philosophy is a limitation of perception and credulity in the fact that there is no need to have basic knowledge in order to know the truth and cope with complex problems. Such a naive faith entails mistakes and illusions, which leads to only one thing - disappointment of a person.
The opposite of dogmatism is skepticism - thinking that denies any possibility of comprehending the truth. Pyrrho and Zeno were skeptics. They designated as dogmatists everyone who made some information reliable and true, since they questioned everything and made it impossible to comprehend the truth.
Dogmatism and skepticism, according to Kant, are diametrically opposed directions that have one common feature - one-sidedness. None of the directions can help a person develop thinking. That is why he made critical thinking an intermediate link, a golden mean.
Dogmatism does not solve problems because there is no analysis of the situations and circumstances in the past and present that led to their occurrence. Reasoning in stereotypes and ready-made ideas can only lead to aggravation of the problem, its complication, and a departure from reality.
Many may believe that dogmatic thinking is correct because it allows one to observe faith, traditions and other tenets. However, where there is dogmatism, there is a complete lack of connection with reality, progress, growth and development. It’s as if a person gets stuck in a certain time, ceasing to improve.
Dogmatism prevents any growth. It’s the same as if a child decides that he has already been formed and needs to remain the way he was already born: he will not learn to walk, talk, read, etc. Dogmatism is associated with such concepts as conservatism and authority, since people often refer to some authorities when they try to defend their blind faith and refute any new movement.
A dogmatist has no knowledge. He just blindly believes. His beliefs are often unrelated and sometimes even contradictory. For example, a believer who believes in the value of life will go to war with everyone who does not believe, killing them.
The world around us seems dangerous and formidable to a dogmatist. In search of protection, a person is ready to submit to authorities who will speak of certain ideas, often divorced from reality, irrational and simplified. What matters here is not the value and veracity of the information itself, but who it comes from. A person will unconditionally believe in someone whom he considers his authority, believing in any nonsense and recklessness that comes from his mouth.
The meaning of the word Dogmatism according to the Brockhaus and Efron dictionary:
Dogmatism (from δόγμα, position) is a philosophical term denoting a certain attitude towards the content of a system, and not the system itself. The concept of D. is determined mainly by two concepts that are opposite to it - skepticism and criticism. Generally speaking, D. is an attempt to build a philosophical system without a preliminary study of human cognitive abilities and without resolving the question of how much a person can comprehend goals, that is, know the truth. Every person is a dogmatist by nature, because he believes in the possibility of finding truth until he is convinced of the futility of his efforts. Thus, philosophy in its beginning is necessarily dogmatic. Unsuccessful attempts at understanding the world create skepticism, which denies the possibility of a true concept, and skepticism takes its arguments partly from the past of philosophy, partly from consideration of the nature of reason itself. The first category of arguments is not dangerous, for it is obvious that the failure of philosophy in the past does not contain a reason why it should not achieve its goal more successfully in the future. The second category of arguments against D. is also not dangerous, because skepticism, taking up arms against thinking, has no other weapon than thinking itself, therefore by its very existence it refutes what it wants to prove. That is why in the new philosophy skepticism does not play any role and dogmatism triumphs. but in the person of criticism, a new and more dangerous opponent of D. has arisen. Criticism is the name given to the direction of German philosophy, the ancestor of which is Kant. Before building a philosophical system, it is necessary to criticize our cognitive ability, a task that Kant solves in the Critique of Pure Reason. The result of Kant's analysis is the impossibility of metaphysics, the knowledge of objects in themselves, and the assertion that we know only phenomena, the law in which belongs not to the phenomena, but to the cognizing subject. Although criticism, like skepticism, limits the claims of human knowledge, by its nature criticism is completely different from skepticism and closer to D. Criticism puts forward only the theory of knowledge from the main tasks of philosophy and asserts its primary importance in a number of philosophical issues. Kant's criticism itself is not at all so different from the philosophy of Locke and Hume that one can see in him the founder of a new direction. That criticism by its nature is a dogmatic trend is proven by history. Kant's criticism very quickly and logically correctly degenerated into D. Schelling and Hegel. E. Radlov.
Philosophy of the Soviet period
The philosophy of the Soviet period can be divided into several stages. First stage (1922-1930). This is a period when the ideological grip was already present, but had not yet contracted, and there was still room for discussion and debate within the framework of materialist ideas.
Second stage (1930-1953). From that moment on, Stalin established himself as an authority in Soviet philosophy for many years. In 1938, he published his “Short Course on the History of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks)”, containing a philosophical part, which becomes the indisputable canon for everyone involved in philosophy. Every year the dogmatization of philosophical knowledge grew and suppressed any living movement of thought.
The third stage (1953 - late 1980s). Since 1956, philosophy began to be taught as an independent subject not only in humanities schools and universities. In 1958, another journal of philosophical research was founded, then destroyed by the commercialization of intellectual life in the early 1990s, and now reborn, although on a much smaller scale. Beginning in the late 1950s, Soviet philosophers began to participate in international philosophical congresses.
Philosophers have discovered that along with Marxism-Leninism in its Stalinist manifestation there is Marx himself, who can be read. Since the early 1960s, books devoted to an emancipatory reading of the classics have been published one after another. These were the works of M.M. Rosenthal, E.V. Ilyenkov, L.A. Mankovsky, B.M. Kedrov, N.I. Lapin, V.V. Keshelava, V.A. Vazulin. The authors consider the problem of the relationship between the ideas of early and late Marx, analyze the internal logic and dialectics of Capital, and explore the humanistic aspects of the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844.
A new free reading of the classics gives impetus to the development of dialectical logic. All over the country, groups of “dialecticians” are emerging, united by the opinion that dialectical logic is the heart of Marxism and that there are no national differences here: We find dialectical schools in Moscow (E.V. Ilyenkov, G.S. Batishchev, V.S. Bibler) , in Kazakhstan (Zh.M. Abdildin), in Azerbaijan (Z.M. Orujev), in Rostov-on-Don (A.M. Minasyan), in Ukraine (V.A. Bosenko). Since the beginning of the 70s, a number of studies have appeared on dialectics and its role in social life; these are multi-volume publications in which dialectics is analyzed as an objective process and method of cognition.
