UNESCO has in due course started to make its contribution to philosophy as a foundation for the progress of culture and humanism. Its support of philosophy is an important condition for social progress. UNESCO can assemble the followers of classical philosophy of Ancient Greece and medieval Europe and turn this into a vehicle of progress. For that purpose, UNESCO Chairs of Philosophy must follow the principle of plurality (freethinking), and not be adherents of paradigms of institutional philosophy.

The annual philosophical forum, and its internet conference, will make a contribution to philosophy only if their organizers take the classical philosophy of Ancient Greece and medieval Europe as its foundation, with such attributes as:

– the search for truth (Plato is dear to me, but the Truth is dearer still)

– freethinking approach in the search for truth

– theorization of sciences as a main direction of movement towards finding the truth, etc.

The proposed hypothesis of theoretical philosophy can become the basis for the salvation of classical philosophy. Its more comprehensive contents are provided in the “Genesis of Theoretical Philosophy” brochure published for the 2009 World Philosophy Day in Moscow.      

PHILOSOPHICAL PROJECT OF R. HOOKER

1. The idea of the 19^th century that said "Unbridled development of society leaves a desert in its wake” [see 2 vol. 32 p. 45] – is more and more becoming a self-evident truth. Social progress does not lead only to new achievements; it also increases the possibility of the destruction of society. The gap between the possibilities of the society and culture, humanism, morality is growing considerably. The possibility of self-destruction of the society has emerged for the first time.

 The search for a way to save society requires adequate mentality for its fundamental study. The existence of inadequacy in the mentality of people to the circumstances of their life is generally recognized. The only hope is to achieve a qualitative growth of mentality, intellect, intelligence, wisdom and reason. For that purpose, it is important to comprehend their scientific nature and grasp the essence and forms of science, scientific order for philosophy as a foundation of the supreme form of science – theory.

 Many thinkers have been analyzing the main problem of society in the new era – the necessity of qualitative leap of science as a foundation for the relevant growth of mentality of people. The social order of philosophy was formulated not only by its founders, but other thinkers as well, for example, the English theologian R. Hooker (1554-1600). In modern science, his design is largely ignored, but it was a driving force behind the intellectual search of J. Locke and G.W. Leibnitz, who were born 32 and 46 years, respectively, after the death of R. Hooker.

J. Locke quoted the book of R. Hooker entitled “Church policy”: “If it were possible to provide the proper tools for true art and knowledge (and I have to admit that our age, which has been called the "age of science", knows little of them and generally pays little attention to them), then there would be nearly the same difference in the maturity of judgment between people who became accustomed to these tools and contemporary people, as between contemporary people and idiots” [1, p. 160].

R. Hooker compared three levels of people's mentality. He called the first of these levels metaphorically as "the idiots”. The word “idiot” is a medical term, but is it used metaphorically for evaluating the mental abilities that are inadequate to the conditions of life. J. Locke also researched this phenomenon. Let us express this idea of R. Hooker using different words. Instead of “contemporary people" we shall use the word “fools” in the interpretation of its meaning used by the Chinese satiric Lao She in “The Divorce”, where he stated that “every fool has his own logic”. As a result, R. Hooker distinguished three levels of mentality:

idiots →   fools → intellectuals.

In general, the main problem of society is to enhance qualitatively the importance of science, turn people into intellectuals and theoreticians, who are able to understand reality monistically. What can be the contents of the qualitative development of science and what can help to ensure its achievement? There are many different answers to the question. Out of all these, I believe that the philosophical project of the ancient Greeks to be truest. Its credo is:

Philosophy → theory → humanism

philosophizing → consideration → thinking

Mentality → wisdom → reason (sense)

2. Classical philosophy was a science about science. The ancient Greeks began to think about thinking, to develop the idea of the supreme form of science and philosophy as a key to this. They did not only formulate the philosophical project of science as the canon, the organum of theorization of all sciences, but laid its foundations, above all in dialectical logic. The best example of practical dialectic understanding of objects is Plato's “Feast”. Based on it, one can master the elements of dialectic logic [see 5; 8]. And only the restoration of continuity of the classical philosophy of the ancient Greeks will save our society in the third millennium.

 Classical philosophy had created everything necessary for the birth of the age of reason, based on the qualitative leap in the mentality of people – to move from consideration (logic) to thinking (reason). The lone efforts of philosophers are not enough to resolve the problems of society, but only they can create the technology of philosophizing, which enhances the heuristic potential of all sciences.

The solving of problems connected with the philosophical foundation of science requires qualitative growth in the understanding of science and culture as a whole. And natural philosophers provide ample evidence of this. The research of zoologists shows the appearance of culture as a mode of life in communities of advanced animals and its contents - tolerance, mutual help, information accumulated by the community (pre-science), imitation as a method of its transmission [see 13].

             Humanism is the culture of society, and the information accumulated by it is science, ideology. It is adopted and imitated, and above all, it is acquired from the older generations. Learning is a particular characteristic in the life of human beings [14]. The etymology of the word “science” arises out of that fact. [4]. Science is an attribute of a society determining its progress. The ideas, thoughts and knowledge determine the success of human life, becoming the ideology of the people. The important condition for the progress of society is the growth of science and its accessibility to all people.

The progress of science is demonstrated in the sequence of its three forms – experience, doctrines (teaching) and theories. Experience is the original and basic form of science. Doctrinal science, which generalized facts, originated seven thousand years ago. It remains the prevailing form of science. Doctrines are pluralistic, paradigmatic and ideologically divide society. The limitations of doctrinal science were understood by ancient Greek philosophers, who realized that the social mandate of philosophy – its establishment as a science about science. Philosophy was seen by its founders as the canon, the organum of theorization of all sciences – the creation of theories and the supreme form of science. Euclid’s geometry was its first achievement. Since that time, the thinkers of all nations have been solving this problem. They have created everything necessary to theorize science as a form of thinking, adequate to modern life.

   3. The progress of philosophy is complicated by the problems of humanism. Humanization of the culture of people required the support by science, and that implied understanding of it as a social phenomenon. A number of factors inhibited the understanding of the problem. One of these was the prerogative of the representatives of state power that saw wisdom as a foundation of their domination. This had already occurred in Ancient Egypt, which can be seen in the teachings of Merikare. Simultaneously with the development of wisdom as a form of science, increased the claims to it from the dominant powers in society.

The establishment of philosophy was accompanied by the appearance of philodoxy – love of one's own opinion, and thought of as a supreme form of wisdom, which was to be imposed onto others. This fact was realized by ancient Greek philosophers and can be seen throughout the entire history of philosophy. It acquired its special meaning in the 19th century and led to the dominance of philodoxy in the 20th century. The credo of philodoxy is the interruption of continuity with classical philosophy, negation of the objectiveness of philosophy and its progress (cumulativeness), and its meaning as a concrete scientific method of cognition, assertion of its inherence to all people from the moment of birth. Philodoxy claims to judge other paradigms of philosophy. But, according to F. Bacon, the court cannot be held by the one who must be judged himself [16.1.68].

The subject of philosophy is only science as a social phenomenon. While the philodoxy proponents write about whatever they like, and their texts are unnecessary for people with sound judgment. That is why the authority of philosophy is declining. The philodoxy practitioners believe that the advantage of their works is its impracticability, but this is simply evidence of the poverty of their ideas. Philodoxy hampers the heuristic potential of science, which gives rise to prosperity of parascience, etc. Philodoxy texts are unclear for the people of sound judgment and even those loaded with high scientific degrees and titles: "It is unclear what the philosophers are busy with. It brings on despondency" [17]. That is why arose the popular idea of rejecting the obligatory teaching of philosophy to students in developed countries and instead there was a concentration on acquiring “experience”. Teaching of modern philosophy is fruitless, unproductive and does not resolve the problems of society. As a result, there appears sadness, boredom, melancholy and even depression in a society, which does not see a way to change the negative tendencies of social dynamics.

The fruitlessness of philosophy leads to the domination of doctrinal science and a decline of its pragmatism. The estrangement of people from philosophy is growing, and therefore, the possibility of its progress is declining, hindering the growth of the noosphere – the people’s reason. Without implementing the dream of R. Hooker, our society will not survive in the third millennium.

Only the development of the mentality, above all the intellectual abilities of the people, will save society. And the momentum for this can come only from philosophers, by explaining the essence and the meaning of science for social progress, indicating the way of its qualitative development and the means of resolving problems - the technology of philosophizing.

4. The ideological turmoil at the beginning of the third millennium, the attack on reason [see 3], etc. requires the defeat of philodoxy and restoring classical philosophy as a science about science - as a canon, the organum of theorization of all sciences and turning theoretical science into the ideology of society. This can be achieved by the struggle of ideas according to long established principles:

1. the progress of science is possible only if it is based on the succession of classical philosophy;

2. ideas are born in the minds of individuals, concerned about social problems;

3. innovative ideas are paradoxical for society;

4. intellectual innovations are dangerous for the dominant powers; therefore, they fight against these innovations, using all resources at their disposal, etc.

      The alternatives to philodoxy are the intentions of the founders of classical philosophy. Out of them, the philosophical project of I. Kant must be seen as the most fundamental. And according to I. Kant, reason is the supreme form of science: feeling → judgment → reason. He considered the self-cognition of reason to be the most difficult problem of reason [15.3.11]. He considered philosophy to be a compass [15.8.534], and therefore, he recognized the necessity of a philosophical revolution [15.3.26] – writing it according to a new plan. The foundation to his philosophical project was Euclid’s geometry, which served as the ideal of philosophy. The philosophical project of Kant consists of creating Euclid’s system of philosophy – generally recognized, stable, practical, universal foundation for theoretical science. In the development of the above new philosophy project, I. Kant saw the capital with which he would make society happy [15.3.27].

Society can be saved by the restoration of classical philosophy and an understanding of the main ideas of its founders, the theoretical synthesis of their achievements – methods of philosophizing technology. Philosophy must become a universal foundation, a methodology, gnoseology of all sciences, providing their theoretization and turning it into an ideology of social progress.

5. Philosophical, like all other problems, are conceived to the extent they are resolved – development of the theory of philosophy explaining science, ensuring quick and easy mastering of the philosophizing technology by people with sound judgment.

 The founders of philosophy were not some institutional philosophers. The representatives of all sciences have developed philosophy. And today, philosophers are not only those who have obtained a special philosophical education. Institutional philosophers usually can work as teachers – the transmitters of knowledge, but not its creators. The instruments of labor are usually developed by those who use them. Accordingly, the progress of philosophy is determined by the representatives of all sciences searching for a philosophical foundation of their science and further developing it.

Philosophy will save the society in the third millennium. But first, philosophy itself must be saved. All the necessary things for this have been created by the best minds of all nations and times. It is necessary to identify their achievements and synthesize them in the form of a theory of philosophy, similar to Euclid's geometry. Philosophy has a special meaning for the humanitarian, including economical, sciences. Many economists were philosophers. A majority of recognized economists based their work on philosophy. No wonder that many economists carried out their own philosophical research to resolve the methodological problems of their science. Such approach allowed to identify the main elements of the technology of philosophizing, synthesize these as theoretical philosophy, to experiment with them pedagogically and test them in practice. The results  have been published in books (see 5-12) and placed on the sorit.ru website as a "Self-teaching guide to philosophizing". The Self-teaching guide to philosophizing allows one to easily and quickly master the power of the technology of philosophizing and theorize with its help all sciences, turning them into a technology of social progress.  The dream of R. Hooker will come true to the extent that philosophy becomes the main science of the third millennium, including the teaching of all people about the technology of philosophizing, which was predicted by F. Engels "... In the university of the future... philosophy will really serve as the core of all knowledge..."[2.20.335].

Reason is a theoretical form of science, implying the ability to think – apply dialectical logic, that is, to build sorites and cladograms of notions, etc. Only the qualitative growth of mentality and consciousness can become the very origin of its establishment – establishment of the ability to think while understanding the essence of all phenomena, i.e. processing information based on established methods. The development of such intellectual abilities does not negate the cultural diversity of human societies, but rather allows them to understand each other, act together, coordinate their activities and cooperate.

References

1.   J. Locke. Works in three volumes. – Moscow, 1983, vol. 2.

2.   Marx and Engels. – Moscow, works. 2^nd edition, vol. 20.

3.   A. Gore. Attack against reason. Translated from English, St. Petersburg, 2008.

4.   S.N. Mareyev, E.V. Mareyeva, V.G. Arslanov. Philosophy of the 20th century. – Moscow, 2001.

5.   A.G. Voitov. Genesis of theoretical philosophy. – M. Endemic, 2009.

6.   A.G. Voitov. Edification of Socrates and Plato to dialectical thinking. Moscow, 1994.

7.   A.G. Voitov. Intellectual capital of I. Kant. 2^nd ed., Moscow, Dashkov & Co. Publishing Corporation, 2006.

8.   A.G. Voitov. Self-teaching guide to thinking. 5^th ed., – M. Marketing, 2007.

9.   A.G. Voitov. Philosophical technology of identifying the essence. Edification to the wise men. Moscow, Dashkov & Co. Publishing Corporation, 2008

10. A.G. Voitov. Philosophy. Selected essays. Moscow, Dashkov & Co. Publishing Corporation, 2008.

11. A.G. Voitov. History and philosophy of science. – Moscow, Dashkov & Co. Publishing Corporation, 2004.

12. A.G. Voitov. Science about science, philosophy, metascience,  epistemology (theory of knowledge). – M. Endemic, 2010.

13. Karel van Schaik. Who’s the smartest in the world. // V mire nauki, 2007 no. 2

14. N.V. Karlov. Universe of education: The long realized necessity and tendency to learning. \\ High School Bulletin, 2008, no. 7

15. I. Kant. Works in 8 vols.

16. F. Bacon. Works in two vols. – Moscow, 1978.

17. The unknown ways of civilization // Rossiyskaya Philosofskaya Gazet. April 2010.