The question of the meaning of life, happiness, which often acts as the most important criterion for the meaning of life, is, in fact, the key problem of philosophy. This is due to the fact that all life orientations and any human activity are reduced to the problem of the meaning of life.

Meaning of life- this is a regulatory concept inherent in any developed worldview system, justifies and interprets the moral norms and values ​​inherent in this system, shows in the name of what the activity prescribed by them is necessary.

The need to raise and resolve the issue of the meaning of life is caused by the finiteness of human existence, mortality. Death, like birth, forms the boundaries of human life. However, death also has a positive meaning, since it streamlines life, forms a certain level of responsibility to oneself and society. You can understand life only when you can lose it. Since ancient times, two main types of attitudes towards death have developed in world culture, dating back to Indian and Egyptian cultures. In India, both in ancient times and in our days, a dead person is burned at the stake, the ashes are scattered in the wind, and nothing remains of him, except for the soul, which is reborn. A feature of the ancient Egyptian civilization was the cult of the dead - hence the desire to preserve a particular body by embalming.

It is necessary to clearly distinguish between the concepts of “meaning of life” and “purpose of life”. When a person is faced with the goal of becoming, for example, a doctor, scientist, engineer, then there is still no answer to the question that worries him about the meaning of life (in any case, he feels the answer only intuitively, in a purely emotional way). A person in his thoughts goes further: why do you need to become a doctor, engineer, scientist? Thus, if the goal indicates what a person is striving for, then the meaning of life indicates what he is doing it for. Those. whether there is a logic of life actions that is acceptable until death, because if it is not there, then anything can be overestimated.

In the history of philosophy, there are traditionally three main points of view on the question of the meaning of life. The first approach is most typical religious interpretation of life. The only thing that makes life meaningful and therefore has absolute meaning for man is something other than active participation in the life of God-man. God created man in his own image and likeness, and the task of man is to discover the divine foundations in himself. The second approach is based secular interpretation of life, which basically goes back to the same religious idea subjected to secularization. Man is capable of rebuilding the world on the basis of goodness and justice. Moving towards this bright future is progress. Progress presupposes a goal, and a goal gives meaning to human life. However, within the framework of this approach, there is a well-known reservation - if humanity is gradually moving towards a specific goal in the future, then the past and present, the generations of people who lived before that turn into just a source, a means to achieve a higher stage. And this, in turn, raises the question of whether such an end justifies such means. Subjective approach suggests that life has no meaning at all, stemming from the past and the future, especially from the other world. The meaning of life is in life itself - i.e. in life itself, there is no meaning given once and for all, once determined. Only we ourselves, consciously or spontaneously, intentionally or involuntarily, by the very ways of our being, give it meaning and, thereby, choose and create our human essence.

In the concept of "meaning of life" it is customary to single out 2 main components: individual and social. individual component characterizes the meaning of life for the very personality of a person. This is the level of material and spiritual development that a person achieves in the process of life. Social component it is the significance of the life of the individual for the development of society. This is the extent to which a person is able to participate within the whole, to correlate his goals with it. Both components are interconnected and harmoniously develop in a person.

The problem of the meaning of life and death is connected with the problem of immortality. An analysis of cultural traditions allows us to distinguish three main types of ideas about immortality - scientific (physical immortality of the body), religious (immortality of the soul), philosophical (spiritual immortality preserved through cultural memory). The philosophical understanding of immortality consists not only in the achievements of individuals, but also in the contribution of each to the public cause. The objective criterion of such immortality is the social values ​​created and achieved by the individual, various benefits necessary for the development of society.

slide 2

The concept of “happiness” is closely connected with the category “meaning of life”…

If the meaning of life is, as it were, an objective assessment of the significance of a person’s existence, then happiness is a personal experience of the fullness of one’s being, the results of one’s life, accompanied by a feeling of deep moral satisfaction. The question of the ethical category of “happiness” belongs to the fundamental questions of human existence. For everyone strives to become happy and, of course, this problem has been studied for a long time. It constitutes one of the most constant and, at the same time, dynamic attitudes of moral consciousness. And attempts to solve this issue accompany the entire history of mankind. In ethical science, the problem of happiness has always occupied a very large place.

slide 3

How can the concept of "happiness" be defined in terms of philosophical views? The understanding of "happiness" most often depends on the solution of the question of the nature of man, the meaning, purpose of man, the epoch and culture.

In ancient philosophy, there were two main ideas about happiness: Hedonistic direction (founded by Aristippus from Cyrene, born c. 435 - d. c. 355 BC) Eudemonistic direction (the term "eudaimonia" was introduced by Aristotle)

slide 4

Hedonistic direction

Happiness is momentary pleasure, sensual joy, pleasure as the motive and goal of all human behavior.

slide 5

Eudemonistic direction

Happiness was seen as the desire for a complete, sustainable, holistic good, happiness as the motive and goal of all aspirations. At the same time, eudemonistic happiness requires the presence of an external factor, an external assessment from the outside, i.e. this direction is objective. This provision about the objectivity of the eudemonistic trend is confirmed by the etymology of the word eudaimonia, which translates as "the fate of a person under the protection of the gods." Objectivity, in this case, means the presence of an external, divine or random factor that leads to a state of happiness.

slide 6

In addition to these two main approaches to understanding happiness, every philosopher of Antiquity, one way or another, touched on the concept of happiness ...

The Roman philosopher Varro in the 1st century BC counted 289 different points of view on happiness. for example: For Aristotle, “The free use of one’s talent is happiness” For Plato, “Happiness (eudaimonia) lies in the knowledge of the perfection of numbers” For Cicero: “Everyone who has virtue is happy. The happiest of all is the one who depends only on himself ”... This list can be continued endlessly, and in each new definition there will be some one exact idea, without which happiness is really impossible.

Slide 7

In the chain of ancient concepts associated with the meaning of life, there is always a virtue, which in relation to the first constantly changes its predicative state to a subjective one and vice versa ...

At the same time, the internal connection of virtue with the meaning of life does not consist in a conceptual and logical conversion, but in the continuation of the moral work that was started by nature and continued in society in the form of the main civic-personal task.

Slide 8

Aristotle

The ancient Greek philosopher and encyclopedic scientist Aristotle, for example, believed that the goal of all human actions is happiness (eudaimonia), which consists in the realization of the essence of man. For a person whose essence is the soul, happiness consists in thinking and cognition. Spiritual work thus takes precedence over physical work. Scientific activity and art are the so-called dianoetic virtues, which are achieved through the subordination of passions to reason.

Slide 9

Epicurus

Epicurus and his followers proclaimed the goal of human life to be pleasure, understood not as sensual pleasure, but as getting rid of physical pain, mental anxiety, suffering, fear of death. The ideal is life in a "secluded place", in a close circle of friends, non-participation in public life, distant contemplation. The gods themselves, according to Epicurus, are blessed beings who do not interfere in the affairs of the earthly world.

Slide 10

Stoics

According to the teachings of the Stoics, the goal of human aspirations should be morality, which is impossible without true knowledge. The human soul is immortal, and virtue consists in human life in accordance with nature and world reason (logos). The life ideal of the Stoics is equanimity and calmness in relation to external and internal irritating factors.

slide 11

Cynics

Cynics (Antisthenes, Diogenes of Sinop) - representatives of one of the Socratic schools of Greek philosophy - considered virtue (happiness) to be the ultimate goal of human aspirations. According to their teaching, virtue consists in the ability to be content with little and avoid evil. This skill makes a person independent. A person must become independent of the external world, which is impermanent and beyond its control, and strive for inner peace. At the same time, the independence of man, which the Cynics called for, meant extreme individualism, the denial of culture, art, family, state, property, science and social institutions.

slide 12

Socrates

Socrates' motto was "Know thyself", inscribed on the pediment of the Temple of Apollo at Delphi, which Socrates visited as a young man. What is the meaning of life - that's what interested Socrates and the main questions: what is the essence of the human person? what does a person live for? what is good and what is evil? Did Socrates himself realize this? After all, he did not leave behind a single written line, believing that the letters deaden the meaning of the word. The speeches and conversations of this sage were recorded for posterity by his students Plato and Xenophon. Socrates himself claimed: “I know that I don’t know anything” (however, he immediately added that his fellow citizens did not know this either).

slide 13

Socrates proved that the process of cognition is just as important as its outcome, that a sincere desire for true knowledge is already the most important step in revealing the secrets of the human soul, even if a person does not have time to unravel these secrets completely. This first-born Athenian philosopher saw his mission in inspiring people to search for truth (the meaning of life) ...

Socrates believed that the meaning of human life, the highest good, is to achieve happiness. Ethics should help a person build a life in accordance with this goal. Happiness is the content of a prudent, virtuous being, i.e. only a moral person can be happy (or reasonable, which is essentially the same thing).

INTRODUCTION

The meaning of life, the meaning of beings is a philosophical and spiritual problem related to determining the ultimate goal of existence, the destiny of mankind, man as a biological species, one of the main worldview concepts that is of great importance for the formation of the spiritual and moral image of the individual. The question of the meaning of life can also be understood as a subjective assessment of the life lived and the compliance of the results achieved with the original intentions, as a person’s understanding of the content and direction of his life, his place in the world, as the problem of a person’s impact on the surrounding reality and setting goals by a person that go beyond his life. . In this case, it implies the need to find an answer to the questions: “What are the values ​​of life?” "What is the purpose of life?" (or the most common goal of human life as such) "Why (for what) to live?". The question of the meaning of life is one of the traditional problems of philosophy, theology and fiction, where it is considered mainly from the point of view of determining what is the most worthy meaning of life for a person. Ideas about the meaning of life are formed in the course of people's activities and depend on their social status, the content of the problems being solved, their way of life, world outlook, and a specific historical situation. In favorable conditions, a person can see the meaning of his life in achieving happiness and well-being; in a hostile environment of existence, life may lose its value and meaning for him. Questions about the meaning of life have been and are still being asked by people, putting forward competing hypotheses, philosophical, theological and religious explanations. The resulting verifiable answers to these questions shaped science. At the moment, science is able to answer, with a certain degree of probability, specific questions such as “How exactly ...?”, “Under what conditions ...?”, “What will happen if ...?”. The biological basis for the emergence of such questions is being explored in psychology (see also suicide). Separately, it can be noted that within the framework of psychology, the question “What is the purpose of human life in general?” can be studied (and is being studied), since psychology operates with the concepts of "goal", "person" and "life".

Philosophical vision of the problem

Paul Gauguin's interpretation of the answer to the question about the meaning of life can be seen in his painting, Where did we come from? Who are we? Where Are We Going?, completed in 1898. The concept of the meaning of life is present in any developed worldview system, justifying and interpreting the moral norms and values ​​inherent in this system, demonstrating goals that justify the activities they prescribe. The social position of individuals, groups, classes, their needs and interests, aspirations and expectations, principles and norms of behavior determine the content of mass ideas about the meaning of life, which in every social system have a specific character, although they reveal certain moments of repetition. Subjecting to a theoretical analysis of the ideas of the mass consciousness about the meaning of life, many philosophers proceeded from the recognition of some unchanging “human nature”, constructing on this basis a certain ideal of a person, in the achievement of which the meaning of life was seen, the main purpose of human activity. Great philosophers - such as Socrates, Plato, Descartes, Spinoza, Diogenes and many others - had clear ideas about what kind of life is "best" (and therefore most meaningful) and, as a rule, associated meaning life with the concept of good.

Considering the issue, it is appropriate to identify how this problem was considered in different eras. A number of interpreters of the problem tried to reduce the importance of the inherent value of human life by calling for self-denial and sacrifice in the name of future generations. But a person should be happy not in someone else's, but in his own life. Happy not at the expense of others and not at the expense of others. The essence of the problem is succinctly expressed in the form of a question: "Why live?". There is, writes the French philosopher A. Camus, only one fundamental question of philosophy. It is a question of whether or not life is worth living. Everything else - whether the world has three dimensions, whether the mind is guided by nine or twelve categories - is secondary. Among the many approaches to solving this complex problem, several can be distinguished. Adherents of the philosophy of hedonism and eudemonism, today, like many centuries ago, affirm as the meaning of life and its highest goal: the first - the achievement of maximum pleasure, the second - the achievement of happiness. Supporters of utilitarianism believe that the achievement of benefits, benefits, success is precisely the meaning of human life. Proponents of pragmatism argue that the goal of life justifies any means to achieve it. In the modern Christian Orthodox tradition, it is proclaimed: "man has no limits to his human nature." If God is a free spiritual person, then man must become the same. There is always the opportunity for man to become more and more godlike. Not a remaking of the world on the basis of goodness, but the cultivation of substantial goodness in oneself. The perfection of human nature within the nature of God turns out to be a source of joy and freedom. Proponents of materialistic ideas believe that the development of man and humanity is determined by their internal logic of self-development. The purpose of a person has nothing to do with some kind of world mind, absolute or god. In the materialistic tradition, the meaning of life is seen in the self-development of a person, in the improvement of his essential forces, abilities and needs. This process is conditioned by the previous development and has a specific historical real content. Therefore, the category "meaning of life" can be defined as a regulatory concept inherent in any developed worldview system, which justifies and interprets the moral norms and values ​​inherent in this system, shows in the name of which the prescribed activity is necessary. The meaning of life is a philosophical category that reflects a long-term, stable, internal conviction of the individual, a task that has social and personal value and is realized in its social activities. This task is determined by the system of social relations, the goals and interests of society and the free choice of the individual. It is impossible to find the meaning of life for all times and peoples, because along with universal, eternal truths, it includes something specific - the aspirations of people of each given era. The meaning of life is different for each person. The content of the purpose of life varies not only depending on the historical conditions of a person's existence, but also on his age characteristics: in youth, the goals are the same, in maturity and old age they are different. Only we ourselves, consciously or spontaneously, intentionally or involuntarily, by the very ways of our being, give it meaning and, thereby, choose and create our human essence. "Only we and no one else," writes the talented philosopher N.N. Trubnikov in his book "The Time of Human Existence". The meaning of life is an independent conscious choice of those values ​​that (according to E. Fromm) orient a person not to have (setting to possess), but to be (setting to use all human potentialities). The meaning of life is in the self-realization of the individual, in the human need to create, give, share with others, sacrifice oneself for the sake of others. And the more significant the person, the more it has an impact on the people around it. The meaning of life is to improve yourself, improve the world around you. These general ideas about the meaning of life must be transformed into the meaning of the life of each individual, due to objective circumstances and his individual qualities. The category "meaning of life" is one of the main worldview concepts, which is of great importance for the formation of the spiritual and moral image of the individual. From what life strategy a person chooses, the life of not only himself, but also his environment, and sometimes the whole of mankind often depends. The question of the meaning of one's life in a certain period is visited by every thinking being who wants to understand and know himself, his purpose and place in this world. Life necessarily forces a person to answer the questions: “What do I live for?”, “What is the meaning of my life?” Each person responsible for his own destiny and the fate of others cannot and does not want to live without a goal, a specific task or a dream, but is always looking for something “worthy” with which to occupy his life, to make it more significant. A clear understanding of the meaning and purpose of one's life is the main driving force of a person's being, a strategic tool that allows one not to submit, but, on the contrary, to overcome all the difficulties and trials on the path of life. But for this it is necessary that a person himself determines, himself communicates this or that meaning to his existence, finds his purpose according to his abilities, makes his life as fruitful, useful, necessary as possible. By the meaning of life, we understand the individual's awareness of the basic content of his life, both past and present, and future, which determines his place and significance in the life of society and gives a person confidence that his individual life is needed both by himself and others, and society. As the researchers emphasize, the meaning of human life as a living being is “a teleonomic concept, because it expresses a certain purposefulness of activity and life in general,” the basis of the meaning of life is “a vital, emotionally acceptable goal, which is not only objectively expedient, but also subjectively approved, personally acceptable and recognized as such... Finding the meaning of life presupposes the free goal-setting of the individual, therefore its necessary condition is freedom as a human form of self-determination (self-conditioning) of being. Understanding the meaning of life presupposes the existence of sustainable plans and programs for the future, which, despite all sorts of temporary difficulties, will steadily lead a person forward. According to K.S. Stanislavsky, the meaning of life can be correlated with the “super task” of human life, which combines all the small life goals: “The goal of life in this case can be considered as the trunk of a whole“ tree of goals ”, which combines and directs all private and specific goals for the realization of the meaning of life. It should be noted that in order to achieve both momentary (“here and now”) and strategic goals on the way to the fulfillment of a meaningful life task, each person requires both the ability to find and outline this goal, as well as endurance, unbending will, kindness and love for others, willingness to fight obstacles and even make sacrifices. In the history of socio-philosophical thought, depending on what goals a person sets for himself, two different attitudes were distinguished in finding the meaning of life by an individual: “to be” or “to have”. The meaning-of-life setting “to have” is rooted in the distant past of mankind, where this requirement was a necessary condition for the survival of the human race. The presence of this attitude is a normal state of mind and a modern person, since life requires the possession of certain things. But at the same time, the attitude “to have” should not become an end in itself, the possession of certain things, objects, objects should only serve as a means of achieving meaningful life tasks. As you know, the superiority of this attitude ultimately leads to hypertrophied utilitarianism - the desire for immeasurable enrichment, erasing all the best human qualities. As Z. Freud noted, this type of personality and society, where this type of people prevails, are sick. Setting "to be" means the implementation of a higher program that meets the spiritual needs of a person, his true essence. According to the teachings of M. Eckhart: “... not to possess anything and make your being open and “unfilled”, not to allow the “I” to stand in its way - is a condition for gaining spiritual wealth and spiritual strength. According to Marx, luxury is the same vice as poverty, the goal of a person is to be many, and not to possess many. The life-meaning program “to be” involves the rejection of egoism and egocentrism, the activation and productive realization of a person’s natural data, spiritual growth, going beyond the boundaries of one’s isolated “I”, striving for the “human” in a person - Goodness, Truth, Beauty, Justice. In the implementation of the life-sense setting “to be”, a person reveals and develops his abilities, enriching the world around him and affirming himself as a necessary, useful link in the social world. This view has been quite popular in the history of philosophy. The opinion that the realization of the meaning of life is connected with the development of a person in accordance with spiritual nature, with the assertion of oneself, with the development of abilities inherent in nature, is supported by many philosophers. So, G. Fichte emphasized: “... only a person is initially nothing ... What he should be, he must become ... and become himself, his freedom, I can only be what I myself I'll do it myself." Here G. Fichte especially emphasizes the responsibility imposed on the individual himself. Thus, speaking of two opposing life attitudes, it should be noted that none of the attitudes can be self-sufficient separately. They should complement each other, but the priority should remain with the orientation towards the embodiment of the best human qualities, towards “to be”. The strength of a person is that he is a free being who is not obliged and cannot live according to any scenario imposed from the outside. Life on a "leash" is tantamount to a meaningless existence. “A person who wants not only to simply exist, decides which order will be chosen and approved, otherwise the person is completely surrendered to the power of existence and obeys its decisions,” concludes Karl Jaspers. Different people have a different understanding of the meaning of life: one of them elevates the individual and inspires feats, helps to overcome life's difficulties, the other - belittles and turns a person into an asocial being. Hence, the problem of the meaning of life is originally a problem of choice. It is on the choice of goals, values ​​and ideals that it depends whether a person’s life succeeds or simply “passes by”, “burns out”. The most important thing is to be able to discern and choose the true meaning and determine the true goals, not confusing them with false ones, leading to the destruction and degradation of the individual. Modern life contains the potency of various choices. For many, the main goal may be to ensure material prosperity, striving for personal gain and benefit, serving new "idols" promoted by numerous religious sects, etc. But life in pursuit of pleasure, in slavery to your whims, as a puppet in the hands of other people can be truly meaningful? In order to make the right choice, meaningful life guidelines should be especially carefully, soberly and objectively considered and evaluated in youth, when the first ideas about adult life are formed and the first independent steps are taken. It is on the right choice that the social value of a person’s life and his personal happiness depend. Each society is interested in a deep and correct understanding by each of its members of the meaning of their lives, which largely determines the active and practical essence of the individual. The actions of a person who has no idea about the meaning of his life are dangerous and thoughtless, and he can be metaphorically compared to a ship without a rudder in a stormy sea. Moreover, if a person did not have a clear idea why he should live and how he should live, then his very existence would indeed turn into a senseless waste of time with all the ensuing negative consequences. The life of every person, on the one hand, is self-realization, the objectification of his abilities, desires and needs, creative and intellectual potential, and on the other hand, it is a process unfolding in the external objective world, in a society that makes specific demands on the individual. If these requirements are not observed, both the disruption of the life of society and the individual will occur. Therefore, the meaning of life is not consistent with egoism, with alienation from the world of other people: the breadth of a person's connections with the surrounding reality, with others only multiplies the fullness of his being. The meaning of human life can be found only on the path of uniting the interests and goals of society and the individual. The meaning of human life lies in the coincidence of the main orientation of subjective attitudes, positions of the individual with the general positive trends in the development of society. Closely connected with this is human happiness, which is moral satisfaction arising from the consciousness of the correctness, greatness and nobility of the main life line of behavior. There is no doubt that it is impossible to completely reduce the life of people only to the service of society, but the existence of such a goal is one of the main requirements for the full development of the individual. A life revolving within the narrow framework of personal interests, without involvement in public affairs and the existence of other people, sooner or later will turn out to be fruitless, meaningless. Only "egoistic" self-affirmation cannot be the meaning of human life. Indeed, if people over the centuries were only satisfied with little, shutting themselves up in a narrow circle of personal existence, repeating the life path of previous generations, then their level of development would not go far from the level of an animal. Man, being the crown of the creation of nature, with his inherent creative charge, cannot and should not live only with primary needs, but must act for his own good, the good of those around him and society. The opinion that reduces meaningful life guidelines to the search for personal happiness deserves special consideration. A person always strives for happiness, putting his understanding into it. But what does the concept of “happiness” really embody: the state of a dream come true, immense joy or satisfaction with life? Even Greek philosophers, revealing the nature of happiness, talked about the existence of a certain guardian demon that provides a joyful, successful, full of pleasure life. But already in Socrates, the understanding of happiness is connected with the inner world of a person - his soul. Only the soul that is spiritually orderly and virtuous is happy. “For me,” says Socrates, “only the virtuous, whether a woman or a man, is happy: the unrighteous and malicious is always unhappy.” Aristotle also argued about the different understanding of the concept of “happiness” by people: for many it is pleasure and enjoyment, but a life wasted for pleasure is a slavish life worthy of an animal; for others, happiness is honors ... however, success, for the most part, is something external, depending on those who appropriate it, recognize it; for some, happiness consists in increasing wealth, and this is one of the most absurd goals - living contrary to nature, because wealth is a means for something else, and as an end it has no meaning. In general, the subsequent philosophical and ethical thought was in solidarity with the ideas of the ancient sages and believed that happiness cannot be considered only as a separate, temporary manifestation of human life: it is always a process, a struggle between the opposite poles of good and evil, good and bad luck, luck and bad luck. Such an approach to understanding happiness encourages a person to take active actions, makes it possible for him to be the creator of his own destiny, not to depend on chance, to realize happiness himself, and not to wait for it. Since a person is a part of society, he must build his actions, observing the interests of other people. The attainment of one's own happiness must by no means come at the expense of the misfortune of others, and to enjoy it while others suffer is blasphemy. We agree with the opinion of V. Ya. Blyumkin that “... the meaning of life cannot be reduced to the search for a narrowly understood personal happiness. There must be a main meaning in human life, something that justifies our everyday existence. It is necessary to strive to achieve not just happiness, but a special, morally justified happiness, life must receive justification and a positive assessment from the point of view of something higher, universal. On the way to high moral happiness and meaning, people often have to give up many comforts, material well-being and live a life full of dangers, anxieties and hardships. As already noted, happiness, like the meaning of life, is not an external message, but something that is found by the effort of the person himself. The meaning of human existence, in our opinion, is given by what lies in the depths of the human soul. And it is the focus on such values ​​as love, conscience, courage, the ability to endure suffering, the ability to deal with one's own shortcomings and vices, a sense of responsibility, kindness, selfless service to people, devotion and respect for others, etc. make life meaningful. And it is these highly spiritual values ​​taken together that can fill human life with happiness. We believe that a person has a reason to live as long as the need for Truth, Goodness and Beauty is alive in him. The problem of the meaning of human life cannot be considered without touching upon the problem of the meaning of death, which is its reverse side. Man is mortal and, unlike animals, understands that his life is finite. Awareness of infinity requires a lot of courage from people: how to overcome the fear of death, how to live on, realizing that somewhere the end, meaningless to the whole life passed, is waiting, how best to live life so as not to lose its intrinsic value? As a rule, from the fact of their mortality, everyone draws their own conclusion: wanting to use every minute for pleasure, some people live life in pursuit of pleasure, for the same reason others want to live it more fruitfully, use every moment with great benefit, with a desire to leave after yourself a good name. Indeed, the awareness of death should not awaken in a person the fear of it, not the desire to thoughtlessly squander life, but to live it fully and meaningfully. Everyone should hurry to live, try to use every minute purposefully, with full dedication. This is the moral meaning of death. L.N. Kogan's assertion is true that "the pathological fear of death is the result of an aimlessly, senselessly lived life." Awareness of a wrong and senselessly lived life gives rise to repentance in many, a desire that came too late to start it anew and live differently, more dignified. The understanding of a usefully lived life, pride in a worthy significant trace that remains after it, gives a person a sense of accomplishment, satisfaction with life and makes the departure from life more painless. Death is the law of nature, which orders life, increases its value. Understanding finiteness, as a judge, condemns, approves or sentences a person to mental anguish, can revive conscience, responsibility, a desire to reconsider and change one's life position even in the most irresponsible person. As is known, in the history of culture there are two concepts of Eternity in relation to individual existence. The first comes from the understanding of Eternity as an attribute of God, and, accordingly, a person is eternal (immortal) due to his immortal soul. The second concept connects Eternity with the real life of a person, with his involvement in Eternity in culture, creativity, compassion and love for one's neighbor, with belonging to the eternal world of spiritual values ​​created by all generations of people who lived on earth. Despite the fact that the “sword of Damocles” of imminent physical disappearance hangs over his head, a person lives and creates, overcoming the fear of death in the moral sense, trying to extend his life beyond the biological time allotted to him by nature. As is known from history, in all cultures man has tried to find ways to achieve physical immortality. But an infinite life cannot make sense. SA Kuchinsky emphasizes: "Physical immortality destroys the dialectic of life and death, the concept of human culture, history - the idea of ​​continuity of generations and life itself." There is no doubt that the achievement of individual immortality renders life itself meaningless. But one way or another, the creative and inquisitive mind of a person still found various forms of compensation for the physical finiteness of individual existence, or, according to R. Lifton, methods of immortalization: biological immortality (hope to continue life in offspring); creative immortality (hope for the continuation of life in the results of one's labor); theological immortality (various religious forms of transcending death by establishing a connection with eternal spiritual values); naturalistic immortality (hope for immortality by merging with nature, developed in Japanese and other oriental cultures); sensory transcendence (here the mechanism of immortalization is based on direct personal experience associated with the achievement of various subjective states, such as loss of a sense of time, enlightenment, ecstasy, expansion of consciousness, etc.). The drama of individual finiteness is overcome by the fact that a person, dying biologically, does not leave forever. A person lives and acts not only for himself, but also for others, for society. A person who has correctly determined the meaning of his life and lived it in accordance with it, dies physically, but remains to live in the affairs of society, in the people he brought up, in the ideas that he left, i.e. acquires moral immortality. Death is not a confrontation, but a continuation of life. Everyone, in one way or another, strives to prolong himself: biologically - in posterity, in culture - through creativity, labor, the creation of that social world in which, as it were, he continues to live with his descendants. Moreover, an equal length of time lived does not equate the life of one person with the life of another. It is important how these years are lived. As the researchers emphasize, "a mortal, as a certain generic being, a person receives immortality in the human race, in offspring, in the material and spiritual culture of mankind." Consciousness of the realized life goal, satisfaction from the life lived, the benefit brought, confidence that your creativity and activity will be in demand in the future by society, are the main humanistic idea of ​​the “culture of dying”. It is in this case, as L.N. Kogan emphasizes, that faith in the afterlife is not needed: “The immortality of mankind is in its material and spiritual culture. Contributing to culture, enriching it, a person joins the immortality of the family. The meaningful life choice of each is his own, it is impossible to copy from someone and build life according to someone else's scenario: the meaning of life must be realized, defined, outlined by the individual himself. Meaningful orientation is the main core of a person's beliefs, his principles, goals, which is the impulse, the impetus for all life, regardless of worldview settings. A life-meaning choice is a strategic line that passes through a person’s entire life, subordinating his actions and behavior, and deviation from it or its loss can lead to internal conflicts of the individual or, even worse, to his moral, and even physical death.

The inner world of a person is a single spiritual experience the interaction of his personality both with the external facts of being, and with his own "I".

Thus, the inner world of a person is given to him directly in direct contemplation by his own consciousness of his own processes of consciousness. Therefore, for a person in his inner world, both the processes of consciousness caused by the external facts of being and the processes of consciousness caused by the activity of his own “I” are equally obvious, because for his consciousness both those and these processes are phenomena of the same inner nature of his own psyche.

Thus, in the inner world of a person, a dialectical unification takes place in a single spiritual experience of two separate and opposite phenomena of reality - external objective factors of being and the internal subjective sphere of being.

In the process of this, the internal attitudes of the human soul are transformed and changed, because they are influenced by the external circumstances of being, and the external circumstances of being are perceived and evaluated by a person from the point of view of these constantly changing internal attitudes.

In the inextricable combination of this, a certain state of the human soul arises, characterized by an integral understanding and experience of one's own being, aimed at assessing this being from the point of view of the meaning of life, solving the problems of happiness, immortality, aspirations, life path plans, etc.

break these human problems into purely external and purely internal is impossible, and the final solution of any human problem must always take into account the dialectics of his inner world, that is, the mutual influence of external circumstances and internal states on each other, as a result of which the general result of his worldview is formed.

This dialectic is most fully expressed in the problem of human happiness, which consists of two components of different origin:

- from what depends on the preferences of the person himself;

- from what is predetermined for him by external conditions, that is, it depends only on the external circumstances of his being.

HAPPINESS – This is a concept that expresses the highest satisfaction of a person from his being. Thus, happiness is a certain bodily-spiritual state of a person that gives him joy, pleasure or a feeling of bliss for one reason or another with one or another duration in time.

That is, happiness is a multifaceted and multifaceted concept, which, if we talk specifically about the states of a person’s inner world, can be anything, for example:

1. Intellectually and spiritually saturated, long-term and periodically updated satisfaction from the general harmony of the world and the favor of fate, which made it possible to live this life.

Or, as an option - a steady, grateful and lasting joy from luck, luck on the path of life, satisfaction with the path traveled and optimistic, calm, wise bliss from confidence in a further favorable outcome of life.

2. Emotionally and intellectually elevated momentary state of intense joy caused by some event or physical sensation.

Or a spiritual experience of bright joy, lasting according to the duration of the source of joy or according to the sharpness of its novelty.

3. Low intellectually and spiritually saturated background enjoyment of the soul from the opportunity to possess material goods, or some general, undoubtedly positive balance of the state of mind from having the opportunity to get what you want in this world, to exercise your power and see submission to your will, etc.

4. An unpretentious and causeless feeling of satisfaction with life of a psychophysiological nature,

etc. and so on.

If we are not talking about the states of the inner world of a person that determine or do not determine happiness, then

happiness, as a concept, is in the general philosophical sense the ideal of a certain life, which would be characterized by complete favor to the person in all its parameters and circumstances.

Happiness in this sense is a goal that is poorly realized in specific forms, but constantly attracting mankind to achieve the maximum sum of the conditions of being for the full realization of all human abilities to rejoice and enjoy life.

However, in reality, the problem of happiness is not a problem closed on itself, since a person is a social phenomenon, and much in his life depends on his relationship with other people and with society.

Because of this, the problem of finding happiness or the meaning of happiness, as such, is closely interconnected with morality, that is, with the system of norms and rules for the behavior of people in society. That's why the problem of happiness in philosophy called to comprehend the world in its universality, cannot be decided outside the ethical aspect.

In the ethical aspect, depending on the completeness of taking into account the dialectics of the inner world of a person, that is, depending on the allocation of material or spiritual priorities in a person’s life, philosophy distinguishes three main directions in solving the problem of happiness:

1. Hedonism. Hedonism is the principle of the supremacy of sensual, bodily pleasure when building ethical systems.

In these systems, everything that is associated with bodily pleasure is considered moral in behavior, and vice versa.

As for the problems of happiness, hedonism proceeds from the absolute priority of bodily bliss and believes that

happiness is a set of pleasant experiences from various comfortable states of the body.

In hedonism, bodily pleasure is recognized as the highest goal and the highest good of a person, that is, happiness is the meaning of human life itself, and everything that gives a person bodily pain, embarrassment and physical discomfort in general is contrary to the meaning of human life and, therefore, immoral.

Hedonism, therefore, presupposes for happiness, first of all, internal, subjective prerequisites in the form of individual sensations of pleasure.

That's why happiness in hedonism is possible only as a complex of individual sensations, only as something that can exist only separately for each individual. Thanks to this, hedonism is reduced to selfishness, that is, to the complete disregard for the interests of other people for the sake of their own.

2. Eudemonism. Eudemonism is the principle of the need to combine spiritual and material factors in motives for ethical improvement.

According to eudemonism

the elementary way to happiness is the elimination of both the physical suffering of the body and the unrest of the soul.

However, eudemonism gives some preference to the spiritual prerequisites for happiness, since the feeling of happiness, according to eudemonism, depends more on a person’s internal ability to be happy than on the achievement of external material goods.

Therefore, eudemonism considers the ability of a person to be internally free from the outside world, to become independent of the external circumstances of life, as the main guarantee of happiness.

a more complex, non-elementary path to happiness is the path to spiritual work to renounce the empty temptations of the world, the path to virtue and purity of spirit.

Thus, in eudemonism, the higher the morality of the individual, the more significant its prerequisites for happiness.

In eudemonism happiness is also seen as the main goal of any human life, but it considered possible in a single form and for many people, and even for all people if each person will do everything possible not only for his own, but also for universal human happiness (social eudemonism).

3. Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is the principle of basing any ethical system on criteria of personal or social good.

Happiness in the system of utilitarianism is understood as"use of benefits", as the highest possible benefit, as super-useful, as a set of the maximum possible results of what is useful and beneficial.

Utilitarianism accepts the possibility of such happiness, both for the individual and for the largest possible number of people. Utilitarianism understands the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people as the sum of the benefits of individual people, on the one hand, and as the subordination of moral norms to the tasks of obtaining benefits, on the other hand.

Thus the problem of happiness is directly related to the problem THE MEANING OF LIFE, since many philosophical systems directly elevate happiness to the rank of the meaning of life for any person.

However, happiness, as such, cannot be the central idea of ​​life, that is, its meaning, if we consider the problem of the meaning of life through the finiteness of human being, through his mortality. Because the fact of the complete and final disappearance of a given person from existence, with its tragedy, devalues ​​to zero any significance of any of his current happiness in the overall result of his existence.

Solving the problem of the meaning of human life, therefore, traditionally resolved from two points of view:

1. Atheistic point of view.

Based on atheism, if a person is mortal, then there is no meaning to life other than life itself, as such. That is, the meaning of life is in life itself, in living it with some meaning.

Thus, the atheistic point of view invites a person to find the meaning of his life himself, based on what he can offer himself so that something completely meaningless in its own essence would be filled with some meaning from the human essence.

This position assumes a variety of ways out of the situation in the form of life goals - to live a life without suffering, measuredly and calmly, or to live a life in the pleasures given to the spirit and body, or to fully realize oneself during life in science, art, career, etc. etc., or leave a good memory for posterity, achieve fame, raise children, fight for communism (Marx) or for universal love for each other (Feuerbach), or see the meaning of life in the will to power (Nietzsche), etc.

2. Religious point of view.

Based on many religious points of view, the meaning of the current life, most often, is the preparation for gaining eternal life. It is the general and absolute meaning of life in general is eternal life. However, eternal life requires certain conditions, consisting in the spiritual and moral improvement of a person, which requires a person’s moral efforts to acquire high virtues, life merit, inner freedom from worldly temptations, contempt for wealth, following the will of God, etc.

Thus, purpose of a person's current life from a religious point of view is cleansing and thus salvation of his soul for eternal life.

Thus, the meaning of life in philosophy is directly related to the PROBLEM OF DEATH AND IMMORTALITY of a person.

In philosophy, the theme of death is solved in different ways..

The first way affirms the immortality of man. One of the first philosophical teachings about the immortality of man was Plato's doctrine of man as a being consisting of two parts - a mortal body and an immortal soul. In the future, all philosophy, standing on the positions of human immortality, one way or another, is a continuation of Plato, or comments on Plato.

The second way calls to come to terms with the inevitability of death, for example, on the philosophical grounds that everything has an end, and a person should also have it. Or reconcile on the grounds that a person does not meet with death at all, because while he is alive, there is no death yet, and when death comes, then the person himself is no longer there. Or reconcile for any reason of any kind, just to accept this fact and not suffer from it all your life. Or put up with death without any reason at all, since this does not change anything in terms of the overall result. And so on.

Some second way philosophies see death as a positive side, which manifests itself in the threat of death makes people think about the meaning and content of life. Or, according to other versions (existentialism), in the face of death, in a borderline state, a person is able to gain an understanding of the meaning of life, freed from false goals and unnecessary trifles.

At its core, both of these philosophical ways of understanding death are aimed at ensuring that a person gains inner freedom from awareness of the fact of his mortality.

At the same time, if death is understood as the elimination of this person from this life, then inner freedom from death is understood as a courageous affirmation, as opposed to this, of one's personal beginning in spiritual perfection, or in the material achievements of this life.

The highest form of affirmation of the personal principle, both in the spiritual sphere and in material achievements, is such human activity as creation.

CREATIVITY is a human activity that creates qualitatively new material and spiritual values ​​that never existed before.

Almost all types of human activity include elements of creativity. However, they are most clearly manifested in science, philosophy, art and technology.

The science of heuristics studies the nature of creativity and creates various models of creative activity. According to heuristics, creative activity most often contains the following main phases:

1. Intention, that is, the primary organization of the material, the identification of the central idea, the core of the problem, the outline of the main goal and the stages of achieving it.

2. Maturation ideas, that is, the process of mental construction of an ideal image of the result of creative activity.

3. insight, that is, the moment of an instant solution to a creative problem, often unexpected and not logically arising from the maturation of ideas.

4. Practical implementation of the idea.

5.Examination, that is, an experimental or logical assessment of the fidelity and novelty of the solution found.

Creativity is the maximum expression of the personal beginning of a person, because in creative activity a person objectifies itself in the objects of creativity, that is materializes in them the state of your soul and your inner world.

Introduction

The realization that a person lives only once and death is inevitable, with all its sharpness puts before him the question of the meaning of life and happiness. The problem of the meaning of life and happiness is important for every person. Nietzsche said: “If there is a why to live, any how can be endured,” and he was right.

Of course, many modern philosophers are right, arguing that the choice of the meaning of life and happiness depends on many factors - objective and subjective. Objective factors include the socio-economic conditions prevailing in society, the political and legal system functioning in it, the worldview prevailing in it, the prevailing political regime, the state of war and peace, etc. A significant role in choosing the meaning of life and happiness is also played by the subjective qualities of a person - will, character, prudence, practicality, etc.

Man has always strived for happiness. Man has always thought about happiness. The man managed to be happy. But happiness is such a deep experience that no general schemes, no reflections bring us closer to understanding this phenomenon. And therefore, for everyone who thinks about happiness, it opens up in its unknown and eternal novelty, as if no one had ever touched this problem.

A person turns out to be a problem for himself when he asks himself a question about the meaning of his own existence, the boundaries of his being, about the difference from his own kind, from all living beings. It is only by problematizing the foundations of one's own life that a person really becomes a person.

The problem of man is not a purely theoretical problem, for reflection on which time is carved out at leisure. This is a practical, vital problem. Finding himself in a critical situation, a person each time "chooses" himself, decides the question of the meaning of his existence. As soon as he stops thinking about it, he ceases to be a person, turns into a thing, freezes within certain boundaries, grows together with a certain social role, is forever expelled from the world of free choice. The human problem as a practical problem has always been, and will always be, faced by each of us: at certain moments of life, a person problems his existence, determines the meaning of his life, chooses the direction of his life path for happiness.

1. The meaning of human life

The meaning of life is related to the question “What to live for”, and not to the question of how to maintain life. The attitude of a person as a conscious, thinking being to his life and to himself is reflected in the meaning and purpose of his life. The meaning of life is a perceived value to which a person subordinates his life, for the sake of which he sets and strives to achieve life goals. 1

So what is the meaning of life. This question has always stood before philosophers, and the answer to it was considered from two different positions: from the point of view of an individual person and a person as a representative of humanity.

In the first understanding, the meaning of life is an element of the unique spiritual life of the individual, that he forms himself independently of the systems of social values ​​that prevail in society. From these positions it is impossible to speak of a single meaning of life for all. Each individual discovers it in his own thoughts and, based on his own experience, builds his own hierarchy of values. At the same time, the meaning of life also exists as a phenomenon of consciousness of the human race. His search has been prepared by the long process of human evolution, the development of the reflective ability of his thinking, the formation of consciousness.

Religious philosophy has retained the greatest fidelity to the search for the abstract-universal meaning of human life. It connects the meaning of human life with the contemplation and embodiment of the divine principle in man, the desire for a superhuman shrine, communion with the truth and the highest good. The Russian religious philosopher V. Frankl believed that the world itself is meaningless and blind, just as the external life of a person is meaningless. But the human mind is already a breakthrough of meaninglessness. The inner spiritual life of a person, which V. Frankl called true being, has a meaning. It is accessible only to the soul experiencing anxiety, languor, dissatisfaction, "search for meaning." In order for a person to discover the meaning of life for himself, two conditions are needed: “firstly, the existence of God as the absolute basis for the power of goodness, reason and eternity, as a guarantee and triumph over the forces of evil, meaninglessness and decay, and, secondly, the possibility for me personally, in my weak and short life, communion with God,” wrote V. Frankl. 2

A person is interested not just in the truth, which would represent the object as it is in itself, but in the meaning of the object for a person, to satisfy his needs. In this regard, a person evaluates the facts of his life according to their significance, realizes a value attitude towards the world. The specificity of a person lies precisely in the value attitude to the world. Value is everything for a person that has a certain significance, personal or social meaning for him. We deal with value where we are talking about native, holy, preferred, dear, perfect, when we praise and scold, admire and resent, recognize and deny. All people have values, but not always the same. The word "value" was already well known to the ancient Greeks.

In antiquity, there was no clear understanding of the uniqueness of man in the world. A modern philosopher would say: "Let's clearly define what is an idea as a truth, as a concept, and what is an idea as a value, as an ideal." But in antiquity they philosophized differently, here truth and value are not strictly separated from each other. In the philosophy of the Middle Ages, it was believed that man exists in the name of God, and not God for man. We can say that it was about the values ​​of God. In modern times, philosophers singled out the mind as the main feature of man. The all-consuming interest in truth obscured the problem of value. Kant took a decisive step towards it, he "spread" truth, beauty and goodness. The mind deals with truth, and the value, as the followers of Kant considered, is the mind, more precisely, the rational will. By the 20th century, all the conditions had developed for the development of the doctrine of value. The philosophical trends of the twentieth century bring the problem of values ​​to the fore. It is important that in all modern philosophical schools value is understood in the same way, at least in one respect.

There is no value only where a person is indifferent to something, is not interested in the differences between truth and error, beautiful and ugly, good and evil.

Theories of value are theories about the meaning of life: great philosophers such as Socrates, Plato, Descartes, Spinoza and many others had clear ideas about what kind of life is best, and therefore most meaningful.

Among the various value forms of the human psyche, the most important is the will, self-regulation by the subject of his activity, manifested as purposefulness, determination, self-control. According to Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, the will occupies the first place among all values.

In the world of human value orientations, faith, the act of accepting something as value-positive, has enduring significance. Faith is preceded by doubt, which is translated into faith as a result of philosophical analysis.