This basic position was the dogma about the thinking substance of the human personality—as its essence. The rational nature of man has become the basis of reasoning not only for methodologists, but for ethicists and politicians. Descartes denied animals, except humans, the substance of thinking. Man seems to stand out from the rest of nature. This served as the basis for some exaltation of the human personality. However, even the followers of Descartes soon corrected this proud feature of Cartesianism and introduced the distinction between man and animals into its more moderate boundaries. But this separation of man into the basis of thinking - the main substance of the human personality - in the ideas of thinkers of that era even more forced us to focus attention precisely on the study of the human personality, its attributes, its laws, and not the laws of all nature in general and the laws of the universe. Consciousness, turned inward; consciously directed towards one’s own kind; consciousness, focused on the laws of existence of “I” and other “I”. Such was the consistent movement of points in the philosophy of modern times. And the formative, creative and revealing secrets of the microcosm, eclipsing the macrocosm already, with a force whose height had no boundaries, appeared in man as a substance of thought lazy Not only among humanists and rationalists, but also among theologizing and skeptical thinkers like Descartes’ contemporary, Blaise Pascal. It was better to isolate man from the rest of nature and, despite the fact that the significance of the universe was revealed by naturalistic thinking, they still believed that man was not so dissolved in it that he did not feel his individuality and was not aware of his personality. Thought is the dignity and criterion of a person’s personality. But it was Pascal who introduced skepticism into this challenge to the omnipotence of the human mind. According to Pascal, man is truly great precisely because of his natural ability to think (unique paeagePe). But thanks to the same ability. a person to arouse pity. Indeed, how much remains hopelessly hidden from the human mind. ')
It is common for a person to think that he can comprehend truth and justice. But this is misleading. As for justice, for example, it is, in essence, a habit created by imagination and fantasy, supported by the power of magistracy and kings. In this thought one can hear once again the skepticism of sociologists. However, such doubt in the absoluteness of the prevailing political “norm understanding” nevertheless elevated the person with the possibility of a critical attitude towards power, and indirectly freed him from the indispensable obligation to obey any authority. This also undermined the custom. From the point of view of Pascal, doubt about the unconditional authority of absolute power, in relation to a thinking person, is more acceptable that
[fragment illegible in the scan of the first edition]
AJ arena or rye EE - ai
The identification of norms that sometimes contradict each other is accomplished with the clear consciousness of the abiding “I.” 1)
In the field of theoretical thought, a skeptical understanding of law and justice, if it could satisfy a philosopher, then in the field of political thinking, which develops the principles of justice, it turned out to be insufficient.
Skepticism in the field of politics either paralyzes the will or introduces anarchy, that is, destroys the state, and, consequently, the very concept of the political individual. The political 'thinking of the 'seventeenth' was so imbued with the idea of the need for state 'rule': Therefore, the indignation of the rational nature of man against tradition, even thanks to skepticism, could not 'lead to an anarchic doctrine'. Destroying and rejecting the traditional understanding of the norm, the mind immediately looked for a basis for the construction of a new norm understanding. The skeptical current, partly noticeable already in the philosophy of Descartes and quite noticeable in the brilliant aeoirisms of Pascal, was suitable for destruction, but not for the creation of political doctrine. She tore the individual out of the ashes of traditional ‘authorities’, but left him helpless in creating the ideals of a social understanding of life, ‘and most importantly, the postulates for such a’ understanding of life. Despite his skepticism, Descartes found postulates for his methodological philosophy. The same postulates must be found for political philosophy.
What was accomplished by Descartes in relation to the entire field of human knowledge, Hugo Grosch, two years before the French thinker, did in relation to the philosophy of law.”
[fragment illegible in the scan of the first edition]
Moss.
whose name