Doctor of Philosophy, Associate Professor,
Professor at the Department of Philosophy and Social Sciences,
Kyiv National University of Trade and Economics
19, Kyoto str., Kyiv, 02156, Ukraine
PERSONALITY AS A PROOF OF THE EXISTENCE OF GODBackground. If a person is a part of nature, then the very fact of its existence, as well as the general order, meaning, regularity, expediency that we find in this nature, are not derived from it itself, but are metaphysical (supernatural) order. The existence of such a principle of organization of the world, embodied in the ideas of order and comprehension, testifies to the spiritual basis of being, the metaphysical root cause.
The analysis of recent researches and publications has shown that despite the existence of individual scientific achievements, the important philosophical-religious and existential problem of personality as an evidence of God’s existence remains unresolved.
The aim of the article is an attempt to show that no matter how we consider a person – from the point of view of its natural existence, or as a spiritual being, we are compelled to recognize the existence of God as a metaphysical condition for the possibility of both the first and the second.
Materials and methods.The study uses historical-philosophical, comparative, interdisciplinary research methods, as well as the method of transcendental reflection.
Results. The natural (biological) and supernatural (spiritual, metaphysical) sides of the individual’s existence are considered. The theological interpretation of the "anthropic principle" is given; in particular the appearance of a person is treated as a reasonable purpose of the universe that suggests an intelligent Creator of that goal. Attention is paid to the moral argument, where God acts as the condition for the possibility of harmonization of virtue and happiness as the highest guide on the path of moral self-improvement.
Conclusion. Nature does not know freedom, there is an absolute necessity. Freedom needs to go beyond the boundaries of nature. Accordingly, if we recognize the fact of human freedom, then we inevitably must recognize God in our picture of world as the ontological guarantor of freedom. And vice versa: if we only recognize nature (matter) and refuse the idea of God, then we automatically refuse the person in her right to freedom. Denying freedom, we thus deny the human level in the person itself, we "mess" it, reducing it to the animal. The absence of God means the absence of man. The theological interpretation of the anthropic principle gives an understanding of the fact that the scientific fact "all physical constants of the universe are arranged in such a way that an observer emerges with necessity" perfectly correlates with the religious postulate of the teleology of the universe and man as "the crown of creation."
Keywords: ontological question, determinism, potential infinity, actual infinity, absurdity, God as the root cause, anthropic principle, personality, spirit and matter, "moral argument".
- Majakovskij, V. (2015). Poslushajte. Ljublju. [Listen up. Love]. Moscow: Azbuka [in Russian].
- Vitgenshtejn, L. (1995). Tractatus Logico-philosophicus. Filosofs’ki doslidzhennja [Tractatus Logico-philosophicus. Philosophical studies]. Kyi’v: Osnovy[in Ukrainian].
- Osipov, A. I. (2015). Put’ razuma v poiskah istiny [The path of mind in search of truth].4-e izd., pererab. i dop. Moscow [in Russian].
- Behtereva, N. P. (2017). Magija mozga i labirinty zhizni [The magic of the brain and the maze of life]. (3nd ed., rev.). Moscow; SPb. [in Russian].
- Filosofskij jenciklopedicheskij slovar’ [Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary](1983). Moscow: Sov. jenciklopedija [in Russian].
- Katasonov, V. N. (1999). Borovshijsja s beskonechnym: Filosofsko-religioznye aspekty genezisa teorii mnozhestv G. Kantora [Fought the Infinite: Philosophical and religious aspects of the genesis of G. Kantor’s set theory]. Moscow: Martis [in Russian].
- Vysheslavcev, B. (1914). Jetika Fihte. Osnovy prava i nravstvennosti v sisteme transcendental’noj filosofii Jetika Fihte [Fundamentals of law and morality in the system of transcendental philosophy]. Moscow, Reprint [in Russian].
- Raner, K. (2006). Osnovanie very. Vvedenie v hristianskoe bogoslovie [The foundation of faith. Introduction to Christian Theology]. Moscow [in Russian].
- Karter, B. (1978). Sovpadenija bol’shih chisel i antropologicheskij princip v kosmologii. Kosmologija: Teorii i nabljudenija[The coincidence of large numbers and anthropological principle in cosmology. Cosmology: Theories and Observations].Moscow, (pp. 369-379) [in Russian].
- Kazjutinskij, V. V. (1992). Antropnyj princip v neklassicheskoj i postneklassicheskoj nauke [Anthropic principle in non-classical and post-non-classical science]. Problemy metodologii postneklassicheskoj nauki: sb. nauch. statej– Problems of the methodology of post-non-classical science:V. S. Stepin (Ed.). Moscow: Nauka, (pp. 146-153) [in Russian].
- Dicke, R. H. (1961). Dirac’s Cosmology and Mach’s Principle, Nature, 192, 440-441 [in English].
- Djevis, P. (1985). Sluchajnaja Vselennaja [Random Universe ]. Moscow.
- Hoyle, F. (1982). The Universe: Past and Present Reflections. In: Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 20, 16 [in English].
- Greenstein, G. (1988). The Symbiotic, Universe: Life and Mind in the Cosmos. New York: William Morrow, (pp. 26-27) [inEnglish].
- Gegel’, G. (1975). Sluchajnaja Vselennaja [Random Universe]. (Vols.1). Moscow [in Russian].
- Frankl, V. (1990). Chelovek v poiskah smysla [Man searching for meaning]. Moscow: Progress[in Russian].
- Frank S. L. (1994). S nami Bog. Duhovnye osnovy obshhestva [God with us. Spiritual foundations of society]. Moscow: Respublika[in Russian].
- Eccles, J. C. and Popper, K. R. (1977).The Self and Its Brain (Berlin, Heidelberg, London, New York: Springer-Verlag [in English].
- Mur, Dzh. (1984). Principy jetiki [Principles of ethics]. Moscow: Progress, (pp. 62-63) [in Russian].
- Gubin, V.D. (1999). Osnovy filosofii [The basics of philosophy]. Moscow: AST, (pp. 8-11) [in Russian].
- Kant, I. (2004). Krytyka praktychnogo rozumu [Critics of practical mind].Kyi’v: Osnovy [in Ukrainian].