Schweitzer culture and ethics analysis. Views A

Schweitzer Albert

Culture and ethics

Albert Schweitzer

Culture and ethics

Translation from German by N. A. Zakharchenko and G. V. Kolshansky

FROM THE PUBLISHING HOUSE

FOREWORD

PART ONE DECAY AND REVIVAL OF CULTURE

I. THE WINE OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE DECLINE OF CULTURE

II. CIRCUMSTANCES HOSTILE TO CULTURE IN OUR ECONOMIC AND SPIRITUAL LIFE

III. BASIC ETHICAL CHARACTER OF CULTURE

IV. THE PATH TO CULTURAL REVIVAL

V. CULTURE AND WORLD VIEW

PART TWO CULTURE AND ETHICS

I. THE CRISIS OF CULTURE AND ITS SPIRITUAL CAUSE

II. THE PROBLEM OF AN OPTIMISTIC WORLD VIEW

III. ETHICAL PROBLEM

IV. RELIGIOUS AND PHILOSOPHICAL WORLD VIEW

V. ETHICS AND CULTURE IN GRECO-ROMAN PHILOSOPHY

VI. OPTIMISTIC WORLD VIEW AND ETHICS DURING THE RENAISSANCE AND AFTER THE RENAISSANCE

VII. SUBSTANTIATION OF ETHICS IN THE 17th AND 18th CENTURIES

VIII. LAYING THE FOUNDATIONS OF CULTURE IN THE AGE OF RATIONALISM

IX. KANT'S OPTIMISTIC AND ETHICAL WORLD VIEW

X. NATURAL PHILOSOPHY AND WORLD VIEW OF SPINOSA AND LEIBNIZ

XI. OPTIMISTIC AND ETHICAL WORLD VIEW OF I.-G. FICHTE

XII. Schiller, Goethe, Schleiermacher

XIII. NADETIC OPTIMISTIC WORLD VIEW OF HEGEL

XIV. LATE UTILITARISM. BIOLOGICAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL ETHICS

XV. SCHOPENHAUER AND NIETZSCHE

XVI. THE OUTCOME OF THE STRUGGLE OF EUROPEAN PHILOSOPHY FOR THE WORLD VIEW

XVII. NEW WAY

XVIII. JUSTIFICATION OF OPTIMISM THROUGH THE CONCEPT OF THE WILL TO LIFE

XIX. THE PROBLEM OF ETHICS IN THE LIGHT OF THE HISTORY OF ETHICS

XX. THE ETHICS OF SELF-DENIAL AND THE ETHICS OF SELF-IMPROVEMENT

XXI. The Ethics of Reverence for Life

XXII. THE CULTURE-CREATING ENERGY OF THE ETHIC OF AWESOME FOR LIFE

FROM THE PUBLISHING HOUSE

The name of Albert Schweitzer (1875--1965), "doctor from Lambarene", Nobel Prize winner, is known all over the world.

By publishing A. Schweitzer's book "Culture and Ethics" translated into Russian, we acquaint Soviet readers with Schweitzer the philosopher, with one of the areas of his versatile activity. The book was written about forty years ago and has been reprinted several times.

The translation was made from one of the last lifetime editions. This work represents only two parts out of four that the author intended to write, setting out his system of views.

Schweitzer sets himself the task of awakening in his contemporary society the desire to create a philosophically justified and practically applicable optimistic-ethical worldview, considering the lack of such a worldview to be the main reason for the decline of culture in Western society. At the same time, he believes that it is necessary to abandon the optimistic-ethical interpretation of the world in any of its forms, that neither world- and life-affirmation, nor ethics can be justified based on the knowledge of the world. He proclaims the independence of life outlook (ethics) from the worldview, the pessimism of knowledge and the optimism of action, practice. This optimism, according to Schweitzer, is rooted in our will to live, the most immediate and deepest manifestation of which is reverence for life.

The ethical is fraught with the highest truth and the highest expediency. These are the main milestones of Schweitzer's worldview.

A significant place in the book is given to the history of ethical ideas and a critical analysis of ethical systems (from the time of Ancient Greece to the end of the 19th century) from the point of view of the ethics of active self-improvement and reverence for life proclaimed by Schweitzer.

Schweitzer is close in spirit to the late Stoics, Kant, the rationalists of the 18th century, in whom he traces the development of the basic principle of morality, contrasting their views with Hegel's supra-ethical worldview with his formula of the reasonableness of the real.

Ethical pathos also permeates Schweitzer's protest against the "grotesque progress" of modern Western society, hostile to a genuine "ethical culture", which has lost the ethical ideals bequeathed to it by the Enlightenment and rationalism of the 18th century. Schweitzer's criticism is criticism from the standpoint of abstract humanism; his practical activities became the concretization of his views.

Schweitzer's views have not received a complete systematic exposition. The practical implementation of his philosophical principles occupied him more than their theoretical justification. Therefore, his worldview, his ethics cannot be considered in isolation from his activities.

The internal logic of his convictions (albeit not always coinciding with the logic of reality), the passion of his faith in the triumph of goodness and humanity, selfless service to accepted ideals, both

Schweitzer A. Culture and ethics

Translation by N.A. Zakharchenko and G.V. Kolshansky

General edition and foreword by prof. V.A. Karpushina

Moscow: "Progress", 1973

Albert Schweitzer. Culture and Ethik. Munich, 1960

FROM THE PUBLISHING HOUSE

FOREWORD

PART ONE DECAY AND REVIVAL OF CULTURE

I. THE WINE OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE DECLINE OF CULTURE

II. CIRCUMSTANCES HOSTILE TO CULTURE IN OUR ECONOMIC AND SPIRITUAL

III. BASIC ETHICAL CHARACTER OF CULTURE

IV. THE PATH TO CULTURAL REVIVAL

V. CULTURE AND WORLD VIEW

PART TWO CULTURE AND ETHICS

I. THE CRISIS OF CULTURE AND ITS SPIRITUAL CAUSE

II. THE PROBLEM OF AN OPTIMISTIC WORLD VIEW

III. ETHICAL PROBLEM

IV. RELIGIOUS AND PHILOSOPHICAL WORLD VIEW

V. ETHICS AND CULTURE IN GRECO-ROMAN PHILOSOPHY

VI. OPTIMISTIC WORLD VIEW AND ETHICS DURING THE RENAISSANCE AND AFTER

RENAISSANCE ERA

VII. SUBSTANTIATION OF ETHICS IN THE 17th AND 18th CENTURIES

VIII. LAYING THE FOUNDATIONS OF CULTURE IN THE AGE OF RATIONALISM

IX. KANT'S OPTIMISTIC AND ETHICAL WORLD VIEW

X. NATURAL PHILOSOPHY AND WORLD VIEW OF SPINOSA AND LEIBNIZ

XI. OPTIMISTIC AND ETHICAL WORLD VIEW OF I.-G. FICHTE

XII. Schiller, Goethe, Schleiermacher

XIII. NADETIC OPTIMISTIC WORLD VIEW OF HEGEL

XIV. LATE UTILITARISM. BIOLOGICAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL ETHICS

XV. SCHOPENHAUER AND NIETZSCHE

XVI. THE OUTCOME OF THE STRUGGLE OF EUROPEAN PHILOSOPHY FOR THE WORLD VIEW

XVII. NEW WAY

XVIII. JUSTIFICATION OF OPTIMISM THROUGH THE CONCEPT OF THE WILL TO LIFE

XIX. THE PROBLEM OF ETHICS IN THE LIGHT OF THE HISTORY OF ETHICS

XX. THE ETHICS OF SELF-DENIAL AND THE ETHICS OF SELF-IMPROVEMENT

XXI. The Ethics of Reverence for Life

XXII. THE CULTURE-CREATING ENERGY OF THE ETHIC OF AWESOME FOR LIFE

FROM THE PUBLISHING HOUSE

The name of Albert Schweitzer (1875--1965), "doctor from Lambarene", Nobel Prize winner, is known all over the world.

By publishing A. Schweitzer's book "Culture and Ethics" translated into Russian, we acquaint Soviet readers with Schweitzer, the philosopher, with one of the areas of his versatile activity. The book was written about forty years ago and has been reprinted several times.

The translation was made from one of the last lifetime editions. This work represents only two parts out of four that the author intended to write, setting out his system of views.

The ethical is fraught with the highest truth and the highest expediency. These are the main milestones of Schweitzer's worldview.

The inner logic of his convictions (albeit far from always coinciding with the logic of reality), the passion of his faith in the triumph of goodness and humanity, selfless service to accepted ideals, the charm of his outstanding personality - all this inspires deep respect for Albert Schweitzer.

for obvious reasons, he cannot give an accurate diagnosis of the ailments of Western culture, does not put its degradation in direct connection with the crisis of the foundations of bourgeois society, does not see real ways out of this crisis.

For us, ethical mysticism is unacceptable, which Schweitzer proclaims as the only direct and only deep worldview, the logical conclusion of rational thinking without preconditions, which he seeks to renovate. The path to life-affirmation through ethical mysticism and religion leads away from the high road of human development.

A detailed critical analysis of Schweitzer's views is given in the preface by prof. V. A. Karpushina.

Ch. XXI.

The Ethics of Reverence for Life

Complicated and difficult are the paths that erring ethical thinking must take again. But its path will be easy and simple if it does not turn on seemingly convenient and short paths, but immediately takes the right direction. To do this, three conditions must be met: the first is not to deviate in any way onto the road of ethical interpretation of the world; the second is not to become cosmic and mystical, that is, always understand ethical self-denial as a manifestation of an inner, spiritual connection with the world; the third is not to indulge in abstract thinking, but to remain elementary, understanding self-denial for the sake of the world as self-denial of human life for the sake of all living being, to which they stand in a certain relation.

Ethics arises due to the fact that I am deeply aware of the affirmation of the world, which, along with my life-affirmation, is naturally embedded in my will to live, and I try to realize it in life.

To become a moral person means to become a true thinker.

Thinking is the controversy that takes place in me between desire and knowledge. In its naive form, this controversy appears when the will requires knowledge to present the world to it in such a form that would correspond to the impulses latent in the will, and when knowledge tries to satisfy this demand. In the place of this dialogue, doomed in advance to ineffectiveness, there must come another, true one, in which the will would demand from cognition only that which it itself can actually cognize.

If cognition will give only that which it can cognize, then the will will always receive the same knowledge, namely: in everything and in all phenomena there is the will to live. Constantly deepening and expanding knowledge will have no choice but to lead us deeper and further into that mysterious world that is revealed to us as the omnipresent will to live. The progress of science consists only in the fact that it more and more accurately describes the phenomena in which diverse life is found, reveals life to us where we did not suspect it before, and gives us a means by which we can use the known process of development in one way or another. the will to live. But no science is able to say what life is.

For the world and life outlook, the results of knowledge are reflected in the fact that a person is no longer able to remain in thoughtlessness, for knowledge fills him more and more with the secret of the omnipresent will to live. Therefore, the difference between a scientist and an unlearned is very relative. The unscientist, filled with the secret omnipresent will to live at the sight of a flowering tree, has more knowledge than the scientist who examines with a microscope or physically and chemically the thousand forms of manifestation of the will to live, but with all his knowledge of the process of manifestation of the will to live, does not experience any excitement before the secret of the omnipresent will to live, on the contrary, full of vanity from the fact that he accurately described a piece of life.

All true knowledge passes into experience. I do not know the essence of phenomena, but I comprehend them by analogy with the will to live inherent in me. Thus knowledge of the world becomes my experience of the world. Cognition, which has become an experience, does not transform me in relation to the world into a purely cognizing subject, but excites in me the feeling of an inner connection with it. It fills me with a sense of reverence for the mysterious will to live that manifests itself in everything. It makes me think and wonder and leads me to heights of reverence for life. Here it releases my hand. Then it may no longer accompany me. From now on, my will to live must find its own way in the world.

Cognition reveals to me my attitude to the world, not when it tries to tell me what certain manifestations of life mean on the scale of the whole world. It does not leave me on the surface, but leads me to the depths. It puts me inwardly in relation to the world and makes my will experience everything that surrounds it as the will to live.

The philosophy of Descartes proceeds from the position "I think, therefore I am." This miserable, arbitrarily chosen beginning leads her irrevocably onto the path of abstraction. His philosophy does not find contact with ethics and lingers in a dead worldview and lifeview. True philosophy must start from the most immediate and comprehensive fact of consciousness. This fact says: "I am the life that wants to live, I am the life among the life that wants to live." This is not a contrived position. Daily and hourly I encounter him. At every moment of consciousness, it appears before me. As from an everlasting spring, a living worldview and lifeview, embracing all the facts of being, constantly flows from it. From it grows the mysticism of ethical unity with being.

Just as in my will to live there is a passionate longing to continue life after the mysterious elevation of the will to live, a longing that is usually called desire, and a fear of annihilation and a mysterious debasement of the will to live, which is usually called pain, so these moments are also inherent in the will to live. surrounding me, whether she speaks or remains mute.

Ethics, therefore, is that I feel compelled to show an equal reverence for life, both for my will to live and for any other. This is the basic principle of morality. Good is that which serves to preserve and develop life, evil is that which destroys life or hinders it.

In fact, everything that is considered good in the usual moral assessment of the relationship of man to man can be reduced to the material and spiritual preservation and development of human life and to the desire to give it the highest value. And vice versa, everything that is considered bad in human relations can be reduced in the end to the material and spiritual destruction or inhibition of human life, as well as to the lack of desire to give life the highest value. Separate definitions of good and evil, often lying on different planes and seemingly unrelated, turn out to be direct aspects of one and the same phenomenon as soon as they are revealed in the general definitions of good and evil.

But the only possible basic principle of the moral means not only the ordering and deepening of existing views on good and evil, but also their expansion. A person is truly moral only when he obeys the inner impulse to help any life he can help, and refrains from doing any harm to the living. He does not ask how much this or that life deserves his efforts, he also does not ask whether and to what extent she can feel his kindness. For him, life is sacred. He will not pluck a leaf from a tree, he will not break a single flower, and he will not crush a single insect. When he works at night by a lamp in the summer, he prefers to close the window and sit in stuffiness so as not to see a single butterfly that has fallen with burned wings on his table.

If, walking down the street after rain, he sees a worm crawling along the pavement, he will think that the worm will die in the sun if it does not crawl to the ground in time, where it can hide in a crack, and transfer it to the grass. If he passes by an insect that has fallen into a puddle, then he will find time to throw a piece of paper or a straw to him to save him.

He is not afraid of being ridiculed for being sentimental. Such is the fate of any truth, which is always ridiculed before it is acknowledged. It was once considered foolish to think that people of color are really people and that they should be treated like all people. Now this nonsense has become the truth. Today it seems not quite normal to recognize as a requirement of reasonable ethics an attentive attitude to all living things, down to the lowest forms of manifestation of life. But someday people will be surprised that it took so long for people to recognize the senseless infliction of harm on life as incompatible with ethics.

Ethics is an unlimited responsibility for everything that lives.

In its generality, the definition of ethics as human behavior in accordance with the idea of reverence for life seems somewhat incomplete. But it is the only perfect one. Compassion is too narrow to be a moral concept. Ethics includes the experience of all states and all impulses of the will to live, its desires, its striving to fully manifest itself in life, its striving for self-perfection.

Love means even more, because it simultaneously contains compassion, joy, and mutual aspiration. But it reveals the ethical content in a certain equality, even if natural and deep. It puts the solidarity created by ethics in relation to analogy with what nature sometimes temporarily allows in a physical relationship between two sexes or between parents and their offspring.

Thinking should strive to formulate the essence of the ethical as such. In this case, it must define ethics as self-denial for the sake of life, motivated by a sense of reverence for life. If the expression "reverence for life" seems very general and not vital enough, then nevertheless it is precisely such that conveys something inherent in a person who has absorbed this idea. Compassion, love, and in general everything connected with high enthusiasm, is adequately conveyed in it. With tireless vital energy, a feeling of reverence for life develops in a person a certain frame of mind, penetrating it and bringing into it the anxiety of constant responsibility. Like a ship's propeller crashing into water, reverence for life irresistibly pushes a person forward.

The ethics of reverence for life, which arose from an inner impulse, does not depend on the extent to which it takes shape in a satisfactory ethical worldview. It is not obliged to give an answer to the question, what is meant by the influence of moral people on the preservation, development and elevation of life in the general process of world events. It cannot be misled by the argument that the preservation and improvement of life it promotes is negligible in its effectiveness compared with the colossal and constant work of the forces of nature aimed at the destruction of life. But it is important that ethics strives for such an impact, and therefore we can leave aside all problems of the effectiveness of its actions. What matters to the world is the fact that in the world, in the image of a person who has become moral, the will to live is manifested, filled with a sense of reverence for life and a readiness to self-deny for the sake of life.

The universal will to live comprehends itself in my will to live differently than in other phenomena of the world. In them this will is revealed as a kind of individualization, which - as far as I can see from the side - is only a "living of oneself", but does not strive for unity with other wills to live. The world is a cruel drama of the bifurcation of the will to live. One life asserts itself at the expense of another, one destroys the other. But one will to live acts against another only out of an inner striving, and not out of conviction. In me, however, the will to live acquired the knowledge of another will to live. It embodied the desire to merge with itself and become universal.

Why is the will to live aware of itself only in me? Is it connected with the fact that I have acquired the ability to think about the whole existence? Where is the evolution that has begun in me leading me?

There are no answers to these questions. My life with a sense of reverence for life in this world will forever remain a mystery to me, in which the creative will simultaneously acts as a destructive will, and the destructive one acts as a creative one.

There is nothing left for me but to adhere to the fact that the will to live manifests itself in me as a will to live, striving to unite with another will to live. This fact is my light in the dark. I am free from that ignorance in which the world is. I am delivered from the world. Reverence for life filled me with an unease that the world does not know. I draw from it a bliss that the world cannot give me. And when in this being other than the world, someone else and I understand each other and willingly help each other where one will would torment the other, this means that the duality of the will to live has been eliminated.

If I save an insect, it means that my life acts for the benefit of another life, and this is the removal of the duality of life. If somewhere and in some way my life works for the benefit of another, then my infinite will to live experiences union with the infinite, in which all life is one. I experience a joy that keeps me from vegetating in the wilderness of life.

Therefore, I take as my life's destiny the task of obeying the higher revelation of the will to live in me. As the goal of my actions, I choose the task of eliminating the duality of the will to live to the extent that this is subject to the influence of my being. Knowing only what I need, I leave aside all the mysteries of the world and my being.

The desire for and anticipation of every deep religion is contained in the ethics of reverence for life. But this ethic does not create a complete worldview and agrees that the temple should remain unfinished. It completes only the kliros. But it is on the kliros that piety sends its living and endless service to God...

The ethics of reverence for life reveals its truth in the fact that it comprehends the various manifestations of the ethical in unity and interconnectedness. No ethics has yet been able to link together the desire for self-improvement, in which a person uses his powers not to influence outside, but to work on himself, and active ethics. The ethics of reverence for life was able to do this, and in such a way that it not only solved school problems, but significantly deepened the understanding of ethics.

Ethics is reverence for the will to live in me and outside of me. Out of a feeling of reverence for the will to live arises in me a deep life-affirmation of humility. I understand my will to live not only as something that is realized in happy events, but at the same time experiences itself. If I do not let this self-experience go into thoughtlessness, but keep it as something valuable, then I will understand the secret of spiritual self-affirmation. I will feel a previously unfamiliar freedom from the fate of life. In those moments when I could think that I was crushed, I feel lifted up to the inexpressible happiness of freedom from the world that suddenly rushed over me and I experience a purification of my life outlook. Humility is the hall through which we enter ethics. Only he who, in deep self-denial for the sake of his own will to live, experiences a feeling of inner freedom from all events, is able to give his strength always and to the end for the sake of another life.

I fight in my reverence for my will to live, both for freedom from the destinies of life and for freedom from myself. I cultivate in myself a high sense of self-preservation, not only in relation to what I meet, but also in relation to the form in which I am connected with the world. Out of a feeling of reverence for my life, I surrender to the power of truth in relation to myself. If I acted contrary to my convictions, I would buy at a high price all that I have achieved. I am afraid that, due to infidelity towards myself, I can wound my will to live with a poisoned spear.

The fact that Kant put the conflict of truth with itself at the forefront of ethics testifies to the depth of his ethical feeling. But the fact that in his search for a moral being he did not reach the idea of reverence for life did not give him the opportunity to see a direct connection between truth in relation to oneself and active ethics.

In fact, the ethics of truth in relation to oneself imperceptibly passes into the ethics of self-denial for the sake of others. Being true to myself compels me to actions that appear as self-denial in such a way that ordinary ethics derives them from the idea of self-denial.

Why do I forgive something to a person? Ordinary ethics says: because I feel compassion for him. She presents people in this forgiveness as too good and allows them to give forgiveness that is not free from the humiliation of another. In this way, she turns forgiveness into a sweet triumph of self-denial.

Thanks to this not very noble idea, the ethics of reverence for life is eliminated. For her, all prudence and all forgiveness are actions to enforce truth in relation to oneself. I must forgive everything infinitely, because if I do not do this, I will be untrue in relation to myself and will act as if I am not as guilty as the other in relation to me. Since my life is already so heavily tainted with lies, I must forgive the lies committed against me. Since I myself do not love, hate, slander, show deceit and arrogance, I must also forgive the dislike, hatred, slander, deceit, arrogance shown towards me. I must forgive quietly and imperceptibly. I don't forgive at all, I don't bring it up at all. But this is not exaltation, but a necessary extension and improvement of ordinary ethics.

We fight against the evil inherent in man, not with the help of the judgment of others, but with the help of our own judgment of ourselves. The struggle with ourselves and our own truthfulness are the means by which we influence others. We imperceptibly involve them in the struggle for deep spiritual self-affirmation, which comes from reverence for one's own life. Power makes no noise. She just acts. True ethics begins where the use of words ceases.

The truest thing in active ethics - if it also manifests itself as self-denial - is born from the compulsion of one's own truthfulness and only in it does it acquire its true value. The whole ethics of being other than the world only flows in a pure stream when it originates from this spring. It is not out of a feeling of kindness towards another that I am meek, peaceful, patient and affable - I am such because in this behavior I secure the deepest self-assertion. The reverence for life that I feel for my own life and the reverence for life that I am willing to give my strength for another life are closely intertwined.

Since ordinary ethics does not have the basic principle of the moral, it immediately jumps into the discussion of ethical conflicts. The ethic of reverence for life does not rush into this discussion. It uses the time to think through the basic principle of morality from all angles. Confident in her rightness, she then only judges conflicts.

Ethics must polemicize with three opponents: thoughtlessness, selfish self-affirmation and society.

She usually does not pay enough attention to the first opponent, since the depot never comes to open conflicts. But he does harm to her imperceptibly.

Ethics can take over a large area without encountering the troops of egoism. A person can do a lot of good without requiring any sacrifice for himself. And if he must really use up his vital forces to a considerable extent, then he feels these losses no more than the loss of one hair.

On an enormous scale, inner liberation from the world, fidelity to oneself, other than the world, being, even self-denial for the sake of another life, is only a matter of attention paid to this behavior. We miss a lot because we don't really care about it. We do not submit sufficiently to the pressure of the inner urge to ethical being. In many places, steam escapes from the fragile boiler. The resulting energy losses in ordinary ethics are very great, since it does not have a single basic moral principle that affects thinking. She can't close the cauldron's cracks, she doesn't even look at it.

However, reverence for life, which always comes to the aid of thinking, comprehensively and deeply permeates every impression, reflection and decision of a person. A person cannot discard this reverence, just as water cannot help but become colored when a drop of soluble paint falls into it. The fight against thoughtlessness unfolds and continues.

But how does the ethics of reverence for life behave in the conflicts that arise between the inner impulse to self-denial and the need for self-affirmation?

And I am subject to a bifurcation of the will to live. In a thousand forms my life comes into conflict with other lives. The need to destroy or harm life lives on in me as well. When I walk on an unbeaten path, my feet destroy or hurt the tiny creatures that live on this path. To save my life, I must protect myself from other lives that can harm me. So, I can chase a mouse that lives in my room, I can kill an insect nesting in my house, I can destroy bacteria that endanger my life. I get my food by destroying plants and animals. My happiness is built on hurting other people.

How does ethics justify this cruel necessity to which I am subject as a result of the bifurcation of the will to live?

Ordinary ethics seeks compromises. It seeks to determine how much I should sacrifice my life and my happiness, and how much I should keep for myself at the expense of the life and happiness of other lives. In this way it creates an applied, relative ethics. What in reality is by no means ethical, but only a mixture of unethical necessity and ethics, she passes off as ethical. Thus, it leads to a monstrous delusion, contributes to an ever-greater obscuring of the concept of the ethical.

I. THE WINE OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE DECLINE OF CULTURE

II. CIRCUMSTANCES HOSTILE TO CULTURE IN OUR ECONOMIC AND SPIRITUAL

III. BASIC ETHICAL CHARACTER OF CULTURE

IV. THE PATH TO CULTURAL REVIVAL

V. CULTURE AND WORLD VIEW
PART TWO CULTURE AND ETHICS
I. THE CRISIS OF CULTURE AND ITS SPIRITUAL CAUSE

II. THE PROBLEM OF AN OPTIMISTIC WORLD VIEW

III. ETHICAL PROBLEM

IV. RELIGIOUS AND PHILOSOPHICAL WORLD VIEW

V. ETHICS AND CULTURE IN GRECO-ROMAN PHILOSOPHY

VI. OPTIMISTIC WORLD VIEW AND ETHICS DURING THE RENAISSANCE AND AFTER

RENAISSANCE ERA

VII. SUBSTANTIATION OF ETHICS IN THE 17th AND 18th CENTURIES

VIII. LAYING THE FOUNDATIONS OF CULTURE IN THE AGE OF RATIONALISM

IX. KANT'S OPTIMISTIC AND ETHICAL WORLD VIEW

X. NATURAL PHILOSOPHY AND WORLD VIEW OF SPINOSA AND LEIBNIZ

XI. OPTIMISTIC AND ETHICAL WORLD VIEW OF I.-G. FICHTE

XII. Schiller, Goethe, Schleiermacher

XIII. NADETIC OPTIMISTIC WORLD VIEW OF HEGEL

XIV. LATE UTILITARISM. BIOLOGICAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL ETHICS

XV. SCHOPENHAUER AND NIETZSCHE

XVI. THE OUTCOME OF THE STRUGGLE OF EUROPEAN PHILOSOPHY FOR THE WORLD VIEW

XVII. NEW WAY

XVIII. JUSTIFICATION OF OPTIMISM THROUGH THE CONCEPT OF THE WILL TO LIFE

XIX. THE PROBLEM OF ETHICS IN THE LIGHT OF THE HISTORY OF ETHICS

XX. THE ETHICS OF SELF-DENIAL AND THE ETHICS OF SELF-IMPROVEMENT

XXI. The Ethics of Reverence for Life

XXII. THE CULTURE-CREATING ENERGY OF THE ETHIC OF AWESOME FOR LIFE

FROM THE PUBLISHING HOUSE

The Nobel Prize is known to the whole world.
Publishing in translation into Russian the book by A. Schweitzer "Culture and

ethics", we acquaint Soviet readers with Schweitzer the philosopher, with one of

areas of his diversified activities. The book was written over forty years

back and reprinted several times.
The translation was made from one of the last lifetime editions. This work

represents only two parts of the four that the author assumed

write, setting out your system of views.
Schweitzer sets himself the task of awakening in contemporary society

the desire to create a philosophically sound and practically applicable

optimistic-ethical worldview, considering the main reason for the decline

culture in Western society is the lack of such a worldview. At the same time, he

believes that it is necessary to abandon the optimistic-ethical

interpretation of the world in any of its forms, which is neither world- and life-affirmation, nor

ethics cannot be justified on the basis of knowledge of the world. He proclaims

independence of life outlook (ethics) from world outlook, pessimism of knowledge and

optimism of action, practice. This optimism, according to Schweitzer, is rooted in

in our will to live, most immediate and most profound

the manifestation of which is reverence for life.
The ethical is fraught with the highest truth and the highest expediency. These are

the main milestones of Schweitzer's worldview.
A significant place in the book is devoted to the history of ethical ideas and

critical analysis of ethical systems (from the time of ancient Greece to the end of the 19

century) from the point of view of the ethics of active

self-improvement and reverence for life.
Schweitzer is close in spirit to the late Stoics, Kant, the rationalists of the 18th century,

in which he traces the development of the basic principle of moral,

opposing their views to the supra-ethical worldview of Hegel with his

formula for the reasonableness of the real.
Ethical pathos also permeates Schweitzer's protest against the "grotesque

progress" of modern Western society, hostile to a genuine "ethical

culture", who lost the ethical ideals bequeathed to him by the Enlightenment and

rationalism of the 18th century. Criticism of Schweitzer is criticism from positions

abstract humanism; concretization of his views was his practical

activity.
Schweitzer's views have not received a complete systematic exposition.

The practical implementation of his philosophical principles occupied him

more than their theoretical justification. Therefore, his worldview, his

ethics cannot be considered in isolation from its activities.
The internal logic of his beliefs (albeit not always coinciding with

logic of reality), the passion of his faith in the triumph of good and

humanity, disinterested service to accepted ideals, charming

his outstanding personality - all this inspires deep respect for

Albert Schweitzer.
At the same time, one cannot but admit that the author of the book does not give, and quite

for obvious reasons, cannot give an accurate diagnosis of the ailments of Western culture,

does not put its degradation in direct connection with the crisis of foundations

bourgeois society, sees no real way out of this crisis.
For us, the ethical mysticism that Schweitzer proclaims is unacceptable.

the only immediate and the only deep worldview,

the logical conclusion of unconditional rational thinking, as

the renovator of which he seeks to act. The path to life affirmation through

ethical mysticism and religion are led away from the main road of development

humanity.
A detailed critical analysis of Schweitzer's views is given in the preface by prof.

V. A. Karpushina.
FOREWORD

"Culture and ethics" - this problem is becoming more and more

relevant, because the development of civilization in the 20th century has already reached such a milestone,

when the ethically devoid culture of bourgeois society is increasingly

threatens the well-being and existence of man on Earth. Required in full

measure the danger posed to the future of mankind

the so-called "mass culture" of bourgeois society, which has no firm

moral foundations, saturated with the ideas of violence, robbery, the cult of sex and

continuously and for a long time corrupting the human dignity of many

generations.
On the other hand, in the moral development of mankind,

step of the greatest importance: mankind, distrustful of capitalism

turns away from the ethics of individualism, which has degenerated into a cult of selfishness and

acquisitiveness, and turns his eyes to the ethics of collectivism, born in

new time by the proletariat and developed socialism.
In connection with these processes, which are polar opposites in

moral development of mankind, naturally there is a revival

public interest in ethical and cultural issues.
It is well known that the founders of Marxism-Leninism inflicted

death blow to the moralizing critique of capitalism, exposing its entire

ineffectiveness, hopelessness both in theoretical and in

organizational and practical aspects. Moralizing criticism only multiplied

illusions and, like religion, sowed unrealistic hopes for moral means

"cure" of capitalism from its organic "ailments". Rejection by Marxism

moralizing criticism of capitalism gave birth to many bourgeois scientists

misconception that Marxism is allegedly alien to the ethics of education

personality, that he is content with the doctrine (including ethical) about

education and organization of the masses.
This persistent illusion of bourgeois consciousness is quite widely

spread and touched even the most prominent representatives of modern

bourgeois intelligentsia. A certain tribute was paid to her by R. Rolland, A.

Einstein, T. Dreiser and others. Such an outstanding

a humanist of our time, like Albert Schweitzer*.
(* We do not dwell on the biography of A. Schweitzer, since it is widely

highlighted in Soviet literature. See: B. M. Nosik, Schweitzer, M., publishing house

"Young Guard", ZhZL series, 1971; collection "Albert Schweitzer - the great

humanist of the XX century", M., publishing house "Nauka", 1970.)
Contrary to such illusions and errors of the bourgeois consciousness, the problems of ethics

personality, as well as the problems of social ethics, represent a great

interest both for the theory of Marxism-Leninism and for practical

communist activities. This does not mean any concessions.

moralizing critique of capitalism. Having turned socialism from a utopia into a science,

Marxism has discarded moralizing criticism as unnecessary

and harmful rubbish, for it prevented the proletariat from mastering the real

ideological weapon of the revolutionary struggle - the theory of scientific communism.

The development of modern socialism, which has come to grips with the question of

practical solution to the problem of the comprehensive development of the individual, encourages

revitalization of Marxist-Leninist research on ethical

problems in all their diversity, including the ethics of personality. Marxism

removes the opposition between the ethics of social and the ethics of individual and

opens the way to solving that incredibly intricate ethical problem before

which Schweitzer stopped in impotence, declaring that without mysticism the transition from

it is impossible to understand and implement the ethics of the individual to the ethics of the social.
The entire social ethics of Marxism-Leninism necessarily has a personal

aspect. There is not a single tenet of communist morality that is not

applied directly and directly to the individual. Schweitzer came from

the antagonism of society and the individual existing in bourgeois society, beyond

such antagonism did not conceive of posing ethical problems and means of ethics

tried to solve the problem of this antagonism, not understanding all the illusory and

futility of such a solution. Marxism is alien to the illusory attempt

moral solution of socio-economic problems. Putting their decision on

realistic basis for the socio-economic transformations carried out

revolution, Marxism in its very formulation of ethical problems proceeds from

overcoming by socialism the antagonism of society and the individual. And with the fall of this

antagonism, the opposition between the ethics of social and the ethics of

personality.
The bourgeois limitations of Schweitzer's worldview and the illusory

conviction in the miraculous power of ethics, supposedly capable of independently

solve the problems of socio-economic development of mankind, prevented him

correctly pose the problem of personal ethics. But in Schweitzer's views on

problems of the ethical content of culture a lot of deep and valuable thoughts,

whose importance was great even in the period between the two world wars and

is growing in our era.
In questions of the theory and history of ethics, philosophy of culture and history

culture (religion and music in particular) Albert Schweitzer is a major,

colorful figure. It can safely be put on a par with the largest

cultural figures of the 20th century. His philosophical concept of culture is a phenomenon

original, deep in thought, significant in its humanistic

orientation. Schweitzer is sharper than other Western thinkers, his

contemporaries, felt the tragic crisis of bourgeois culture and in

unlike many bourgeois theoreticians involved in philosophy and

sociology of culture in terms of the supposedly inexorable decline of human

civilization, boldly stood up in defense of the cultural progress of mankind,

fought against the destruction of culture, for the progress of humanism in culture, for

lasting peace. All these motives have found vivid expression in the philosophy of culture.

Schweitzer.
Schweitzer's concept should be considered and evaluated not in comparison

with Marxism, because the differences are too great, and in comparison with the bourgeois

philosophy of culture of the XX century, in which the views of Schweitzer occupy an important

place and point to the deep internal inconsistency of the bourgeois

humanism of our era.
The philosophy of culture of Albert Schweitzer, developed by him on

throughout his life, consist of four parts. The first part is formed

book "The Decay and Revival of Culture". The outlines for this book were made

Schweitzer, by his own admission, back in 1900. She has undergone

significant processing during Schweitzer's first stay in Tropical

Africa (1914-1917) and appeared in print only in 1923. In this way,

it becomes obvious that the cultural and ethical concept,

developed by Schweitzer in this work, is the fruit of long reflections,

the work of critical thought, many years of maturation of the philosophical position,

which became the basis of beliefs and personal behavior. In the published book, this part

philosophical system occupies the first five chapters and contains a general outline

theories of culture, ethics and worldview, which in their unity form

fundamentals of A. Schweitzer's philosophy of culture.
The second part of Schweitzer's philosophy of culture is called "Culture and

ethics". This part of the work was written in the early 20s and went out of print

in 1923. It consists of 22 chapters, the contents of which are thematically

is divided into three large sections: general problems of the theory of culture, ethics and

worldview; a brief history of European ethical thought; justification

new ethics - the ethics of reverence for life.
The third part of the philosophy of culture - "The doctrine of reverence for life"

(1963) --is an extended summary of the last six chapters

work "Culture and Ethics".
Finally, Schweitzer dreamed of writing the final part of his philosophy

culture in the form of a separate work called "Cultural State", but

by chance. A man of extraordinary sincerity, the strictest honesty in his

beliefs and actions, Schweitzer failed to overcome his Franciscan

illusions and did not find in modern society a single state that

could become an analogue of his ideal ideas about the so-called

cultural state. He never accepted socialism, although the socialist

states perceived in the last years of his life through the prism of their

peaceful policy and regarded as the hope of mankind.
Schweitzer gave a generalized assessment of his philosophy of culture in a letter to

to the Soviet researcher of his works V. Petritsky. He wrote: "My main

work -- philosophical study "Culture and Ethics". She came out in

1923 in Germany, and shortly thereafter in England. In it I explore

problem of the ethical content of our culture. Do this research

I was prompted, in particular, by Tolstoy, who made me a great

impression. I have established that our culture does not have enough ethical

character. Then the question arises why ethics has such a weak

impact on our culture? Finally, I came to the explanation of this fact by the fact that

ethics has no

strength, because it is not simple and imperfect. She takes care of our

attitude to people, instead of having the subject of our relationship to

to all things. Such a perfect ethics is much simpler and much deeper than usual.

With its help, we achieve a spiritual connection with the universe.
I presented the idea of this simple and deep ethics in lectures at the university

Uppsala (Sweden), and then in Cambridge and Prague. Then I realized that she

found a way

to the hearts and minds of people. She found recognition both in philosophy and in

religion. It is already taught in schools and seems to children completely

natural.
The ultimate goal of all philosophy and religion is to induce

people to achieve deep humanism. The deepest philosophy becomes

religious, and the deepest religion becomes thinking. They both perform

their appointment only if they encourage people to become

humane in the deepest sense of the word ". (G. Getting,

Meetings with Albert Schweitzer, M., 1967, pp. 117--118.) * G. Goetting,

Meetings with Albert Schweitzer, M., 1967,

pp. 117--118.
Consider the content of Schweitzer's philosophy of culture in more detail and

more systematically, so that its place in modern bourgeois society can be established.

ideology, which is now so actively involved in the problems of philosophy and sociology

culture. In the book "The Decay and Revival of Culture", which is the original

moment of the philosophy of culture of A. Schweitzer, two groups are discussed in detail

problems: the causes of the observed crisis of culture and the search for ways to

revival. The root cause of the deep and growing crisis

modern culture of bourgeois society Schweitzer considers futility

numerous attempts to create a convincing individual ethics. Schweitzer

rightly notes that the decline of the culture of bourgeois society is not caused by

world war, quite the contrary, the war only intensified the crisis of culture and itself

was his expression. She began the process of self-destruction of culture, and now

this process is in full swing. This conclusion, formulated

Schweitzer based on his observations of the course and results of the First World

war, he refers both to the second world war and to the post-war period,

which gave rise to the threat of a thermonuclear catastrophe for all mankind. These

considerations lead Schweitzer first to pacifism and then to the position

the most active fighter for disarmament, the cessation of thermonuclear tests,

liquidation of local wars, prevention of a world war. Speeches

Schweitzer against militant nationalism, racism, militarism,

German and Italian fascism, its struggle against the aggressions of the American

imperialism made his name popular among the democratic public

all over the world.
But what, according to Schweitzer, are the reasons for the decline of modern

culture? Schweitzer fixes the features of the cultural crisis of bourgeois society in

generally correct, although he does not act as a pioneer.

Here are his main theses on the crisis of culture. public character

modern production has torn people away from their breadwinner, the earth, and urban

life hurts more and more. The faith of the worker in

the spiritual significance of his work. Specialization destroys the integrity of a person.

Unfree, disunited, limited man is now in a bourgeois

society is in danger of becoming inhumane. Indifference flourishes. People

talk too easily about war, including thermonuclear war. Complete

demoralization of the individual by bourgeois society is in progress.
Schweitzer shows signs of a deep crisis in the field of spiritual culture

modern bourgeois society. He writes: propaganda has taken the place of truth;

history has been turned into a cult of lies; the combination of scholarship with prejudice has become

ordinary; freedom of thought is out of use, for millions refuse to

to think, we are not even aware of our spiritual poverty; with a refusal

individuality, we have entered a new Middle Ages; spiritual life even

prominent cultured peoples has taken a menacingly monotonous course in

compared to past times. Schweitzer rightly grabbed some

essential features of the spiritual life of modern bourgeois society. However

one cannot fail to notice the circumstance that he hardly takes into account

progressive forces and social tendencies of modern society. In that

reveals the bourgeois limitations of his critical analysis of culture

modern capitalism.
The bourgeois narrow-mindedness of Schweitzer's criticism becomes even more

more obvious when we consider his views on the relation of the individual and

society. In the spirit of the traditions of bourgeois enlightenment, Schweitzer formulates

the basic law of cultural development: "When society affects the individual

stronger than the individual on society, the degradation of culture begins, because in this

In the case of necessity, the decisive value is diminished - spiritual and

moral inclinations of a person. "In the operation of this law, he sees the reasons

crisis of culture of modern bourgeois society. He writes: "Relations

between the individual and society are undermined not only in the intellectual, but also in

ethical plane", a person "subordinates his judgment to the judgment of the masses and his

the morality of the morality of the masses", "from year to year steadily

the dissemination of collective opinions is being improved while

exclusion of individual thinking.
Bourgeois consciousness stops at stating these facts and

trends. It does not penetrate into the underlying causes of their social

determinism. It cannot, as a rule, break the false circle in

reasoning: society determines the individual, and the actions of the individual drive

society. The illusory nature of such a train of thought was shown long ago and

criticized by K. Marx in his "Theses on Feuerbach". Schweitzer in this

case, shares the illusions of bourgeois consciousness and seeks an explanation for the crisis

culture on the paths of the wrong course of thought of a person who turned out to be powerless

create a proper individual ethics as the basis of a humanistic culture.

Along with the material progress of civilization, the forces of ethical

progress, and hence the woeful fruits of a culture divorced from ethics. They are

devoid of the spirit of humanism and inhumane. And all this only because it was discovered

the decline of philosophical culture, philosophy has become philosophizing without thinking,

the revolt of the natural sciences easily subverted philosophical fantasies, and philosophers

were unable to create an optimistic-ethical worldview.
Christian ethics was also powerless to prevent the crisis of culture.

Schweitzer has no hopes for her. So social determination

spiritual crisis of bourgeois society is shifted by Schweitzer to

a separate person. Therefore, all hopes for the revival of the Schweitzer culture

connects only with the creative activity of individuals in the field

spirit: a gigantic revolution must take place without revolutionary action,

the carriers of the movement are individuals endowed with individuality,

the ethical principle can only be born in an individual, everyone must take on

self-accessible only to the individual function of putting forward spiritual and ethical ideas.

Only this ethical spirit of a proud and selfless person will return

humanity, according to Schweitzer, humanistic in its foundations

culture and ensure its true revival.
With its philosophical concept of culture, in which with all its might

the importance of an optimistic worldview and humanistic ethics is emphasized

("culture is the result of the interaction of an optimistic worldview and

ethics"), Albert Schweitzer challenged the anti-humanism of bourgeois society. He

wrote: "Society is afraid of the human person, because in it the spirit acquires a voice

and truth, to which it would prefer never to give a word. But his power

as great as his fear." These words can rightfully be attributed to

Schweitzer himself. Bourgeois society had reason to fear this

ascetic philosopher. He didn't flinch. And the truth of his words was too

often merciless, although she coexisted with illusory hopes and

superficial judgments. "The ideals of culture have dried up because they failed to

enough to firmly substantiate the optimistic and ethical principles in

worldview,” wrote Schweitzer. This judgment is wrong in fact, and in

theoretically, it is very far from thoughtfulness. But next to him we

we read appeals addressed to the individual: overcome your fear, become a sign

ethical progress, do not bow your head before any inhumane forces,

be an inflexible optimist in your world and life affirmation, and then

retrograde society corrupting and destroying the highest product

humanity - culture, will be afraid of you, and you will be worthy of the name - Man.

Others may object to us and say: "This is just a sermon, and nothing more."

Yes, of course, this is partly true. But this is the preaching of a heroic man

addressed to people with a call to perform heroic deeds in the name of salvation

culture and peace on earth.
Evaluation of the first part of Schweitzer's philosophy of culture only as a sermon

would be narrow and one-sided. Despite the frankly idealistic and even

the religious nature of Schweitzer's worldview, in his philosophical concept

culture, we find a lot of deep and valuable thoughts. There is given a sharp and

often profound criticism of the anti-humanism of contemporary bourgeois society; in

as a criterion of culture and its progress on the positions of historicism

considers the measure of humanism actually achieved by a particular society;

culture itself is identified with the material and spiritual progress of society,

and the latter emphasizes the crucial importance of moral progress

individual and all mankind. The whole concept of Schweitzer's culture represents

is a philosophical protest against chauvinism, racism, fascism, militarism and

war.
There is another side to Schweitzer's reflections on the fate of culture in

our time, important for assessing the place that he occupies in the series

contemporary thinkers of bourgeois society. This is Schweitzer's estimate

the historical role of reason and rationalism in general. In this matter, he often

although not always, comes into conflict with the spirit of irrationalism that prevails

in modern bourgeois philosophy. "Rationalism," writes Schweitzer, "is something

more than an ideological movement that ended in the late 18th and early 19th

centuries. It is a necessary phenomenon of any normal

spiritual life. Any real progress in the world is predetermined in

ultimately rationalism.
The question of rationalism raised by Schweitzer is a complex one. Schweitzer is correct

connects successes in the development of civilization and culture since the 18th century with

development of rationalism. This thesis expresses the anti-church

the nature of Schweitzer's worldview; rationalism takes over

theological beliefs; even Christian humanism he tries to comprehend

from pantheistic and rationalistic positions (that is why so sublimely

All of Schweitzer's statements about Spinoza's philosophy resound). Paying tribute

this high appreciation by Schweitzer of the spirit of rationalism in European philosophy, and

first of all, German classical philosophy of the 18th - 19th centuries, with its

It is impossible to agree on a solution to the question of rationalism. Is it difficult or even

impossible to do, firstly, because the ethical and general philosophical

Schweitzer's concept is inherent in irrationalism. He even talks about the role of mysticism,

through which a person achieves a sense of the presence of God in him

himself. Although this bot, in fact, turns out to be the principle of reverence

man before life, but God is God. It requires faith and worship. And

therefore, in Schweitzer's system there is a fair amount of theism, internally

undermining every system of humanism. Secondly, the proclamation of the triumph

rationalism, important for the fight against the spirit of irrationalism of modern

bourgeois culture, does not yet solve the problem of its epistemological foundations.

Rationalist philosophical systems provided a one-sided solution to this problem.

Problems. It is for this one-sidedness that Schweitzer rightly criticizes

ethics of Hegel. But he himself, in fact, follows in the footsteps of the latter, in

in any case, in his conviction in rationalistic epistemological

fundamentals of culture and cultural-historical process. He, therefore,

acts in the spirit of the traditions of bourgeois enlightenment and shares the illusions

classical German idealism of the XVIII-XIX centuries in this matter.
Defining the epistemological foundations of culture from the standpoint of scientific,

Marxist-Leninist theory of culture, it is necessary to take into account the fact that

Marxism has long overcome the opposition of rationalism and sensationalism by

introducing practice into epistemology and interpreting it from the standpoint of

materialistic understanding of history. Appreciating rationalism and its

role in the development of culture, Schweitzer also refers repeatedly to the analysis

problems of human activity. But human activity itself

considers primarily through the prism of morality and as a moral

activity. This approach opens up some fruitful possibilities for him.

for the ethical assessment of various phenomena of culture and civilization; but for

a deeper understanding of culture in its many-sided forms of this clearly

not enough: the ethical criterion, moreover, understood in an idealistic sense,

becomes a one-sided measure of only certain forms of culture, and

a universal criterion for all forms of culture can only be a measure

comprehensive development of a holistic, harmonious personality. Schweitzer himself

feels the insufficiency of the ethical criterion of culture. In separate places

in his book, he comes from relatively private ethical assessments of culture to

more general questions about personal development, about comprehensiveness and integrity

individual, on the improvement of the social structure. But his principles

essence of the individualistic-ethical theory, which opposes

individual and social ethics, prevent him from coming out to discuss this

a wide range of problems of the individual, society and culture.
The second part of A. Schweitzer's philosophy of culture - "Culture and Ethics" -

consists of three main sections, though not singled out by the author himself, but

clearly differentiated thematically. In the first section,

which includes four chapters, contains an exposition of the general philosophical concept

religion and philosophy. The basis of culture is, according to Schweitzer, not

material, but its spiritual side. "Material achievements," he writes, "

it is not yet a culture; they become it only to the extent that they succeed

put at the service of the idea of improving the individual and society. " Here

Schweitzer formulates the main idea that guides the entire course of his research

problems of cultural progress. But in order to go further along this right path,

the process of "perfection of the individual and society" must be explained with

materialistic positions that have always remained alien to the worldview

Schweitzer. That is why he prefers to talk about "the idea of perfection

individual and society", and not about the socio-historical movement itself.

Schweitzer, culture should serve this idea, and

self-realization in reality, in a real historical movement.

Weakness, illusory nature, scientific hopelessness of such an idealistic

schemes for the development of culture, society and personality has long been revealed and overcome

Marxism.
The tragedy of mankind and its culture began, according to Schweitzer, from the middle

XIX century. It was then that the first signs of the crisis of rationalism appeared and

generally optimistic outlook. This was the beginning of the tragedy.

humanity. The entire history of the development of Western European philosophical and

ethical thought is, according to Schweitzer, the history of the struggle for

optimistic outlook. At the same time, the history of ethical thought and the history of

moral development of society are considered by him as the most essential

and a deep layer of world cultural history. However, the fight for

optimistic outlook and life-affirming individual ethics

ended unsuccessfully. Pessimism and social ethics were born. Pessimism as

a reduced will to live - as Schweitzer understands it - is dangerous for culture. BUT

social ethics, in his opinion, neglects the individuality of the individual.

Therefore, as Schweitzer believes, the ideological and

ethical foundations of culture. Such is the essence of the tragedy of mankind. For

to overcome the tragedy, it is necessary, according to Schweitzer, to turn again to ethics,

since it is she, and not a worldview, that is, not philosophy and not religion,

constitutes the essence of every historical type of culture. The essence of the new

ethics Schweitzer declares individual reverence for life.

Reverence for life is the essence of the new historical form

humanism advocated by Schweitzer. This is earthly humanism, fundamentally

different from the theistic humanism of Christianity. Thus, exactly

humanism forms, before Schweitzer, the deepest core of the culture of mankind and in

every historical epoch acts as the main criterion of progress

civilizations of all nations.
In all this train of thought of Schweitzer, there are many conjectures valuable from the point of view of

scientific theory of culture. The thesis that

material achievements in the historical development of civilization become

element of culture only if they are placed at the service of progress

individual and society. Schweitzer's understanding of humanism is productive as

deep core of human culture and as a criterion for the progress of civilization.

Schweitzer stands on the position of historicism even when he raises the question of difference

historical types and forms of humanism. Rejecting as unacceptable to us

solution of these problems from the standpoint of the ethics of reverence for life, we cannot

do not pay tribute to Schweitzer and do not take into account the role of his philosophy of culture in

posing problems that are a worthy subject of study for

modern Marxist-Leninist philosophical theory of culture and the world

cultural and historical process.
The second section of the second part of Schweitzer's philosophy of culture is devoted to the analysis

history of ethics from Greco-Roman times to the beginning of the 20th century. On the stated

ethical concept of moral self-improvement of the individual based on

connection of the ethics of world- and life-affirmation (the origins and foundations of which the author

finds in ancient China) with the ethics of world- and life-denial (origins and principles

of Western European ethics, Schweitzer artificially draws out the struggle between two

these opposing concepts. This simplifies and distorts

the actual historical process of the development of ethical concepts in Europe.

All ethical concepts that lie outside the two trends indicated by Schweitzer

development of world ethical thought, are evaluated by him either as supra-ethical (as,

for example, the ethical views of Hegel), or as socio-ethical

(for example, utilitarianism) and are declared not deserving of serious attention.
Schweitzer's analysis of the history of ethical thought was strongly influenced by

the principle of abstract universal humanism professed by him. Applying the last

as a criterion for evaluating ethical views, Schweitzer credits the entire

antiquity according to the department of egoism. At least until Plato the ethical

The thinking of the Greeks, according to Schweitzer, remains closed in the circle of the egoistic.

Schweitzer highly appreciates the ethics of the late Stoics and early Christianity,

calling them "winter seedlings in the field of the coming culture." highly rated

The ethics of early Christianity is associated with Schweitzer's nihilistic attitude towards

ethical heritage of antiquity. Hence its rigid and

sometimes superficial assessments of the ethical concepts of ancient times. And that is not

less his analysis of the moral progress of mankind, connected with

the collapse of the polis system, the emergence of the concept of "humanity", the birth

ethical doctrine of the late Stoics and early Christian communities, is not

lightweight. It is based on facts that require their study and

explanations from the standpoint of the Marxist-Leninist methodology of the history of cultural

phenomena.
Noting Schweitzer's commitment to the spirit of ethical doctrine in his own way

interpreted Christianity (Schweitzer, in fact, in place of the Christian

principle of love of neighbor put his moral imperative of reverence

before life, but the very system of ethics of individual self-improvement

borrowed from Buddhism and Christianity), one cannot but emphasize that

circumstances that Schweitzer was still alien to uncritical apologetics

church-Christian ethical doctrine. He noted the greatness, historical

the importance of Christian ethics, considered its birth a major step in

moral development of mankind and at the same time clearly pointed to

internal inconsistency of the ethical teachings of Christ, which brought upon himself

the disfavor of both church circles and modern ideologues of the orthodox

Protestantism. So, for example, Schweitzer wrote: "Imbued with enthusiasm, then

there is an outwardly optimistic worldview ethic in

pessimistic worldview - such is the grandiose paradox of the doctrine

Jesus." It is for such and similar statements that Schweitzer is disliked

leaders of Protestant theology - the Niebuhr brothers, Karl Barth, Vogelsang and

other. They spoke more than once about the unbiblical character of religious and

ethical views of Schweitzer. And, of course, they are right: the views of Schweitzer

very far from the moral canon of Christianity.
Although Schweitzer's essay does not give a rigorous picture of the historical

development of ethical systems in Europe, his assessment of many ethical doctrines

are the result of a deep understanding of the history of ethics. Graceful and deadly

essentially a characteristic of the ethical doctrine of reasonable selfishness.
Highly appreciates Schweitzer 1785 in the history of ethics, the year when Kant

Hegel, Schweitzer points out its significant weaknesses and too wide

Hegel's understanding of culture. He categorically condemns and rejects

ethics of positivism and social Darwinism. Schweitzer's thought is inquisitively looking for a way out of

historically contradictory development of individual and social ethics. Neither

one of the syntheses of these polar concepts does not appear to him

satisfactory. He writes: "The ethics of Jesus and the religious thinkers of India

moves away from social ethics to individual ethics. Utilitarianism, which has become

scientific ethics, renounces individual ethics in the name of

social ethics ... Individual ethics without social - imperfect

ethics, which, however, can be very deep and vital. Social

ethics without individuality is an organ isolated from the whole body, not

receiving no vital juices." Schweitzer turns to the search for

individual ethics, which, in his opinion, has a deep social meaning in

ethical heritage of ancient Chinese and ancient Indian thinkers and

religious reformers, with whose concepts he compares ethical

the views of representatives of the German philosophy of life, and above all Schopenhauer

and Nietzsche.
Schweitzer considers Nietzsche and Schopenhauer to be outstanding moralists who

worked to transfer ethical teachings to European soil

ancient Chinese and Indians. Chinese optimism found expression

Schweitzer, in the individual ethics of Nietzsche's life-affirmation, and the Indian

pessimism - in the individual ethics of Schopenhauer's life-denial. merit

and another Schweitzer sees in the fact that they are engaged exclusively in individual

ethics, interpreting the latter as two different planes of manifestation of the will to live.

"With Schopenhauer, the will to live becomes ethical when he turns to

world- and life-denial, in Nietzsche - when he proclaims an in-depth world- and

life affirmation."

According to Schweitzer, social ethics can and should grow only as

realization of individual ethics. This thesis reveals Schweitzer's inherent

anthropological limitations of ethical views. It should be noted

also that academic objectivism and Christian indulgence towards

the weaknesses of sinners clearly prevent Schweitzer from giving a clear and historical

a fair assessment of the reactionary ethical currents of the late XIX and early XX

centuries.
This section concludes with a review of the development of ethical thought in the 1990s and

beginning of the 20th century. This period in the history of bourgeois ethical thought is still

under-researched. Therefore, Schweitzer's work in this

direction is of known interest, although problem analysis is often

turns out to be superficial, not affecting the social significance of various

ethical doctrines. Schweitzer pays special attention to the presentation of ethical

concepts that connect the ethics of moral self-improvement

individual personality with the ethics of utilitarianism (G. Sedgwick, L. Stefen, S.

Alexander, W. Wundt, F. Paulsen, F. Jodl, H. Geffding, G. Simmel). He is not

accepts these concepts, but the search for the connection of individual ethics with ethics

social finds worthy of attention. Analyzing ethical concepts,

representing a protest against the bankrupt ethics of utilitarianism with

positions of Kantianism (G. Cohen, V. Herman, C. Renouvier) and from the positions

intuitionism (D. Martino, F. Bradley, T. Green, S. Lowry, D. Seth), he finds

their fight against the vulgarities of utilitarianism justified, opening an outlet for

individual ethics, so highly valued by him.

Valuable moments in the criticism of ethical concepts of the 90s of the XIX and early

XX century is a strict, condemning analysis of the ethics of pessimism Ed. Hartmann,

a convincing, if somewhat objectivist, critique of ethical beliefs

racists - X. Chamberlain and G. Keyserling; interesting and essential deep

Schweitzer's critical remarks on the ethics of A. Bergson, A. Fulier, J. Guyot

and etc.
The final section of the work "Culture and Ethics" contains a general outline

philosophy of culture of Schweitzer, called by him "The worldview of reverence for

life". Here Schweitzer's own ethical concept is stated. Her

the main ideas are. Not knowledge and not practice, but experience is

essential link between man and the world. The beginning of human existence

is not Cartesian "cogito, ergo sum", but much older and

the all-encompassing feeling: "I am the life that wants to live." Being itself,

Schweitzer, there is a universal will to live. Therefore, the meaning of human life

comes not from the mind and not from the activity itself, but from the will. He

lies in a reverent attitude towards all life: good -

support, nurture life, elevate it to the highest, that is

human, values, it is bad - to destroy life, harm it, constrain it.

Reverence for life and appreciation of man as the highest value constitute,

according to Schweitzer, the basis of the new humanism.
About the need for a new ethics and a new humanism, only vaguely

guessed, according to Schweitzer, representatives of the European philosophy of life and

American pragmatism. The will to live gives impetus to action. But by acting

without thinking, I seem to plow the sea with a plow and sow seeds in the furrows of the waves.

The thinking will immediately encounters suffering and takes

pessimistic character. Therefore, it is not at all accidental that religious

systems have always been pessimistic and did not deceive man with the hope of

earthly happiness. But how can one live without this hope? The self-conscious will understands

that she can only rely on herself. Society is unreliable and besides

or a blind horse that doesn't know where it's going. And woe to the coachman if he

will fall asleep. Therefore, ethics can only be individual, and not ethics at all.

the whole society, which is far from united. But the whole secret, never revealed

moralists of the past is that individual ethics, being

means of self-improvement of the individual, should serve all mankind,

to ensure his continuous moral progress, clearly expressed and

fixed in the progress of culture.
Ethics, according to Schweitzer, cannot be directly oriented towards service.

society. Then it becomes supra-individual, demands from the individual

sacrificial behavior, then it is strictly regulated, dogmatic and

deprives the culture of the spirit of humanism. Progress in the history of ethical thought in our

time, according to Schweitzer, is to boldly evaluate ethics

society is pessimistic. The main thing that aspires to, according to Schweitzer,

the social ethic is to have slaves who don't revolt. Own

Schweitzer's strong condemnation applies to all modern ethical systems

bourgeois society. Even imbued with the spirit of militant individualism,

they have a proud and at the same time illusory claim to serve everything

humanity, the progress of society, while forgetting about the very essence of culture

On the creative moral personality.
Schweitzer's position is different. He writes: sacred is life as such;

ethics is an unlimited responsibility for everything that lives; awe

before life fills me with such anxiety, which the world does not know;

the ethic of reverence for life places a high stake on increasing the feeling

human responsibility. She sees property as property.

society under the sovereign control of the individual. Such an ethical

the position of the individual can be, according to Schweitzer, only a consequence of

ethical mysticism, which he highly values. Under mysticism Schweitzer

understands the sublime, divine destiny of man, manifested in

his affairs. Mysticism has its justification only in and through ethics.

"Ethics must be born out of mysticism. Mysticism, for its part, never

must think that it exists only for its own sake. She doesn't eat

flower, but only its calyx. The flower is ethics. the mystic,

existing only for itself, is a stupid wit." So on

Franciscan manner Schweitzer places God in man and dissolves him in

human deeds and deeds. God turns out to be quite identical

ethical principle in man. Such a train of thought for Schweitzer is

necessity, because he completely rejects the social origins

ethical behavior of the individual, and nature itself guides a person on the path

natural behavior, which is not yet moral and must be

ennobled by ethics. God for Schweitzer only makes sense as

a mysterious will that directs the actions of the individual in the direction of the moral. AT

in the end it turns out that Schweitzer's god is his highest

ethical principle of reverence for life. Clearly, what is the understanding of God

not only is it not biblical, but in general it is very far from

traditional Christianity.
The ethical concept of Schweitzer was strongly imprinted by the German

philosophy of life. His ethics has much in common with the position of S. Kierkegaard (assessment

the role of experience, the meaning of will, the motives of irrationalism, polemics with

rationalism of Descartes and Hegel), but Schweitzer does not accept the hopeless

individualism, the principle of subjective truth, gloomy pessimism. Apparently

for these reasons he never mentions Kierkegaard's philosophy. Personality

Schweitzer does not exist at all, but lives in a constant struggle for happiness, and

moral self-improvement of the individual serves the progress of everything

humanity.
The philosophical position of Schweitzer is in many respects also related to philosophy

life of V. Dilthey. They are united: the assessment of life as a universal value -

human life as the highest value, understanding of progress as spiritual,

historicism as a method of analyzing spiritual phenomena. But Schweitzer does not accept

Diltheev's psychologism and his motives for social ethics. In his essay

history of ethics Schweitzer passes by the ethical concept of Dilthey.
Schweitzer refers to the ancient Chinese and Indian as his predecessors.

moralists, and in the 19th century, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche. They are from opposite

positions developed the ethics of moral self-improvement in the form

concepts of optimism (Chinese thinkers and Nietzsche) and pessimism (Indian

thinkers and Schopenhauer). Arguing with them, Schweitzer critically synthesizes

some aspects of their ethical concepts and on the basis of this synthesis builds

their ethics and their concept of humanism. In contrast to Schopenhauer, he

highly appreciates the will to live, and in contrast to Nietzsche, he sternly

condemns the cult of power. In contrast to both of them, he appears as a passionate

humanist and angrily condemns the war. However, the theoretical basis of humanism

Schweitzer, as well as all his ethics and philosophy of culture, remains in essence

individualistic: the moral progress of the individual acts as

engine and criterion of the history of world culture and civil history in general.

This is a special kind of individualism. Personality Serves Moral Progress

of all mankind and in his service rises to heroic behavior.

If you look for analogies, then you should turn not to Christianity and not to

image of its founder. Much closer to the train of thought and to the

the ascetic activity of Schweitzer, the ethics of Giordano's heroic enthusiasm

Bruno. "What moral victory has been achieved by all mankind if one

the man proudly said: no, I do not submit to evil" - this principle of ethics

heroic individualism of the past revived to a new life by Schweitzer and in

his theory and in his noble missionary work, which has nothing to do with

clergy and clergy.
The ethical concept of Schweitzer has received significant development in the last

his book "The Teaching of Reverence for Life", written by him at the suggestion

Chairman of the People's Chamber of the GDR Herald Götting, who visited the hospital

Schweitzer at Lambarin in August 1961. The book was written during 1962

year and went out of print in the GDR in 1963 (there are already several editions and

translations into European languages). Since in this last book Schweitzer

sums up the results of his long work on the study of ethics and

culture and in a number of significant points complements and refines its

views, it should stop.
First of all, it should be noted that in this book Schweitzer tries to

transcend the narrow horizon of ethical individualism so characteristic of

his previous work. To this end, he raises the question of good as

active moral principle of man. Good expresses activity and

consists in the active activity of a person for the benefit of other people and society.

Activity expresses good only if it is aimed at

improvement of the individual and social order. Thus, in

Schweitzer's individualistic ethics is invaded by a resolutely posed

social motive. Schweitzer is working hard to connect

individual and collectivist principles in the concept of the unity of personal and

human social responsibility. He withdraws his previous thesis that

that transpersonal (that is, social, class, party, collective)

responsibility allegedly belittles personal responsibility. This evolution

the Schweitzer ethics of reverence for life towards overcoming

individualism was highly appreciated by the press of the GDR. Newspaper "National Zeitung"

placed on its pages an editorial "Reverence for life.

Maxim Albert Schweitzer and socialist ethics". It said:

"Schweitzer does not reduce his principle in an undialectical way to the motto

one-sided vegetarianism, but sees it in its deepest recognition

the laws of life. Evil, says Schweitzer, is wanton destruction

life. Good is a contribution to life. This view is embodied

only in activity. Therefore, reverence for life, in understanding

Albert Schweitzer, is identical to the responsibility for life, not only

simply for life, not only for a solitary existence, but also for a worthy

adds new ethical principles. First of all, the principle of "man

to this question he devotes a special section in his last

ethics book. The content of the principle "man to man", explains Schweitzer,

are two main points. First, ethics expresses not just norms

behavior of the individual, and the relationship of solidary cooperation between people;

the progress of the moral development of mankind consists, according to Schweitzer, in

that more and more people are involved in the sphere of solidarity cooperation.

In this regard, their hopes for the further moral development of mankind

he begins to associate with socialism. Secondly, the Schweitzer understanding

goodness (and, accordingly, duty) is characterized by social activity;

the requirements of his ethics are now acting as the norms of an active social

behavior of people connected with each other by the service of personal development

and society, the struggle for lasting peace on earth, the struggle for the real

equality of peoples and races. All this means that in its purely personal

ethics Schweitzer found himself forced to introduce an increasingly significant social

somewhat specific. In mutual assistance, mutual service,

mutual responsibility of people, according to Schweitzer, is practically realized

principle of reverence for life. Of course, the principle of "man to man",

somewhat going beyond the boundaries of ethical individualism, remains an abstract

formula of philosophical anthropology. It is still very far from

Marxist historicism and to the class point of view in solving the problems of ethics,

personality and culture. But the evolution of Schweitzer's views in the direction of rapprochement

individual ethics with social ethics is evident. Death interrupted development

his views in this very significant direction.
Finally, Schweitzer supplements his ethics with another principle - "man and

nature". With this principle, he expanded the scope of ethical responsibility

humanity: all human actions in relation to everything earthly, which

all nature are subject to ethical evaluation. In relation to nature

Schweitzer advises a person to be guided by the principle of conscious

necessity: in this case, a person’s act will be free, moral

and guaranteed from a predatory attitude to the riches of nature. It is impossible not

agree with Schweitzer's protest against the predatory tendencies of technical

progress, especially in the imperialist countries, in relation to

the riches of nature. concern for conservation; and multiplying the wealth of nature

dictated by Schweitzer the expansion of the scope of ethical responsibility and

inclusion in ethics of the principle "man and nature". However, this Schweitzer principle

considers everything still abstractly, outside social conditions, distracted from

fundamental difference in the conditions for its implementation. It is definitely weak

side of a new aspect of Schweitzer's ethics.
Summing up the final assessment of the entire ethical doctrine of Schweitzer, taking into account

the emerging evolution of his views, it should be noted especially his historical

optimism. He was convinced of the victory of social forces providing

moral and cultural progress of mankind; his humanistic ethics

with all the weaknesses inherent in abstract bourgeois humanism,

opposes ethical formalism, traditionalism, relativism,

dominating now in bourgeois ethical concepts.
Schweitzer considered the threat of global

thermonuclear war. And in this he is undoubtedly right. Such a war would

catastrophe for all mankind, the death of culture, a return to savagery, and

not at all the path to supposedly communist progress, as is now believed

some adventuristically minded politicians in China. Such a war cannot

be also a means of artificially preserving capitalism on earth. it

understand the most sober politicians of contemporary bourgeois society.

Schweitzer was always hostile to the cult of power and condemned wars. This

position of pacifism later led him to the camp of active fighters for peace and

disarmament. After receiving the Nobel Peace Prize, Schweitzer spoke with

heartfelt anti-war speech; essential to revitalize

supporters of peace had Schweitzer's anti-war speeches on the radio, his

calls for an end to thermonuclear testing, unconditional support

Moscow Treaty on the Ban on Nuclear Weapons Tests. He called for

the speedy restoration of peace in Vietnam, was keenly interested in the affairs of his

homeland: condemned attempts to revive fascism in Germany, followed the successes

cultural and economic development in the GDR, tied the hopes of mankind

to a lasting peace with the successes of world socialism.
Schweitzer devoted his life to serving humanity, its moral

progress, the revival of culture, the defense of humanism. Serving these purposes

subordinated to him is the philosophy of culture. "Reverence for life," he wrote,

It rejects the purely individualistic (that is, elitist in the understanding

Schweitzer. - V.K.) and spiritual (that is, Hegelian, extra-ethical. - V.K.)

man to neglect the interests of the world." No matter how we treat ourselves

ethical principle of reverence for life, the consequences that

him Schweitzer - fair and noble. The idea of internal unity of ethics and

culture, the requirement to make humanism and moral development of the individual

criteria for the progress of culture, protection of the principle of equality of all people on earth

regardless of the color of their skin, adamant anti-militarism and anti-fascism in

beliefs and practical activities - all these are features of his appearance, which

give you reason to characterize Schweitzer as an outstanding moral

phenomenon in the life of bourgeois society in an era of deep crisis of its culture.
In Marxist literature, when assessing the place and role of Schweitzer in culture

in modern bourgeois society it is customary to compare him with Don Quixote. it

the comparison is not without foundation: Schweitzer is really old-fashioned, lonely,

heroic, noble, he is a beacon by which many in modern bourgeois

society align the course in their moral development. And at the same time, he

bitter reproach to the soullessness, inhumanity of bourgeois society, dooming

culture to decay and destruction. However, this comparison is one-sided. It

does not take into account the positive aspects of his philosophy of culture. Like Prometheus,

who was, by Marx's definition, the noblest saint and martyr in

philosophical calendar, Schweitzer carried to people, like a spark stolen from God, his

torch of the ethics of reverence for life, to protect humanism, to ensure

the revival of culture, to strengthen peace on earth, to defend the equality of people of color and

white peoples. It was a fighter, and not just a thinker and missionary doctor. And

he fought not with windmills, but with the most real incarnations

social evil on earth - racism, militarism, fascism, genocide,

wars. This is his greatness. It was a lone fighter. In it in the first place

for the most part, the thinker acted, illusoryly believing that the righteous word

will make its own way. This is his tragedy. It is an expression in

the fate of an outstanding personality of a great social tragedy - the crisis of culture

modern bourgeois society. The theory indicated a way out of this crisis

Marxism, socialism practically puts an end to this tragedy of culture.
V. Karpushin
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Albert SCHWEITZER "Culture and Ethics"
Part one. Decay and revival of culture.
Wines of Philosophy in the Decline of Culture.
We live in conditions characterized by the decline of culture. And not a war

created this situation - she herself is only its manifestation. All that has gone before

spiritual in the life of society, embodied in facts, which are now in their

turn again have a negative impact on the spiritual principle.

The interaction between the material and the spiritual took on a fatal character. FROM

laboriously passing a terrible waterfall, we are trying to move forward in the stream,

seething with ominous whirlpools. Only at the cost of incredible stress

it is possible - if there is any hope at all - to withdraw the ship of our

fate from a dangerous side arm, where he evaded through our fault, and again

direct to the mainstream.
We have left the high road of cultural development, because we do not

it is common to think about the fate of what is commonly called culture.

At the turn of the century, under a variety of names, a whole series of

writing about our culture. As if by some secret wave, their authors

did not try to find out the state of our spiritual life, but were interested in

solely by the way it has evolved historically. On the relief map

culture, they fixed real and imaginary paths that, crossing

mountains and valleys of the historical landscape, brought us from the Renaissance to the XX

century. The historical approach of the authors has triumphed. The masses taught by them

experienced satisfaction in perceiving their culture as an organic

the product of so many spiritual and

social forces. No one, however, bothered to install the components of our

spiritual life. No one has checked how noble the ideas that drive her, and

to what extent it can contribute to genuine progress.
As a result, we crossed the threshold of the century with unshakable

fantastic ideas about themselves. What was written at that time

about our culture, strengthened our naive belief in its value. To the one who

expressed doubt, looked with surprise. Someone, already half lost with

way, again returned to the main road, frightened by the path leading to

side; others continued to walk along it, but silently. Submissions, in power

where they were, doomed them to isolation.
But now it is already obvious to everyone that the self-destruction of culture is going on.

full swing. Even what is still left of her is unreliable. It is still producing

the impression of something durable, as it has not experienced destructive pressure

from outside, to which everything else has already fallen victim. But its foundation is also

unstable, the next landslide can take him with him into the abyss. How,

Schweitzer A.

Culture and ethics

Translation from German by N. A. Zakharchenko, G. V. Kolshansky
M.: Progress, 1973. - 343 p.

Format: Djvu 8.5 MB

Quality: scanned pages + text layer

Language: Russian

"Culture and ethics" - this problem is becoming more and more urgent in our time, because the development of civilization in the 20th century has already reached a point where the culture of bourgeois society, devoid of an ethical principle, increasingly threatens the well-being and existence of man on Earth. It is necessary to fully appreciate the danger posed to the future of mankind by the so-called "mass culture" of bourgeois society, which does not have solid moral foundations, is saturated with the ideas of violence, robbery, the cult of sex and continuously corrupts the human dignity of many generations.
On the other hand, a step of the greatest importance is being taken in the moral development of mankind: mankind, having lost faith in capitalism, turns away from the ethics of individualism, which has degenerated into a cult of egoism and money-grubbing, and turns its eyes to the ethics of collectivism, born in modern times by the proletariat and developed by socialism.
In connection with these processes, which are polar opposites in the moral development of mankind, there is naturally a revival of public interest in the problems of ethics and culture.

CONTENT

from publisher 3

foreword 5

Part one
collapse and revival of culture
i. Wines of Philosophy in the Decline of Culture 33
ii. culturally hostile circumstances in our economic and spiritual life 40
iii. basic ethical character of culture 51
iv. the path to the revival of culture 68
v. culture and worldview 78

part two
culture and ethics
i. crisis of culture and its spiritual cause 97
ii. the problem of an optimistic outlook 106
iii. ethical problem 112
iv. religious and philosophical outlook 119
v. ethics and culture in Greco-Roman philosophy 123
vi. optimistic outlook and ethics in the era during the Renaissance and after the Renaissance 150
vii. substantiation of ethics in the 17th and 18th centuries 159
viii. laying the foundations of culture in the age of rationalism 175
ix. optimistic-ethical worldview of Kant 188
x. natural philosophy and worldview of Spinoza and Leibniz 197)
xi. Fichte's optimistic-ethical worldview 205
xi. Schiller, Goethe, Schleiermacher 215
xiii. over-ethical optimistic outlook of Hegel 219
xiv. late utilitarianism. biological and sociological ethics 226
xv. Schopenhauer and Nietzsche 238
xvi. the outcome of the struggle of European philosophy for a worldview 252
xviii. new path 272
xviii. substantiation of optimism through the concept of the will to live 278
xix. the problem of ethics in the light of the history of ethics xx. the ethics of self-denial and the ethics of self-improvement 284
xxi. ethics of reverence for life 294
xxi. the culture-creating energy of the ethics of reverence for life 304