Philosophy of the Modern Age and the Enlightenment

The Development of Empiricism

The principles of empiricism, first articulated by Bacon, found further development in the philosophy of the English materialist Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679). Hobbes was a classical representative of nominalism, asserting that only the particular truly exists, while general concepts are merely names. All knowledge, in his view, is derived from experience. The subject of philosophy, according to Hobbes, is the body—this concept holds fundamental significance in his worldview, encompassing physical, natural, and material bodies. Of these, the human body is of paramount importance.

Hobbes constructed his philosophical system through a series of works: On the Body (1655), On Man (1658), and On the Citizen (1642), collectively known as the Elements of Philosophy. The largest and most significant of his works is Leviathan, or The Matter, Form, and Power of a Commonwealth Ecclesiastical and Civil (1651). This work stands as a summation of Hobbes' philosophical doctrine, marking a distinct epoch in the development of European culture.

Human nature, Hobbes argues, is fundamentally distinguished from animal nature only by reason and spirituality. In human society, the individual and the private are primary, while the collective and the state are secondary and derivative—this stance fully aligns with Hobbes' nominalist methodology. In Leviathan, Hobbes sought to explain the origin and essence of the most complex phenomenon of social life: the state.

Hobbes departs from the ancient understanding of society and the state (Aristotle famously said, "Man is a political animal"). At the core of Hobbes' understanding of the state lies the notion of two stages in the development of any human society. The natural state (status naturalis) is one in which no state organization exists; the formation of a state marks a people's transition from the natural state to the civil or political state (status civilis).

According to Hobbes, the natural state of human life is characterized by the utmost intensity of existence and the dominance of natural law. The reign of natural law allows individuals in need to seize the property of others. This unrestricted human freedom, driven by the pursuit of self-preservation by any means, is a manifestation of human nature’s instinct for survival (and, perhaps, that of all living beings). This gives rise to the fundamental contradiction between natural law and the conditions of life itself.

Hobbes based his doctrine on an analysis of human nature and passions: rivalry, greed, distrust, and vanity—all of which make enemies of people, even when they live within the same state. The natural state is one of "war of all against all," a condition that threatens society with self-destruction. Hence, the vital necessity arises for all individuals to replace the natural state with the civil, or political, state.

The defining feature of this new state is the presence of sovereign and absolutely binding authority over all citizens without exception. Such authority is established through a social contract entered into by isolated individuals, thereby transforming them into citizens. The social contract, contrary to some misconceptions, is not an agreement between citizens and the state, as the state itself is the product of this contract. Once entered into, the contract obliges citizens to follow the "Golden Rule" as set forth in the New Testament: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

Hobbes viewed the state's authority as a self-sufficient value, arising from the voluntary surrender of the majority of individuals’ natural rights, which they cannot later reclaim. The state, once formed in this manner, is aptly named the "Great Leviathan"—the biblical monster—symbolizing the tremendous power and invincibility of this human creation. This Leviathan, created by human beings, takes on a life of its own, rises above its creators, and escapes their control. It rules over its subjects, while they are rendered powerless under its reign. Thus, the state's role is to punish, while the citizen's duty is to obey.

To Hobbes, the state is a biblical monster, a great beast known as Leviathan, wherein:

• the soul of the state is its supreme authority;
• judges and officials are its joints;
• counselors are its memory;
• laws are its reason and will;
• rewards and punishments are its nerves;
• unrest is Leviathan's sickness;
• civil war is its death;
• prosperity is its strength;
• the people’s security is its work and purpose.

The idea of the human being as the creator of the state mirrors the process of divine creation through the alienation of a significant portion of natural rights previously held by individuals. For Hobbes, the state is a vast artificial human (or earthly god) created for the protection and preservation of natural human beings. He sought to devise an ideal state, where reason governs, arbitrariness is absent, and politics is grounded in science (as precise as geometry).

Once the state is formed through the social contract, an absolutely sovereign political authority emerges, responsible for ensuring adherence to the contract. This authority holds the exclusive right to legislate, enforce laws, appoint officials, and collect taxes.

Hobbes identified three forms of government: democracy, aristocracy, and monarchy. He disapproved of democracy, believing that "the common people lack great wisdom"; democracy, in his view, breeds factions that lead to civil war. Aristocracy is preferable when it bears little resemblance to popular rule, and it is most perfect when it gravitates towards monarchy. The best form of government, according to Hobbes, is monarchy, as it alone fulfills the ideal of absolute and undivided authority.

Thomas Hobbes was a lifelong proponent of strong central authority and a steadfast opponent of dividing power. In his view, the division of power only leads to its weakening.

In Hobbes's social philosophy, the state and society cannot be entirely equated due to the incomplete alienation of the individual’s natural rights in favor of the bearers of state authority upon its establishment. Thus, Hobbes stands as one of the founders of the theory of social contract, state sovereignty, and the socio-philosophical concept of the alienation of power in the early modern era.

Empiricism reached its most vivid expression in the works of John Locke (1632—1704). Empiricism (from the Greek empeiria, meaning experience) is a philosophical doctrine that recognizes experience as the only reliable means of knowledge. Locke's major works include Essays on the Law of Nature (1662—1664) and An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, published in 1690. Locke entered the history of philosophy as the thinker who provided a classical definition of sensualism and rejected any a priori knowledge.

Locke recognized two sources from which our initial data arise and upon which our knowledge is based: a) External experience — sensations and perceptions triggered by the external world; b) Internal experience — reflection, or the study of the cognitive act itself, that is, the process of self-knowledge. A necessary condition for reflection is the constant flow of impressions from objective reality. Thus, the central thesis of sensualist philosophy is, "There is nothing in the intellect that was not first in the senses."

Critiquing René Descartes' doctrine of innate ideas, Locke argued that all ideas originate from experience, and complex ideas are formed as combinations of simple ones.

According to Locke, the state is created to guarantee natural rights: the right to property, the right to freedom, and the right to life. In the state of nature, all individuals are equal, free, and possess property. The state's duty is to guarantee and protect these natural (inalienable) rights, which cannot be surrendered to anyone's advantage. From this, Locke derived one of the key principles of his social theory: "For no man in society can be exempted from the laws of that society."

Locke passionately welcomed the Glorious Revolution of 1688, which established constitutional monarchy in England under William of Orange (1533—1584), opening the door for the bourgeoisie to gain influence in governance.

George Berkeley (1685—1753) emerged as a key figure in post-revolutionary England. Born in Ireland and a graduate of Dublin University, Berkeley's first major work was An Essay Towards a New Theory of Vision (1709). His most significant philosophical work, A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge (1710), established him as a staunch advocate of idealism and a defender of religion.

According to Berkeley, the only true substance is spirit, or that which perceives color, form, motion, smell, taste, and the like. It is, however, an obvious contradiction to claim that an idea could exist within an unperceived object. To have an idea is synonymous with perceiving properties like color and form in the object where they reside. This leads to the conclusion that the notion of an unthinkable substance (substrate) for ideas is untenable.

Thus, according to Berkeley, all things are merely complexes of our sensations, and their existence is given to us solely in our perceptions. In real life, we perceive a sequence of ideas, some recurring, others vanishing forever. There must, therefore, be a cause for these ideas, one that they depend upon. Berkeley argued that this cause could not be a quality, an idea, or a collection of ideas. The cause must be a substance. For Berkeley, the only possible cause of ideas is an immaterial active substance, or spirit.

The nature of spirit, or the agent, is such that it cannot be perceived in itself, but only through its actions. It is energy, not ergon — work. Hence, spirit is a simple, indivisible, and active entity. As the generator of ideas, Berkeley calls it "mind," and as the executor of actions upon them, "will."

The concept of matter, Berkeley argues, is the most abstract and incomprehensible of all ideas, fraught with contradictions, and should be permanently discarded. Materialists accused Berkeley of denying the existence of things. "I do not at all deny the existence of things that we can perceive through the senses or contemplation. The things I see with my eyes and touch with my hands exist in reality," Berkeley asserted, a claim in which he had no doubts, nor should we. The only thing he denied was what philosophers call matter or corporeal substance. The rejection of this concept, he claimed, would cause no harm to humanity, which would not notice its absence. However, atheists need this phantom to support their godlessness, and philosophers, perhaps, imagine that they will lose a pretext for idle talk. This is the only loss Berkeley foresaw if the term "matter" were eliminated.

Empiricism’s emphasis on the role of experience played an extraordinarily important role in shaping scientific methodology. However, the attempt to reduce all knowledge to experiential data ultimately revealed the limitations of empiricism. David Hume (1711—1776) pointed out several problems that arise from strict adherence to empirical principles. The most significant issues were the problem of induction and the problem of causality.

The problem of induction is that conclusions derived inductively rarely provide reliable knowledge. Even if a pattern has been observed hundreds, thousands, or even millions of times, this does not guarantee that it will not be contradicted in the future. A classical example is the belief that "All swans are white," which was universally accepted until black swans were discovered in Australia. Thus, generalizations drawn from inductive reasoning cannot be considered entirely reliable, revealing the method’s inherent limitations.

Regarding causality, Hume argued that strict empiricism cannot justify the existence of causal relationships. Experience reflects only isolated events, while the connection between them is not immediately given in experience. For instance, when one billiard ball strikes another, and the second ball begins to move, experience shows only the sequence of events: the first ball moves, touches the second, and then the second starts to roll. The statement that the first ball caused the second ball to move is an assumption, not directly evident in experience. As a result, natural laws, which describe cause-and-effect relationships, cannot be derived solely from experience. Yet, discovering regularities in the world remains one of the primary goals of scientific inquiry, showing that empiricism cannot provide a fully reliable method for this task.

The limitations of empiricism, thus, prompted the search for a new methodology, which Immanuel Kant later developed in response to the issues raised by Hume.