Philosophy of the Modern Era

The Doctrine of Man and Society

The philosophy of the Early Modern period shapes a new conception of humanity and society. The foundations were laid by Bacon and Descartes, while English philosophers such as Hobbes and Locke, along with economists like Adam Smith and David Ricardo, and French Enlightenment thinkers (Voltaire, Montesquieu, Helvétius, Rousseau, and others) completed the formation of a new paradigm in understanding man and society, which continues to influence our perspectives on these issues today.

It has already been noted that Early Modern philosophy perceives the cognitive process as an object-subject relationship, where the subject is the individual, thereby excluding both the ancient logos and the Christian God from this process. The first rule of Descartes' method establishes the clarity of human reason as the measure of knowledge's truth, placing the success of practical activity directly in relation to one's knowledge. Thus, although God holds a significant role within Descartes' philosophical system as the creator and guarantor of the existence of the world and other individuals, He is effectively excluded from human life and activity, pushed out of the equation. Descartes initiated the situation that Nietzsche would later declare in the late 19th century: "God is dead. We have killed Him."

However, Early Modern philosophy redefines the place and role of humanity not only within the cognitive process but also in the life of society as a whole. The core tenets of Early Modern philosophy regarding humanity can be summarized as follows: "By nature, people are good. The goal of their lives is well-being in this world, not bliss in the afterlife. This goal can be achieved by individuals through knowledge ('knowledge is power'). The greatest obstacles are ignorance, superstition, and intolerance. As individuals become more educated, they automatically become more moral. Therefore, the world will advance through education..."

Reason is possessed by all, not just the privileged. Natural rights protect the individual from social privileges and tyranny. The subject of moral theory is the educated personal interest: each person seeks and should seek the best for themselves. The sociological thesis regarding the harmony of personal interests posits that "each person's struggle for their own interest should contribute to the common good."

Thus, according to this new worldview, individuals are the creators of their own destinies. Possessing feelings and reason, they are capable of comprehending the laws of the universe and their own enduring nature, and, based on this knowledge, they can build a just society where all individuals are equal, where there is no class division, and where property rights and personal freedom are ensured.

The state, in its origin, has purely earthly and natural causes. The most widely accepted theory of the state in Early Modern philosophy is the theory of the "social contract," developed by English philosophers Hobbes and Locke, and the French philosopher Rousseau. According to these thinkers, in their natural state, society is characterized by the absence of the state. Thus, Early Modern philosophy breaks from the ancient tradition that equated society with the state. In this natural state, all individuals were equal and free, as "nature created all people equal in physical and mental abilities..." All three philosophers agree on this point. However, their views diverge regarding the causes of the state's emergence.

Hobbes argues that in the natural state, "as long as people live without a common power to keep them all in fear, they are in that condition known as war, and it is indeed a state of war of all against all." There is no notion of just or unjust, as there is no law; no one can guarantee safety, and all individuals seek self-preservation. Therefore, people enter into a contract, endowing one person or an assembly of people to represent them and empowering them to govern in exchange for security, peace, and general protection.

In contrast to Hobbes, Locke does not believe that the natural state is characterized by a war of all against all. The transition to the state occurs not out of fear for life but because individuals begin to understand that in a politically organized society, their rights—particularly the right to private property and security—will be better guaranteed than in the natural state. The state, according to Locke, should maintain order and protect private property but should not interfere in economic activities and trade, where private interests prevail. Locke is rightly considered the founder of the ideology of liberalism, which reduces the role of the state to that of a "night watchman."

Rousseau, on the other hand, asserts that in the natural state—before people learned agriculture and metallurgy—they lived "free, healthy, good, and happy." However, as the division of labor arises, so too do private property and conflicting interests, leading to social inequality. Under these conditions, the wealthy offer the poor a contract meant to ensure peace and justice. Thus, the state is created, gradually separating from society and becoming a usurper of power that disdains the law. Unlike Hobbes and Locke, Rousseau advocates for popular sovereignty, believing that the people have the right to overthrow their ruler if he does not serve their interests. The sovereignty of the people is inalienable.

In the 18th century, the French political theorist Charles-Louis Montesquieu (1689-1755) articulated one of the most important principles for state construction, which still underpins all civilized states and serves as a marker of a state's democratic nature—the principle of the separation of powers. Montesquieu posits that since any power tends toward absolutism, it is necessary for the three branches of government—legislative, executive, and judicial—to be relatively autonomous. In this way, each branch acts as a counterbalance to the other two, preventing the concentration of political power in any one governmental entity.