Friday, 20.10.2017, 13:39
The Revelation of the Genius Hazrat
Main | Sign Up | Login Welcome Guest | RSS
Site menu
Login form
The origins of atheism belong to the distant history of the pore, when the development of social work experience has allowed to accumulate a relatively large amount of knowledge and the creation of writing made it possible to accelerate their accumulation and enhancement. On the other hand, it was the epoch when the first exploiter system has provided small minority of people the opportunity to engage in political, artistic and scientific work with responsibility for most of the burden of physical labor of slavery. At that time, as opposed to ideas, where real knowledge was submerged in a mass of mythological and fantastic tales and poetic images, conceived a system of knowledge about nature, about people and their minds, the laws that govern the world and thinking.

The very first step, people trying to understand the world, have led to a demand take nothing for granted, consider true only what is proved reasonable arguments based on facts. This gives rise to the first beginnings of science and scientific outlook.

This initial scientific, atheistic worldview is essentially constituted materialism as "materialist worldview simply means understanding the nature for what it is, without any extraneous additions, and so the Greek philosophers, it was originally something for granted" (Marx, K, F Engels Collected Works, Vol., v. 20, p.. 513).

The struggle between scientific and religious world is complicated and intertwined with the struggle between materialism and idealism. At the heart of this struggle were the social conflicts. Itself a radical contrast to the scientific, materialistic, atheistic worldview and religious idealist not immediately and not fully aware of its participants. The pioneers of scientific thought often could not get rid of some of the prevailing religious beliefs, and among their opponents, some were injected into their system as a whole anti-scientific material that contains scientific knowledge about the nature of man, of his thinking. In addition, religion and philosophy "relationship with their representations of the material conditions of existence all the more confused, more and more obscured by intermediate links. But still it exists "(Marx, Engels F Op., T 21,. 312). Thus, the conflict between materialism and idealism of Plato Democritus associated with the conflict between democracy and aristocracy in Athens.
sm in Ancient India
Ancient India for a period of religious books - the Vedas (the middle of the 2nd millennium BC. Oe.) Characterized by the worship of deified forces of nature. Later, with the formation of slave society, there is a belief in God is growing mythology. Holy books - the Vedas is attributed to a divine origin and indisputable. Rebel against authority of the Vedas first Indian scientists, philosophers school lokayata (Charvaka) - Brihaspati, Dhishan and others (VIv. BC. Oe).

Philosophers lokayata claim that no god (inshvary) No, no one that the world was created and exists eternally in its laws. All things are made of earth, water, light and wind. Variously combined, these elements form all things, including humans. Separately each of the elements of consciousness does not, but with a special connection, they form a body endowed with consciousness. With the destruction of the body will inevitably disappear, and consciousness. That is told in the Vedas about the afterlife and paradise, is a lie, including and then, if an animal killed for sacrifice, goes to heaven. If this were true, said lokayata, the loving son would have sacrificed his father, that he was in heaven.

According to the view lokayata, nature is indifferent to everything human, its properties do not have anything to do with moral rules either in nature or in human history, there is no expediency.

Very close to these views, a prominent representative of the school Sankhya Kapila (c. VI. BC BC).. Things whose existence can not be proved persuasive arguments, not taught Kapila. Neither perception nor inference, nor by analogy the existence of God is not confirmed, but it is the only reliable form of knowledge. Consequently, there is no God.

Nothing stated Kapila, can not arise from nothing. Of quite specific things appear quite specific things. First serve as a basis for the latter, and both are composed of eternal matter - prakriti, which is the cause of all things.

Everything is made of atoms. From non-living bodies are formed live, between the two is difficult to draw a sharp line. The emergence of consciousness in the body, consisting of the elements, devoid of consciousness, Kapila explains as lokayata.

In the belief system of Kapila is contained inconsistencies - the doctrine of purusha. In addition to the matter, devoid of consciousness, Kapila admits more subtle element with consciousness - Purusha, which has neither beginning nor end, and omniscient, but not in contact with matter. Matter is active and constantly changing: purusha passive and unchanging
Atheism in Ancient China
The emergence of anti-religious materialism and ideas in ancient China, is closely associated with the development of science, especially astronomy. Records of solar eclipses, Chinese scientists have begun to over a thousand years BC. Oe. For centuries in China were monitoring the movement of light, and in the IV. BC. Oe. there was the first in the history of the star catalog. Installed astronomers frequency motion of celestial bodies played an important role in the promotion of the idea of ​​objective law - Tao, managing all happens in nature.

Even in the era of the Western Zhou (XI-VIII cc. BC. Oe.) In China was put forward by the position of "supreme being can not exist! The world is formed of five elements, namely metal, wood, water, fire and earth "

Further development of these ideas can be clearly seen in the extant of the famous book "The Tao Te Ching" (IV-III century. BC. E..) In this work, carried out the idea that the world is not run by God, but inherent to the world law - dao. God - creator of the world in the book is not mentioned. Dao determines infallibly the whole course of events and eliminates the possibility of something supernatural.

Materialistic and anti-religious ideas are a significant development in Sun Tzu (III century BC. Oe.) Denied the existence of God or some other supernatural force controlling natural Wang Chung (I in. N. E.), A major materialist and atheist Ancient China, in his book "Lun-Hen," proclaims that the world is eternal, it forms the basis substance (Qi), from which all things arise and into which they grow. The universe has no purpose. Things appear by themselves, they are the work of something of the spirit is made of all natural law, under which all occurs sooner or later dies. There is no immortality of consciousness, just as there is no immortality of the body. Wang Chung makes demands to be met cognition: the truth and falsehood of the case decides only experience, but truth and falsehood of the dispute - only proof.
Atheism in Ancient Greece
In ancient Greece, the first attempts to understand the scientific materialist philosophers of the world have taken the Milesian school (VII-VI centuries. BC BC.) - Thales, Anaximander and Anak-Seaman. They sought to explain the world from itself, without resorting to vnepri-family, supernatural forces. Milesians made very valuable contributions to science - in math, astronomy, physics, biology.

Heraclitus (c. 540-480), Empedocles (c. 490-430), Anaxagoras (500-428) were separated and further developed the view Milesians, according to which the universe exists eternally, is not created by gods and ruled not by them but by the natural pattern. "This space, says Heraclitus, - the same for everything, it gives no god and no man, he always was, is and will forever live fire, measures and actions fading lights up." According to Empedocles, the foundation of the world forms the eternal uncreatable and indestructible matter, reduced to four "roots": earth, water, air and fire, And Anaxagoras in a statement eternity of matter goes further. He argues that not only matter in general, but each of its qualitatively distinct particles gomeomery - never created nor destroyed ever. Anaxagoras, however, introduced into his system of mind - a force that causes particles of matter in order. However, the extant fragments of Anaxagoras works can be seen that by this intelligence, he understood the material momentum rather than some sort of objective consciousness. The mind does not create peace, not control them, but only gives him a push, after which no effect on the course of events has not. These philosophers are unanimous in recognizing and reigning in the world of objective law.

The ratio of the period of the materialists to religion contains some new elements compared to the Milesians. Although the views of these three philosophers still not free from mythological elements, but can not help noticing that they interpret the world is not only non-religious, like the Milesians, but anti-religious.

The same period applies to the activities of Diagoras of Miletus, who stated explicitly in his writings that no gods, the cult of the gods ridiculous, and proves it by the fact that people who commit evil deeds, prosper, and good people suffer persecution (which would not be, if b there the gods that control the destinies of men).

Famous philosopher Democritus (ca. 460-370 years. BC. Oe.), Whose works on mathematics, astronomy, physics, biology, sociology, ethics, aesthetics, logic, epistemology contained large discoveries have been the greatest thinker of antiquity, who raised materialism to inaccessible to the height of his predecessors. The situation prior to materialism and atheism of the eternity of the universe in favor of Democritus in the form of the doctrine of eternity, its foundation - the atoms. In this case, unlike Anaxagoras, who saw in something inert matter that needs to brought in from outside the movement (think easy might lead to religion), Democritus said motion feature, organically inherent in the atoms. Uncreatability indestructibility and he attributes not only matter but also the movement.

Democritus eliminates interference targeting out-of-the forces of nature in natural processes. He claims the undivided rule of causation, rejecting the gods as the creators of the world and its rulers. Opinion on the existence of gods, Democritus asserted - "cunning invention ... in fact they do not, but their existence is recognized only by certain precepts and practices adopted at this or that nation. "

Yet Democritus did not been consistent in his views. He said that the air rush images composed of fire atoms, that "some of them beneficial, others malevolent ... They portend the future of people ...". These images Democritus called gods. But the gods are not omnipotent and Democritus are not immortal.

The greatest atheist of antiquity, whose teaching has become synonymous with atheism, was Epicurus (341-270 years. BC. E..) This glory he justly deserved, by developing a comprehensive, based on the philosophical heritage of Democritus, the atheistic worldview. "Epicurus ... - Marx and Engels wrote - was a genuine radical educator antiquity, he openly attacked the ancient religion, and he goes back atheism Romans ... "(Marx, Engels F Op. V. 3, sec. 127) .

The starting point of Epicurus: "Nothing comes from a non-existent if it were not so, then everything would take place from all eternity ...". Hence the universe, which precludes its creation by the gods, and the denial of any forces outside of nature and able to work on it.

One of the sources of religion, according to Epicurus - the lack of knowledge about the world. The greatest harm done by religion, he saw that it makes people unhappy, depressed by fear for their fate. Epicurus condemns those who "have any scientific field research into the nature and descends into the region of myth." Scientific research should dispel the mystery. This study proves that the heavenly bodies as material, as well as earthly bodies, which move the stars, as well as earthquakes, hurricanes , thunder, lightning, etc. - natural phenomena, subject to the laws of nature, not gods.

Particularly strongly refutes faith in Epicurus another world, where Greek mythology promised endless human suffering. Outside the worldly material world, he argues, is nothing.

As one of the major arguments against religion, Epicurus uses the idea of ​​religious perfection, tranquility and happiness the highest of the gods. Attributed to the gods control the fate of people and nature - meant to deprive them of all these attributes to identify them with mortals. Therefore, concludes Epicurus, serenity and bliss of the gods exclude their leadership role in the world. But this argument has another side: in the doctrine of Epicurus thus preserved the remains of religious beliefs. He taught that the spaces inhabited by mezhmirovyh some creatures do not interfere in the affairs of men, neither in the affairs of nature. The gods. They are composed of atoms and therefore mortal. But they are absolutely serene: they have realized the ideal of the sage, to which people should strive.

In the ancient world was a very popular anti-religious arguments developed by the Greek philosophical school of skepticism. Defending the principle of refraining from judgments, including those on the existence of gods, skeptics have claimed that perform common rituals of religion, not because they share her beliefs, but because they do not oppose the lifestyle demands of society. However, taking such a position is fundamentally different from the militant atheism Epicureans, Skeptics subjected to devastating criticism of the foundations of religious ideology, showed utter absurdity of religious belief.

In favor of religion, was nominated in that era argued that all or almost all people believe in gods and it is unlikely they are all wrong. On this prominent representative of skepticism Carneades (214-129 years BC. Oe.) Argued that most people because of their ignorance often go astray, and so conventional wisdom says not to its truth. In addition, says Carneades, there are people who do not believe in gods, there are people among the religious people who reject the existence of gods, then, does wrong, that in this respect there is general agreement this skeptic rejects vnemirovogo God, the creative world, and the doctrine of God, coinciding with the world.

Particularly thorough and convincing a skeptical critique of the doctrine of providence, purpose of which is subject to all of the universe (teleology). With regard to nature, said Carneades, the regularity with which committed repetitive motion of celestial bodies, the tides and other natural phenomena does not prove that all of this - it gods.

Carneades objected to religious teaching that the gods, controlling the affairs of men, sent all the events of our lives to some - a good purpose: "If the gods really cared about the human race, they would have to make all people good or at least surround sound care good people. "But in fact, prevails in society an injustice. people have a good tight and villains, with impunity, committing villainy prosper. Supporters of religion in this usually answer: blame here are not gods and men: the gods gave them a reason to good use, and people use them for low cases, because people vicious. In this regard, Carneades dare make such a reproach to the deity, "You say that the fault lies in the vices of man? We had to give people such a mind, which would rule out the vices and guilt!" Either we must admit the religious argument that "no matter where you turned providence, it can do whatever he wants", then God - to blame the evil that reigns in his life. But what is God? Or should reject the omnipotence of God, but in this case it loses its divinity.

No less convincing arguments of Sextus Empiricus (II cent.). If God says he is concerned about the fate of the world, then either the world or a part of it. But many in the world of evil, which means that everything the world God does not care. So, if he cares about the fate of the world, but the fate of its parts, is possible only when one of the following alternatives: either God can and wants to extend its care to the whole world, or he wants to take care of the whole world, but can not, or he does not want to do this, although it may, or he does not want and can not take care of the world.

The first of these alternatives there is no, because there is evil in the world. If we adopt the second alternative, God is deprived of omnipotence. If we take the third, God is being jealous, and if we accept the latter alternative, and he will be weak and envious. So how to take one of these alternatives is necessary, is to recognize that God does not care about the world. "If he has no worries about anything and has no concern and action, then nobody can say how he perceives the existence of God. And because of this, it means that nevospriemlemo whether there is a god. "

Atheism in Ancient Rome
In Roman society Epicureanism had a significant number of supporters. This school has existed there for about six centuries - from II. BC. Oe. to the IV. Mr. Oe. If from a huge scientific legacy of Democritus, Epicurus and other atheists, ancient Greece to have survived only a few small pieces and then Rome has left us the only full extant ancient philosophical atheist major product of one of the great antiquity of the materialists and atheists - Titus Lucretius (1v. BC. e..) The famous poem "On the Nature of Things" comprehensively covers and justifies the doctrine of Epicurus, criticizing idealism. But the chief object of her critics - a religion which Lucretius contrasts science research based on established facts accurately and reasonably, their natural explanation.

The starting point of Lucretia - "Things can not occur out of nothing and being born into nothing to address." Thesis that "all matter exists eternally," appears here as the indestructibility of atoms and uncreatability with whom uncreatable indestructible and their inherent "movement, in which primary cells are forever. "As the god of creation and introduction into the world outside-strongly rejected.

All the world is done by the same laws which exclude any interference of any mysterious forces in the natural course of events. The world is not only not made by gods. He and they have not managed.

No gods, but natural causes are responsible for the course of events, which do not have the appropriate, which, according to religious people, proves the existence of the gods. Nature, therefore, is "devoid of the proud owners, all the will of its own without the participation of the gods created."

Lucretius puts a convincing critique of not only religious ideas, but also the idealistic doctrine of the immortality of the soul of Plato.

Giving a scientific explanation of all phenomena, distorted religious beliefs, the poet responds to the question about the causes of these beliefs. This fear of death due to lack of knowledge of the nature of body and spirit and entailing belief in the afterlife, the immortality of the soul, etc. Further, it is the fear of the terrible natural phenomena of nature, due to ignorance of their real causes. One of the reasons for belief in gods is the ignorance of the laws of nature, by which the heavenly bodies make their moves in a certain order, which is completely groundless attributed to the gods. By faith in the gods has also led, according to Lucretius, the ignorance of natural phenomena that underlie dreaming.

Unlike many other ancient thinkers, who saw in religion only false, untenable view, Lucretius to an even greater extent than Epicurus sees in religion is not only wrong, but above all extremely harmful and detrimental to human teachings.

In joining the opinion of Epicurus, Lucretius shows that religion makes people unhappy. But he goes further, rejecting the conventional view that religion makes people moral. Lucretius proves the thesis that religion - a source of crime.

The author considers the poem for the highest honor for a crush faith in the omnipotence of the gods and to show people their own power, the power of their mind, able to penetrate the innermost secrets of nature.

Speaking two centuries later, Lucian (ca. 120 - ca. 180 years. N. E.) Created the immortal images of classical satire, which, like the poem of Lucretius, ruthlessly razyat and beliefs of his contemporaries and the foundation of all religion.

In interviews, "Conversations of the gods" break down the veils of holiness from all the deities worshiped by the Greeks and Romans. It not only shows that these mythical creatures - the same people, just ascended to Olympus human imagination, but nobody denounces these creatures, comparable only with the most miserable human beings and even animals. Debauchery and lust coarse, brazen lies and bragging, low jealousy and a willingness to pull off all that is bad - these look like gods in these conversations.

Lucian, ridiculing ancient ancient beliefs, with no less acerbic and merciless fun at new and beliefs spread in his time, including over Christianity. It shows (dialogues "Lover of lies", "Luky, Alexander, or the False Prophet," "On the death of Peregrinus"), that preachers of these beliefs, liars, charlatans, covering the chatter about high morality and immorality of his own preaching the doctrine, the falsity of which he perfectly known. emptiness and absurdity is shown teaching about the afterlife, as well as appeals to the neglect of the benefits of life on earth and promises "eternal life".

Roman satirist pamphlet "On the death of Peregrinus" is dedicated to one of the prominent figures of early Christianity. Defenders of Christianity, recognizing the decline of morals of many leaders of the religion since it became a state, to this day insist that the Christians of the first centuries - a sample of high morality. Certificate perceptive contemporary - Lucian strongly refutes this myth of Christian theologians.

In the works of Lucian wittily ridicules the very foundations of religious outlook. Lucian felt that everything in nature is performed by its inherent laws, not by the will of the gods.

Neither the nature nor the gods do not govern society. They are not only unable to punish the villain, but are powerless to deal with even the Epicureans who deny their existence, they can only rely on the fact that among the people enough fools willing to believe in the existence of the gods.
Freedom of the Middle Ages
The domination of religious ideas on the minds of all layers of feudal society during the millennial period between the Renaissance of classical antiquity, is very difficult to develop an atheistic thought. As rightly observed by Anatole France, in this period "the happy unanimity undoubtedly contributed to the congregation also used to ... immediately burn any dissident. "But it could not completely stifle thought, try to break the chain, in which her chained obscurantism.

The largest representative of the medieval French philosopher, was free-Peter Abelard (1079-1142). In his treatise "An Introduction to Theology," he was not afraid to say that either all religious dogma - an empty sound, or they are meaningful, accessible understanding of the human mind. And if so, the truths of religion are subject to mind control. "Recklessly chains who. Not figured out carelessly satisfied that he is told not weighed it, not knowing how well-founded evidence for the reported ".

Carriage! lashaya supreme authority of reason, encouraging take nothing for granted, Abelard did not stop before going to state. "Not because you believe that God said so, but because you w is convinced that the way it is."

The only sensible way to achieve truth, Abelard argued - into question, which should be the starting point in addressing any issue. "Doubting - he wrote - we begin to study, but because of the study we come to the truth," Such a high score certainly was of great importance to undermine the religious worldview

In the book "Yes and no," Abelard, emphasizing that the two opposing statements on the same subject at least one false collected many quotes from the "sacred" texts, full of contradictions. These quotes indicate that the questions about original sin , of free will, the creation of the world or eternity, the eternity of the Creator and to other fundamental questions of religion, "Fathers" of the church and even the "Holy Scriptures" give diametrically opposite answers. It has been shown a clear falsehood many reported in the texts that religious ideology proclaimed indisputable truth.

In spite of his rationalism and his struggle against dogmatism, the medieval mind, Abelard remained in captivity of religious beliefs. Nevertheless, his views objectively undermining the foundations of religion, have caused a storm among the clergy

indignation. In 1121 the cathedral in Suazo, Sonia declared these views heretical, made Abelard publicly burn his treatise and put him in a monastery.

Free-fight their way in Italy. In the XII century. Florence made a number of scholars pushing epicurean, materialist and anti-religious ideas.

Several prominent members of the anti-religious freethinking made at this time in the Muslim world.

Here we should mention the Tajik-Persian philosopher and poet Omar Khayyam (1040 -1123). Poems Khayyam "Ruban" not only penetrate deeply into the world of sense, they are full of philosophical thinking and outright anti-religion.

Khayyam ridicules the religious call to renounce worldly goods in the name of good, waiting for us beyond the grave. There is no afterlife, he says, no. There is only a worldly world, where there is the laws of nature before their face and talk moligvy of heaven and hell funny. "Why smoke shrines, mosques lights? What about heaven and hell all these conversations? "All religions, including Islam, are deceiving the people, gave them" weeds "of belief in retribution.

The poet often repeats and wittily illustrates the idea that the only reality - the reality of the earth, that it only makes sense to value, and its loss will not divine retribution, and oblivion. "When the world is going to leave - it will not matter what he did, he said, disgraced himself than you."

Khayyam reveals the contradiction between religious doctrine of the omnipotence and omniscience of God and the doctrine of retribution: "When you are my flesh molded from clay, and thou shalt know that I did not overcome his passions, not you to blame eh, that my life is sinful? Tell me, why should I burn in hell, God? "

Epicurean position that the injustice that prevails in society, is belied by the existence of providence, gets a vivid expression in the works Khayyam, passionately condemning the social evil and so passionately rejects the existence of the all-merciful Lord: "O heavens, for scoundrels generous your hand. They - baths, water mills and irrigation ditch, but he who is pure soul, that only a crust of bread. Such a sky - ugh! - Is not worth spit! "

Some rubai suggest that bold ideas Khayyam divided by certain circles of society, in which he lived. For example: "And so here we live under the arch of blue. Polubezbozhniki and polumusulmane. "

Ruban often envelop the anti-religious thought of as a joke, but the author points out: "Not only are the words I am an enemy of all these lies" - and the most serious claims that the enslavement of the mind firmly rejects any a religion. "The spirit of slavery is in the shrine and Kaaba, pealing of bells - the language of humility Rabiyyat, and slavery, the black print is equal to the beads and the cross on the church and Mirhabe. "

A number of important anti-religious ideas put forward the famous Arab philosopher Ibn Roschts (Averroes) (1126-1198). Considering himself as a faithful follower of Aristotle, the thinker develops materialistic tendency of Aristotle's teachings. Being a child of his time, Ibn Roshdy saves in his teachings and God (which plays here a role similar to "prime mover" in Aristotle), and the immortality of the spirit that the Arab philosopher attributes to human reason.

But Ibn Roshdy vehemently denies the divine creation of the world and defends position on that matter and motion are eternal, that prevail in the world is a natural necessity, immutable laws of nature. God himself acts of necessity, he can not repeal the laws of nature. Therefore, such supernatural events as revelations and miracles are impossible. Prayers can not influence events. Consciousness of the individual - is the ability of the body, especially the brain. Ibn Roshdy therefore denies the immortality of the soul (although admits immortal impersonal intellect of all mankind), as well as belief in retribution.

Ibn Roshdy - the first philosopher who put forward the doctrine that there are two truths: scientific, philosophical, on the one hand, and the religious, theological - on the other. In general, the teaching of Ibn Roshdy, science and religion, philosophy and theology in line with each other. But in some issues, they can come to different results. For the crowd have faith in revelation, authority, etc., for "faith imposes curb on the common people." For a thin layer of educated people is a science and philosophy. The same author has a right to defend theological works immortality of the soul, and philosophical work to deny it, because the theology of the truth is that there is immortality, but the philosophy is true that there is no immortality. Although this doctrine of Ibn Roshtsa about "the duality of truth," full of spirit of compromise, it was crucial for its time, first strictly separated reason and faith, which ultimately served as a release of knowledge from the yoke of religion.

Penetrated into Europe, where Christianity prevailed, the ideas of Ibn Roshdy had a great impact on the progressive development of materialism and religious skepticism in those countries. Particularly significant was the performance of the French followers of these ideas that have deployed active in favor of the views of Averroes at the University of Paris. At the head of the Paris averroistov was Siger of Brabant (ca. 1240-ca. 1282).

In his works (On the origin and destruction, "On the world of eternity," etc.) Seeger argued that the universe exists forever, that life operates a natural necessity, and God does not control their actions, that human consciousness is inextricably linked to his body, perishes with the body and can not after the death of a person experience the torments which he was allegedly waiting in hell.
Free thought and atheism in the XVII century.
For the anti-religious thought XVI and early XVII century. characterized by inconsistency, unsystematic, reaching to the eclectic and the preponderance of negative, destructive element on the positive.

In the XVII century. there are slender, elaborate systems of philosophy, the main contents of which - the positive development of the ideas put forward part of the earlier part of the first nominated. This is Descartes, Gassendi, Spinoza, Hobbes, Locke.

Destructive element, and although sidelined, but also plays an important role. This applies especially to Rene Descartes (1596 - 1650) and Pierre Gassendi (1592-1655). Despite the opposition of their positions on some fundamental philosophical questions, they are both opposed to dogmatism and fideism, both calling for an end to the slavish submission to authority and conventional wisdom, take nothing for granted, and both hit out of scholasticism. . Characteristically, though they are both enemies of agnosticism, but the starting point for them is skeptical doubt.

Although neither the one nor the other did not join the anti-religious position of their predecessors, their teachings were a great contribution not only to fight against the medieval world in general, but especially in the fight against the religion. Numerous followers of Gassendi, the so-called Libert (freethinkers), does not share his religion. Talented writers F. Lamotte-Levaye, W, St. Evremon, B. Fonte nel, Theophile de Viyo, S. Cyrano de Bergerac and Molière great, based on skepticism of Montaigne and Gassendi Epicureanism, even atheistic ideas put forward and found them witty form, invulnerable to obscurantist. As for the Cartesian, then at his weaknesses and have been used and idealistic advocates of Christianity, but the camp of reaction and the camp of progressive thinkers immediately appreciate the enormous progressive ideas of Descartes. No wonder the six years after the publication of the first of his works all his books were condemned to be burned, and preaching his ideas is prohibited.
«  October 2017  »
Site friends
  • Create a free website
  • Online Desktop
  • Free Online Games
  • Video Tutorials
  • All HTML Tags
  • Browser Kits
  • Statistics

    Total online: 1
    Guests: 1
    Users: 0
    Copyright MyCorp © 2017
    Make a free website with uCoz