Will and freedom of will in ancient philosophy. The meaning of free will in the new philosophical vocabulary

FREEDOM OF WILL

the building of a person to self-development in children. In the context of the early Greek culture, the understanding of S. V. is accentuated not so philosophically and categorically, but as a legal meaning. A free person is a huge citizen of the polis, the one who lives on the land of his ancestors. The protilezhnіst yomu - vіyskovopoloneniya, vivezion to a foreign land and transformation into a slave. A coil of freedom of an individual - polis, yogo earth (Solon); the right people live on the land of the polis, where a reasonable law has been established. Therefore, the antonym of the term "vilniy" is not so "slave", like "non-Greek", "barbarian". For the Homeric epic, the understanding of freedom reveals one more sense. A good person is the one who lives without a primus stove, with a good nature. The greatest possible expression of freedom is in the spirits of the hero, who shares his share with him, who competes with the gods. Theoretical rethinking of the scientific and philosophical formulation of the nutrition of SV. folded into the thoughts of sophists, which were contrasted with "fusis" (the only possible order, generated by nature itself) and "no-mos" (the order of life, which is independently restored by the skin people). Socrates blatantly plays the leading role of knowing freedom in the present. True vilny, moral vchinok mozhlivy less than the basis of a clear understanding of goodness and valor. No one can do bad things out of good will, people are better at their best, and less unknowing, non-government shtovhaє yogo on the wrong way. Plato explains ST. s buttyam good as the most "ideas". It is good to sanctify the order, which is the order of the world in the world. Enter freely - mean children, focusing on the ideal of the good, uzgodzhuyuchi special aspirations from the supremacy of justice. Aristotle considers the problem of ST. in the context of moral choice. Freedom is associated with knowledge of a special kind - knowledge-smart ("phronesis"). Vono vіdrіznyaєtsya vіd znannya-"tehne", scho zabezpechuє vyvіshennya zavdanya vіdomim zrazkom. Moral knowledge is smart, that it paves the way for freedom, orienting the choice of the shortest vchinka from the quiet ethical choice. Jerelo of such knowledge is a specific moral intuition, as it sways in people through life experiences. Stoicism develops its own foundation of freedom, acknowledging the priority of providence in life. Self-important individuals stand in the pre-trimannian obov'yazkіv and obov'yazku (Panetsiy). With whom providence can be seen as the law of nature, and as the will in people (Posidonius). The will in the rest of the moment stands as if it were to fight against the lot, and as such it will require a special vibe. Epikur looks at the food about SV. in his atomistic physics. Rest to resist the deterministic atomism of Democracy. Physics of Epikur to bring the possibility of SV. The reasons for such inspiration are not obvious, they appear spontaneously. A special stage in the production of food about SV. formed the Christian ideology. The person was called to create her own life in unity with the Divine, learning the Bible. The problem, however, lies in the fact that, on the one hand, the universalism of God’s will, from one side, and morally susilla people, has not yet reached (and in fact, it has not reached) the knowledge of the Divine, - from the other side. Christian literature, which deals with these problems, can be classified according to the sign of emphasis on the other side of the relationship. So, Pelagii (5th century) to bring to a wide extent the confusion of the Christian idea about the fate of the will of a person in a formalized share, by the way, belittling the significance of the quiet sacrifice of Christ. Augustine defends the idea of ​​universality Providence from the point of view of polemics. The creation of goodness in the activity of a person is only possible for the help of the grace of God. Moreover, її diyu Augustine does not appear to zі vіdomim animals before her from the side of a person. Vaughn manifests itself independently in every way. Homa Aquinas vbachaє sphere ST. at the choice of goals that contribute to the achievement of good. For yoga firmness, until you know there is only one correct path. Reasonable is the necessary pragne of good, but evil, as the result of a rational choice, is impossible. The diversity of positions is also manifested in the era of the Reformation, Erasmus of Rotterdam defends the idea of ​​St. Luther speaks against it, invoking the literal reading of the dogma about the Divine Covenant. God, back to back, calling some people to salvation, condemning others to eternal torment. The future share of a person is overwhelmed, however, by his own unknown. Luther, at the same time, pointing out the special sphere of buttya, "knowing" how the specialness in the mind can be seen the signs of the obornosti that appear in it. To go about the sphere of human everyday life and about professional activity, which is successful, which is a sign of the ability (obviousness) of an individual in the face of the light and God. A similar position is taken by Calvin, who knows that the Will of God will be programing buttya people. Protestantism is practical to reduce free will to a minimum value. The fundamental paradox of the Protestant ethics strikes, however, for those who postulate the inactivity of the human will in the presence of God's grace, there, zmushyuyuchi people rozshukuvat "ciphers" of equipment, zoomed in on the activist type of specialness. With Protestantism polemіzuvav єzuїt L. de Molina (1535-1600): in the midst of seeing God's general knowledge, the theory saw especially "middle knowledge" about those who could stand in awe, but specifically zdijsnitsya for the attainment of a singing mind. Tse umova Molina and pov'yazuvav іz living human will. Whose glance, having taken away his rose from Suarez, having taken into account that God remembers his grace to deprive these people of people, for an hour, I will help God not strangle the ST. Vchennya K. Yanseniya (1585-1638) truly inspired the ideas of Calvin and Luther - a person free to choose between good and evil, or even between different types of sin. A similar view was also taken by the mystic M. de Molinos, who affirmed the idea of ​​the passivity of the human soul before God (Div. Quietism). Topic ST. showing itself and the philosophy of the New hour. For Hobbes, St. means us before the presence of a physical primus. Freedom to interpret it in an individual natural world: a person is more free then, the more opportunities for self-development appear before her. The freedom of the hulk and the "freedom" of the slave are less often compared: the first is not absolute freedom, the other cannot be said to be absolutely wrong. Vіdpovіdno to Spinoza vіlny God, because. If nothing else is determined by an internal law, a human being, like a part of nature, is not. Prote wine pragne freedom, translating non-violent ideas into viraz, affect - in rational love to God. The mind is to multiply freedom, suffering is fast, - respect Leibniz, razrіznyuchi freedom is negative (freedom for ...) and positive (freedom for ...). For Locke, the concept of freedom is equal to the freedom of diy; freedom is the essence of building a child, depending on your choice. The SV himself, opposes the mind, speaks out to the fundamental appointments of the people - such is the look of Rousseau. Transition from natural freedom, obmezheniya by the forces of the individual himself, to "moral freedom" is possible through victorious laws, like people punish themselves. Zgidno with Kant, SV. it is possible only for the sphere of moral laws, which are opposite to the laws of nature. For Fichte, freedom is the instrument for the enforcement of the moral law. Schelling to know his own version of the problem of St., while respecting others, as if they stink like "internal necessities of the day", the freedom of a person is based on a roost between God and nature, butty and nebuttyam. It is with Hegel that Christianity is to bring into the minds of European people the idea of ​​those that history is a process in the attainment of freedom. Nietzsche respects the whole history of morality - the history of pardons for St. On yoga thought, SV. - fiction, "pardon of everything organic". Self-created will before power transfers purification of moral ideas of will and vidpovidalnosti. The Marxist philosophy conceived a mindful development in the fact that the associated philologists are able to rationally regulate the exchange of speeches between the suspility of that nature. The growth of the productive forces of the society creates material changes of mind for the development of individuals. The kingdom of rightful freedom was conceived in Marxism as communism, in which there is private power, exploitation, and by themselves the very foundation of primus. ST. - one of the central to understand the fundamental ontology of Heidegger. Freedom is the most important buttya, the "foundation of foundations", which contains existence in a permanent situation of choice. In a similar rank, for Sartre, freedom is not the identity of an individual, but rather a yogo diy, but rather a supra-historical designation of the generic essence of a person. Freedom, choice and timchasity are the same, respecting the philosopher. Russian philosophy has the problem of freedom, SV. specially rozroblyalas Berdyaev. The world of objects, de-suffering that evil, resisting creativity, calling to hem the conservative forms of objects. The results of creativity will inevitably be activated, but the creative act itself will also inevitably be free. Mabut, dominating the trend in the interpretation of ST. (especially in the 20th century) there is a point of disgrace, for what kind of person is the head of the one who traps with her. You can only find clues for truthfulness at "near-cord" vipads. A.P. Zhdanivsky

New philosophical dictionary. 2012

understanding of European moral philosophy, which was left to take shape in I. Kant at the significant intelligible property of an individual to moral self-destruction. In the retrospective plan, the term "freedom of will" can be seen as a historical and philosophical metaphor: її historically fixed connotations are significantly broader than the normative meaning of the term, in which the sense of the concept of "freedom" is emphasized, and "will" can be replaced by "choices", "choices". » and etc. equivalents. However, the improvement of richness to change the “core” of the metaphor demonstrates the high level of invariance of the main problems: what is moral action; what can you do to condemn free will? In other words: how can moral autonomy (like mental morality and how building up to the birth of natural causality) and how can the natural (divine) determinism be combined with the intellectual and moral freedom of the subject?

In the history of philosophy, one can see two main ways of deducting understanding about free will. The first one (Aristotle, Homa Aquinas and Hegel) was brought up to an analytical deduction of understanding about freedom of will from the very understanding of will as a building of reason to self-determining that generation of special causality. Another way (to be forgiven by Plato and the stoicists through Augustine and most of the scholastics right up to Kant) is postulating free will as independence in the face of ovnishnoi (natural divine) causality and through the whole building to self-significance. For another method, there are two different types of priming. In the first place, theodicy (from the hours of Plato and what Leibnitz knew was completed), de free will is postulated to prove the innocence of a deity in the light of evil. In a different way, lying behind a leeway (forbidding theodicy), but similar to the principle of Kant's method of proof, de free will is postulated by a morally legislative mind. These two confirmations are similar to the fact that to lie in the name of the appointed will: to make an allowance of a singing magnitude, which ensures the formal correctness of the “moral equal”. To this very “freedom of will” is equivalent here to “freedom of choice”, “decision” is just that.

"Freedom of will" in the ancient and middle duma (Greek: rіdshe; lat. arbitrium, liberum arbitrium). Greek moral reflection originated in a universal cosmological paradigm, which made it possible to explain the moral, social and cosmic orders one by one: morality acted as one of the characteristics of “inclusion” of an individual by stretching cosmic podias. The law of cosmic payment, which, having acted in the sight of fate, vislovlyuvav the idea of ​​impersonal compensatory justice (clearly formulated, for example, Anaximander - In I): guilty" or "with". In the archaic and pre-classical svіdomosti, the thesis dominates: vіdpovіdіlіnіnіnіє conveys freedom volіє yak neomіnna umova (e.g., II. XIX 86; Hes. Theog. 570 sq.; 874; Opp. 36; 49; 225 sq.; Aesch. Pers. 21 828 ; Soph. Oed. Col. 282; 528; 546 sq.; 1001 sq.).

Socrates and Plato came up with a new approach to the problem of freedom and viability: goiter is more steadily manifested by the sufficient decision of that kind, morality is accepted as an epiphenomenon of the greater moral good, and freedom is like building to goodness. Vidpovidalnist in Plato still does not become a new moral category of the world, but still it does not become overwhelmed with the problem of destroying the cosmic order: a person is vindicated to the fact that he can know the morally necessitated (parallels in Demokrit - 33 p.; 601-604; 613-61; 613-61; 613 Lur'e). Virtue dії ottojnjuєєє z yogo razumnіstyu: nіhto do not sin voluntarily (Gorg. 468 cd; 509 e; Legg. 860 d sq.). If the deity Plato needs the truth, he expands the theodicy: the skin soul itself chooses its own foal and bears the choice for the choice (“This is the fault of the choice; the god is innocent” - (Rep. 617 e, povn. Tim. 29 e sd.). Prote freedom for Plato's attitude is not in the autonomy of the subject, but in the ascetic state (in relation to knowledge and intelligible greater good).

The Platonic theory is a transitional stage from archaic schemes to Aristotle, with a kind of connection, an important moment of understanding of free will: the understanding of the “volitional” as a self-significant mind, which allows you to talk about “spontaneity” swavilla that analytically leads to understanding about the independence of the river. decision; the appointment of a do-gooder like “the one that looks like we are lying down” that inscription on the insane link of goiter is an exclamation for dobrovolnistyu vchinku. The mind is first understood as a specific causality, in other ways - nature, consumption, vipadka, sounds (Nie. Eth. Ill 5,1112a31 s.; Rhet.l 10,1369 a 5-6); dovilne - like those whose reason is known in the present day (Nie. Eth. Ill 3,1111 a 21 s .; III5, 1112 a 31; Magn. Mog. 117, 1189 a 5 sq.), but "those who us lie down ”() - goiter can be more sensually more reasonable-satisfied dіy Nie. Eth. Ill I, 1110 b l s.; Magn. Mig. 113.1188 "a 25 s.). The concept of "guilt" is growing, that is, a subjective-personal sense. Aristotle christened the possible meaning of the terms "will", "vibir" ("decision"), "do it" , "Tsіl" and so on. All terms were adopted by Stoєyu, and through it they passed to Roman authors and to patristics.

The Stoics cleared the "metaphysical" core of the problem from the social "lushpinnya" and vpritul came to understand the "pure" autonomy of the subject. Their theodicy, more like cosmodicy, developed the ideas of Plato: if evil can be the power of cosmic causality, it should look like people. Reasonableness means the independence of moral decision from external causality (Cic. Ac. pr. II 37; Gell. Noct. Att. VII 2; SVF II 982 sq.). One, scho "we should lie down" - our "profit" () accept chi and give those chi else "tribute" (SVF 161; II 115; 981); on this basis the idea of ​​moral goiter was based. The stoic scheme of free will was bula, i.e., conceived with an underlying “reserve of morality”. The solution to the mind є zherelom spontaneous causality and for appointments can not be free (Aristotelian head of thought). In a different way, it can be free, so that this goiter can be principally possible (visnovki from the theodicy of the Platonic type). At one time, such autonomy did not fit into the deterministic picture of stoic cosmology.

Previously, the alternative concept of Epicurus was broken up, even out of the very parcels themselves, pragmatically speaking in the name of determinism and inducing goiter from the dolnistyu diy (Diog. L. X 133-134; fatis avolsa voluntas. II crt. De re re 257). Prote, having replaced the determinism of fate with the very global determinism of personality, Epikur, having spent the opportunity to explain the end of the moral solution, as the concept has lost its marginal phenomenon.

Thus, the statement about moral autonomy and the insane linkage of freedom and judgment became dominant no earlier than 3 st, BC. i.e., Plotinus knew his own paradigmatic viraz (Epp. VI 8,5-6). In this case, the inner viability of the ancient roman is reminiscent of a strong legal note: for the ancient, there is a sense of morality and rights in the presence of that important character, which the epoch of Christianity was born, and especially in the New Hour. The universal imperative of antiquity can be formulated as follows: the method is the power of perfection and the right of the neighbor. Normative terms that convey the understanding of free will in the texts of non-Christian authors, was a Greek. sometimes more (important in Epikget), more common (including the worse, e.g., Epict. Diss. IV 1.56; 62; Procl.-In Rp. II

nar. 266.22; 324.3 Kroll; Tim. Ill p. 280., 15 Diehl), lat. arbitrium, potestas, in nobis (Cicero, Seneca).

Christianity 1) radically transformed the moral imperative, voicing the blessing of the neighbor and recreating the sphere of ethics in the sphere of law; 2) modified theodicy, replacing the impersonal cosmic determinism with a unique divine causality. At the same time, the problematic side of the food did not recognize the original changes. The field of understanding that has been formed, and the thoughts are constantly tested, are constantly present in the patristic scenes of Clement of Alexandria (Strom. V 14,136,4) and Origen (De pr. I 8.3; III 1.1 sq.) to Nemesia (39-40 ) that John of Damascus (Exp. fid. 21; 39-40); in the order of traditional beginnings, the term () is widely used. Before Aristotle, Nemesia's formula "the mind is free and self-controlled" (De nat. horn. 2, p.36, 26 sq. Morani) is typical for the great period of Christian reflection (por. rig. In Ev. loan. fr.43) .

With whom, the problem of free will became more and more the banter of Latin Christianity (starting from Tertullian - Adv. Henn. 10-14; De ex. cast, 2), knowing its climax in Augustine (vinted by the technical term liberum arbitrium, normative for scholasticism) . In the early yoga works - the treatises "About the Vile Decision" ("De libero arbitrio") and in - the classic theodicy was developed, based on the idea of ​​rationalistic understanding of the order of the world: God does not stand for evil; The only source of evil is will. So that morality could be possible, the subject can be free in the face of natural (including supranatural) causality and the built-in vibirat between good and evil. Morality is a precondition for the moral obligation: the very idea of ​​the moral law stands as a sufficient motive (if the law has a god-like character). In the later period, the scheme is replaced by the concept of covenant, which reaches completion in anti-Pelagian treatises (“On Grace and Vile Decision”, “On the Counseling of Saints” and on) and bring Augustine to a residual perspective with ethical rationalism. The antagonisms of the late Augustine, the Pelagic and її successors, stood for the same classical theory of freedom of freedom and put it (in the form of “synergy”, so that the interaction of human and divine will), like Augustine in his early works.

The middle problems of free will in the main rices resemble the tradition of the sickle “De libero arbitrio”; the mediators between Augustine and scholasticism are Boetius (Cons. V 2-3) and Eryugena (De praed, div. 5; 8; 10). Early scholasticism - Anselm of Canterbury, Abelard, Peter Lombard, Bernard of Clairvosky, Hugo and Richard of Saint-Viktorsky - steadily implemented the classical scheme, focusing on the Augustinian version, but not without some nuances. Zokrema Anselm of Canterbury's understanding of liberum arbitrium is not like the neutral building of swaville (before її liberum arbitrium indiflerentiae), but like freedom to the good (De lib. art. 1; 3). The high school of scholasticism laid down the classical tradition with a memorable peripatetic accent: in the 13th century. the basis of the argumentation is the Aristotelian doctrine about the self-destruction of the soul and the self-significance of the mind, just like the Augustinian theodicy with the postulation of free will go into the background. This position is typical of Albert the Great, and especially of Fomi Aquinas, victorious direct position of Aristotle, Sth. q.84,4 = Eth. Nie. Ill 5,1113 a 11-12). Liberum arbitrium - daily intellectual building, close to building judgment (I q.83,2-3). The will is free in accordance with the needs of the people, but the bones are the decision for itself - the need (I q. 82.1 cf. Aug. Civ. D. V 10). The key aspect of the problem of freedom of will is the setting: charges are put for a fault, which is a reasonable cost of building up to self-destruction (I q.83,1).

Lit.: VerweyenJ. Das Problem der Willensfreiheit in der Scholastik. Hdib., 1909; Saarinen R. Weakness of nill m mediaeval thaught. View from Angusfinc to Buridan. Helsinki, 1993; RomishchM. Griechische Freiheit.esen und Werden Energy Lebensideals. Hdib., 1955; dark M. T. Augustutine. Philosopher of Freedom. A Study in comparative philosophy N.Y.-R, 1958; AdkinsA. Merit and Responsibility A Study in Greek Values. (M., I960; Die goldene Regel. Eine Einfuhrung in die Geschichte der antiken und friichristlichen Vulgarethik. Gott., 1962; Holl J. Historische und systematische Untersuchungen zum Bedingungsverhaltnis von Freichit Werden eins Lebensideals, 1955; Clark MT Augustine, Philosopher of Freedom, A study in comparative philosophy.

A. A. Stolyarov

The Renaissance with its characteristic anthropocentrism and the Reformation gave the problems of free will a special severity. Pico della Mirandola greeted the human spirit and freedom of will as a gift to God, who could create a fate in the transformed world. God does not appoint a person in the world, nor obov'yazkiv. From the power of the will of a person, the stars can rise and the angels descend to thinness, more wine is a product of the power of choice and zusil. Pochatkov's sinfulness of human nature enters the darkness.

The present of human freedom of will was tempted to turn to the problem of pleasing the omnipotent and omniscient God. Erasmus of Rotterdam (De libero arbitrio, 1524) leaned on the possibility of synergy - the gift of Divine grace and human free will for the mind readiness to spivpratsi. Luther (De servo arbitrio, 1525) voicing free will to “pure deceit” by “illusion of human pride”: the will of a person is not free of good or evil, out of insane slavery, or into God, or into the devil; the result of good wisdom by God's will. The human souls without divine grace cannot be blamed for the pure thoughts of the sins of the fallen. J. Calvin occupied an even greater position with food about the baptism in the “Christian Faith” (1536): to instill faith itself in Christ є dієyu Divine grace, people are calmly ordained until the end of the curse, and it is not possible for everyday deeds to know grace spend її.

Thus, the founders of Protestantism brought to the logical inter-providentialistic thought of the late Augustine. The aftermath of such a "supranaturalistic determinism" led to super-exactness, and even absurdity. Luther and Calvin turned on the possibility of free self-determination, but they argued that the building of a person was a child, a subject, and not an object of action, and it was put under the doubt of human godlikeness. Trying to save, wanting to see the appearance of human activity (without which you can’t talk about wine and sin), Luther would be embarrassed to allow the free will of people according to their wishes to what is lower for them, for example. to the lane, and stverdzhuvati, what to sin the stink all the same for your will. Calvin allows the people of the house to take care of the house, but he allows the house to grow for himself to the god of the house. Ale here rozrivaєtsya be-any zv'yazok mіzh dієyu that result. Earlier, Philip Melanchthon (“Augsburzke Spovidnya”, 1531, 1540) moved in Luther’s extreme nights, and directed the remonstrants against the Calvinist indoctrination with the armies.

Post-Trident Catholicism has taken a more protective position on the problem of free will; The Council of Trent (1545-63), having condemned the Protestant "slavery of the will", turned to the Pelagian-Erasmus idea of ​​spontaneity between man and God, the bond of deed and payment. Єzuїti I. Loyola, L. de Molina, P. ta Fonieka, F. Suarez et al. the blessings of the baths of the skin people were voiced, and the poryatunok was the result of an active reception. “Let’s hope for success only in grace, but we’ll work it out like this, we won’t lie down only with us” (I. Loyola). Their opponents - jansenists (K. Jansenіy, A Arno, B. Pascal and іn.) shied up to the death-Augustinian version of the baptism, leading up to the fact that free will was wasted after the fall. The judicious apologia for free will and "little rights" often turned into svavilles in the clouding of moral norms (the doctrine of "probabilism"), and the Jansenist moral rigorism intertwined with fanaticism.

The theological superstitions about freedom of will marked out the division of positions in the European philosophy of the New Hour. According to Descartes, in humans, the spiritual substance is independent of the corporeal, and free will is one of the manifestations. The freedom of will of a person is absolute, but the will of the will can take a decision in any situation and inspire a superior mind: “The will, by its nature, the floors are free, which you can’t accept in any way.” Tsya neutral building of free choice (Liberum arbitrium indifferentiae) is the lower step of free will. Riven її zrostaє z razshelennyam podstav podstav choice. Ailment and sleep fetter free will, a clear mind spryaє її to the greatest manifestation. Through the Cartesian dualism, it became impossible to explain how the will invades the language of change of the bodily substance.

Trying to overcome this dualism, the representatives of occasionalism A. Geiliks and N. Malebranche emphasized the unity of human and Divine will.

On Protestant soil, supranaturalistic determinism turned into naturalistic determinism (T. Hobbes, B. Spinoza, J. Priestley, D. Hartley and others). In Hobbes, Divine Providence is brought to the forefront of an uninterrupted ray of natural causes; The freedom of a person is determined by the day-to-day transition for children: a person is free, because she is not afraid of violence, and you can rob those who are afraid of it. The very bajannya is not at ease, it is called out by calling objects, innate powers and sounds. Vibіr - no more than a struggle of motives, "charging fear and hope", the result is the strongest motive. Illusion of free will wins through those who do not know the strength of people, as they signified її diyu. A similar position is realized by Spinoza: “People acknowledge their own destiny, but do not know the reasons by which the stench is determined” and Leibniz: “... In a person, everything is known and appointed in advance ... and the human soul is a singing world, a spiritual automaton.”

Moral understanding and spontaneously put in one's own row by natural causes. Spivvіdshenie free will and causal determination is one of the central problems of Kant's philosophy. As an empirical subject of a person under orders that are not transverse to natural laws, and for the knowledge of all the forward minds of yoga, one can transfer with the same accuracy, like a sleepy and monthly obscuration. Ale, yak “rich in one’s own way”, as if they don’t give space to the minds, the hour of that causality, people can have free will - building up to self-significance independently from the feelings of the mind. Qiu building Kant calls practical reason. As far as Descartes is concerned, I don’t care about the idea of ​​free will innate: it’s better to understand about the duty (sollen). The greater form of free will (“positive freedom”) is based on moral autonomy, self-legislation of the mind.

Fichte sharply shifted the emphasis from buttya to activity, voicing the whole world (“not-I”) with the product of free creativity I and re-correcting the theoretical mind to the practical, knowledge (Wissen) - cosiness (Gewissen). The causal-hereditary connections melt into foreign bodies of water, and the light of natural fallows - an illusory form of sprynyattya products in the unfamiliar viciousness of human manifestation. Nabuttya freedom - tse turning I to myself, svіdomlennya by him of that which he did unfathomably convergence in a sensitive craving for a svіdomy tsіlepokladannya, fringed with less obviousness of other reasonable I; through the right, freedom is realized by the soul. The movement of freedom of will is a sign of the Hegelian psychology of the spirit, and history stands in Hegel as the formation of subject forms of freedom: abstract law, morality, morality. In the culture of the western world, which is peopled at once from Christianity, the attainment of freedom was understood as the recognition of the people. Svavilla is less than a step at the development of freedom, it is a negative, rational form (abstracting from the stump of a voluptuous one), which manifests free will as building up to self-significance. The real manifestation of free will is a moral impulse, an act that escapes from the decisions of the mind.

Schelling, adopting the ideas of J. Boehme and F. Baader, emphasizing the moment of antinomy in the understanding of free will. Human freedom of will is rooted above the mind of yogo autonomy, but may metaphysical depth, you can lead to good, and to sin, vice: in a pragmatic self-denying person, the building of the building is free to choose evil. The fundamentally irrationalistic understanding of free will included the clouding of the mind like a panuvannya over the senses.

Marxism, following the Hegelian tradition, seeks the main goal of free will at the stage of practical information. Behind the formula of F. Engels, freedom of will is “the ability to make decisions based on knowledge.” A. Schopenhauer turns to the spinal clouding of free will as an illusion of the human mind: the attribute of freedom is applied not to a phenomenal spirit, but to a noumenal butt (will as a speech in oneself) and practically leads to fidelity to one’s rational character.

At 20 st. in the "new ontology" of M. Hartmann, the concepts of freedom and activity, freedom and independence are divided. The lower balls of the buttya - inorganic and organic - more active, but less freedom, more versions - spiritual and spiritual - more freedom, but more powerful activity. Rethink the mutual freedom of the negative (svaville) and positive (reasonable price of night determination); a person can have free will not only in relation to lower physical and mental determinations, but also in relation to God, otherwise ostensibly, to ob'ektivnoї ієrarchії zіnnosti, svіt i n't mає indestructible determinant force. Ideal values ​​orient people, but do not signify її vchinkіv. Before the Cantonese antinomy of freedom and natural causality, Hartmann adds the antinomy of duty; it is necessary to determine the behavior of specialty ideally, that is, by the spectrum of possibilities, but if you choose, you need a real will, which is due to the autonomy of the individual, and not to the autonomy of the principle.

Ontological obstruction of free will took place in the hands of such representatives of phenomenology as M. Scheler, R. Reiner, R. Ingarden). Having introduced existentialism to his own kind of “idolatry of freedom” (S. A. Levitsky), he brought the antinomy of human reason to a deep tragedy - “healthy tragedy of life” by K. Jaspers or “tragic absurdity” by J.-P. Sartre and A. Camus. Religious existentialism interprets free will as a way of understanding the expressions of the transcendent (God), which are expressed in the form of symbols and ciphers buttya, which are voiced by conscience. In atheistic existentialism, freedom of will is to save the building for itself, which is rooted in poverty and turns into a list: values ​​do not create an objective butt, a person constructs them herself to create her freedom. Necessity is an illusion that really “flows into freedom”, as the neo-Freudian E. Fromm said. Absolute freedom to rob the tractors of the heavy pavement, which is necessary for carrying the “heroism of Sisyphus”.

Russian religious philosophy of the 20th century. (N. A. Berdyaev, S. N. Bulgakov, N. O. Loskiy, B. P. Visheslavtsev, G. P. Fedotov, S. A. Levitsky etc.) come out of the Divine Grace with the free self-appointment of people. The most radical position of Berdyaev, who respects following J. Boehme, that freedom, that is rooted in the modern God's "abyss", is not only about nature, but about buttyu vzagali; a free creative act becomes Berdyaev's supreme and self-sufficient value. For a specific ideal-realism of Lossky, free will is stunned by the daily attribute of “substantial spirits”, which independently create their own character and their share (including in the form of their own body, character, the past, and inspire the appearance of God himself), so as not to lie in the spirit of the world , so like all podії the essence of їhnoyї povedіnki lead more, but do not cause.

Windelband V. About freedom of will. - At the book: Vin. The spirit is history. M., 1995; Visheslavtsev B.P. Ethics of the transfigured Eros. M., 1994;.D "vm

Vіdmіnne vyznachennya

Not exactly appointed ↓

FREEDOM OF WILL - the building of a person to self-development in his actions. In the early Greek culture of the understanding of S.V. accentuated not so philosophically-categorically, as a legal meaning. A free person is a huge citizen of the polis, the one who lives on the land of his ancestors. The protilezhnіst yomu - vіyskovopoloneniya, vivezion to a foreign land and transformation into a slave. A coil of freedom of an individual - polis, yogo earth (Solon); the right people live on the land of the polis, where a reasonable law has been established. Therefore, the antonym of the term "vilniy" is not so "slave", like "non-Greek", "barbarian". For the Homeric epic, the understanding of freedom reveals one more sense. A good person is the one who lives without a primus stove, with a good nature. The greatest possible expression of freedom is in the spirits of the hero, who shares his share with him, who competes with the gods.

Theoretical rethinking of the scientific-philosophical statement of the food about S.V. folded into the thoughts of sophists, which were contrasted with "fusis" (the only possible order, generated by nature itself) and "nomos" (the order of life, which is independently established by the skin people). Socrates blatantly plays the leading role of knowing freedom in the present. True vilny, moral vchinok mozhlivy less than the basis of a clear understanding of goodness and valor. No one can do bad things out of good will, people are better at their best, and less unknowing, non-government shtovhaє yogo on the wrong way. Plato understands S.V. s buttyam good as the most "ideas". It is good to sanctify the order, which is the order of the world in the world. Enter freely - mean children, focusing on the ideal of the good, uzgodzhuyuchi special aspirations from the supremacy of justice.

Aristotle considers the problem of S.V. in the context of moral choice. Freedom is associated with knowledge of a special kind - knowledge-smart ("phronesis"). Vono vіdrіznyaєtsya vіd znannya-"tehne", scho zabezpechuє vyvіshennya zavdanya vіdomim zrazkom. Moral knowledge is smart, that it paves the way for freedom, orienting the choice of the shortest vchinka from the quiet ethical choice. Jerelo of such knowledge is a specific moral intuition, as it sways in people through life experiences. Stoicism develops its own foundation of freedom, acknowledging the priority of providence in life. Self-important individuals stand in the pre-trimannian obov'yazkіv and obov'yazku (Panetsiy). With whom providence can be seen as the law of nature, and as the will in people (Posidonius). The will in the rest of the moment stands as if it were to fight against the lot, and as such it will require a special vibe. Epikur looks at the information about S.V. in his atomistic physics. Rest to resist the deterministic atomism of Democracy. Physics of Epikur to bring the possibility of S.V.: as the physical model of Epikur shows the possibility of free movement of the atom in a straight trajectory. The reasons for such inspiration are not obvious, they appear spontaneously. A special stage in the production of food about S.V. formed the Christian ideology. The person was called to create her own life in unity with the Divine, learning the Bible. The problem, however, lies in the fact that the universalism of God's will, from one side, and morally susilla people, has not yet reached (and in fact, it has not reached) the knowledge of the Divine, - from the other side.

Christian literature, which deals with these problems, can be classified according to the sign of emphasis on the other side of the relationship. So, Pelagii (5th century) to bring to a wide extent the confusion of the Christian idea about the fate of the will of a person in a formalized share, by the way, belittling the significance of the quiet sacrifice of Christ. Augustine defends the idea of ​​universality Providence from the point of view of polemics. The creation of goodness in the activity of a person is only possible for the help of the grace of God. Moreover, її diyu Augustine does not appear to zі vіdomim animals before her from the side of a person. Vaughn manifests itself independently in every way. Khoma Akvinskiy vbachaє sphere S.V. at the choice of goals that contribute to the achievement of good. For yoga firmness, until you know there is only one correct path. Reasonable is the necessary pragne of good, but evil, as the result of a rational choice, is impossible. The diversity of positions is also manifested in the era of the Reformation, Erasmus of Rotterdam defends the idea of ​​S.V. Luther speaks against it, invoking the literal reading of the dogma about the Divine Covenant. God called on some people to salvation, while condemning others to eternal torment. The future share of a person is overwhelmed, however, by his own unknown. Luther, at the same time, pointing out the special sphere of buttya, "knowing" how the specialness in the mind can be seen the signs of the obornosti that appear in it. To go about the sphere of human everyday life and about professional activity, which is successful, which is a sign of the ability (obviousness) of an individual in the face of the light and God. A similar position is taken by Calvin, who believes that God's will is in the program of buttya people.

Protestantism is practical to reduce free will to a minimum value. The fundamental paradox of the Protestant ethics strikes, however, for those who postulate the inactivity of the human will in the presence of God's grace, there, zmushyuyuchi people rozshukuvat "ciphers" of equipment, zoomed in on the activist type of specialness. L. de Molina (1535-1600) argued with Protestantism: in the midst of modern visions of God's universal theory, he saw especially "middle knowledge" about those who can become inflamed, but can be seen specifically in the pretrial singing mind. Tse umova Molina and pov'yazuvav іz living human will. Having taken away his rose from Suarez, having taken into account that God is remembering his grace to deprive these people of people, for an hour I can help God not strangle S.V. Vchennya K. Janseniya (1585-1638), in fact, inspired the ideas of Calvin and Luther - a person is free to rob not between good and evil, but only between different types of sin. A similar view was also taken by the mystic M. de Molinos, who affirmed the idea of ​​the passivity of the human soul before God (Div. Quietism). Topic S.V. showing itself and the philosophy of the New hour. For Hobbes S.V. means us before the presence of a physical primus.

Freedom to interpret it in an individual natural world: a person is more free then, the more opportunities for self-development appear before her. The freedom of the hulk and the "freedom" of the slave are less often compared: the first is not absolute freedom, the other cannot be said to be absolutely wrong. Sgіdno Spinoza, God is more powerful, tk. If nothing else is determined by an internal law, a human being, like a part of nature, is not. Prote wine pragne freedom, translating non-violent ideas into viraz, affect - in rational love to God. The mind is to multiply freedom, suffering is fast, - respect Leibniz, razrіznyuchi freedom is negative (freedom for ...) and positive (freedom for ...). For Locke, the concept of freedom is equal to the freedom of diy; freedom is the essence of building a child, depending on your choice. Same S.V., opposes the mind, speaks out to the fundamental mission of the people - such is the look of Rousseau. Transition from natural freedom, obmezheniya by the forces of the individual himself, to "moral freedom" is possible through victorious laws, like people punish themselves. Zgidno with Kant, S.V. it is possible only for the sphere of moral laws, which are opposite to the laws of nature. For Fichte, freedom is the instrument for the enforcement of the moral law.

Schelling to know his own version of the problem of S.V., while respecting others, as if they stink like "internal necessities of the day", the freedom of a person to stand on the path of God and nature, butty and nebutty. It is with Hegel that Christianity is to bring into the minds of European people the idea of ​​those that history is a process in the attainment of freedom. Nietzsche respects the whole history of morality - the history of pardons for S.V. On yoga thought, S.V. - fiction, "pardon of everything organic". Self-created will before power transfers purification of moral ideas of will and vidpovidalnosti. The Marxist philosophy conceived a mindful development in the fact that the associated philologists are able to rationally regulate the exchange of speeches between the suspility of that nature. The growth of the productive forces of the society creates material changes of mind for the development of individuals. The kingdom of rightful freedom was conceived in Marxism as communism, in which there is private power, exploitation, and by themselves the very foundation of primus. S.V. - one of the central to understand the fundamental ontology of Heidegger.

Freedom is the most important buttya, the "foundation of foundations", which contains existence in a permanent situation of choice. In a similar rank, for Sartre, freedom is not the identity of an individual, but rather a yogo diy, but rather a supra-historical designation of the generic essence of a person. Freedom, choice and timchasity are the same, respecting the philosopher. Russian philosophy has the problem of freedom, S.V. specially rozroblyalas Berdyaev. The world of objects, de-suffering that evil, resisting creativity, calling to hem the conservative forms of objects. The results of creativity will inevitably be activated, but the creative act itself will also inevitably be free. Perhaps, the dominant trend in the interpretations of S.V. (especially in the 20th century) there is a point of disgrace, for what kind of person is the head of the one who traps with her. You can only find clues for truthfulness at "near-cord" vipads. (Div. Transgression.)

A.P. Zhdanivsky

New philosophical dictionary. order. Gritsanov A.A. Minsk, 1998.

FREEDOM OF WILL

FREEDOM OF WILL - the building of a person to self-development in his actions. In the context of the early Greek culture, the understanding of S. V. is accentuated not so philosophically and categorically, but as a legal meaning. A free person is a huge citizen of the polis, the one who lives on the land of his ancestors. The protilezhnіst yomu - vіyskovopoloneniya, vivezion to a foreign land and transformation into a slave. A coil of freedom of an individual - polis, yogo earth (Solon); the right people live on the land of the polis, where a reasonable law has been established. Therefore, the antonym of the term "vilniy" is not so "slave", like "non-Greek", "barbarian". For the Homeric epic, the understanding of freedom reveals one more sense. A good person is the one who lives without a primus stove, with a good nature. The greatest possible expression of freedom is in the spirits of the hero, who shares his share with him, who competes with the gods. Theoretical rethinking of the scientific and philosophical formulation of the nutrition of SV. folded into the thoughts of the sophists, which were contrasted with “fusis” (the only possible order, generated by nature itself) and “no-mos” (the order of life, which is independently restored by the skin people). Socrates blatantly plays the leading role of knowing freedom in the present. True vilny, moral vchinok mozhlivy less than the basis of a clear understanding of goodness and valor. No one can do bad things out of good will, people are better at their best, and less unknowing, non-government shtovhaє yogo on the wrong way. Plato explains ST. for the sake of the good as the best “idea”. It is good to sanctify the order, which is the order of the world in the world. Enter freely - mean children, focusing on the ideal of the good, uzgodzhuyuchi special aspirations from the supremacy of justice. Aristotle considers the problem of ST. in the context of moral choice. Freedom is associated with knowledge of a special kind - knowledge-smart ("phronesis"). Vono vіdrіznyaєtsya vіd znannya-"tehne", scho zabezpechuє vyvіshennya zavdanya vіdomim zrazkom. Moral knowledge is smart, that it paves the way for freedom, orienting the choice of the shortest vchinka from the quiet ethical choice. Jerelo of such knowledge is a specific moral intuition, as it sways in people through life experiences. Stoicism develops its own foundation of freedom, acknowledging the priority of providence in life. Self-important individuals stand in the pre-trimannian obov'yazkіv and obov'yazku (Panetsiy). With whom providence can be seen as the law of nature, and as the will in people (Posidonius). The will in the rest of the moment stands as if it were to fight against the lot, and as such it will require a special vibe. Epikur looks at the food about SV. in his atomistic physics. Rest to resist the deterministic atomism of Democracy. Physics of Epikur to bring the possibility of SV. The reasons for such inspiration are not obvious, they appear spontaneously. A special stage in the production of food about SV. formed the Christian ideology. The person was called to create her own life in unity with the Divine, learning the Bible. The problem, however, lies in the fact that, on the one hand, the universalism of God’s will, from one side, and morally susilla people, has not yet reached (and in fact, it has not reached) the knowledge of the Divine, - from the other side. Christian literature, which deals with these problems, can be classified according to the sign of emphasis on the other side of the relationship. So, Pelagii (5th century) to bring to a wide extent the confusion of the Christian idea about the fate of the will of a person in a formalized share, by the way, belittling the significance of the quiet sacrifice of Christ. Augustine defends the idea of ​​universality Providence from the point of view of polemics. The creation of goodness in the activity of a person is only possible for the help of the grace of God. Moreover, її diyu Augustine does not appear to zі vіdomim animals before her from the side of a person. Vaughn manifests itself independently in every way. Homa Aquinas vbachaє sphere ST. at the choice of goals that contribute to the achievement of good. For yoga firmness, until you know there is only one correct path. Reasonable is the necessary pragne of good, but evil, as the result of a rational choice, is impossible. The diversity of positions is also manifested in the era of the Reformation, Erasmus of Rotterdam defends the idea of ​​St. Luther speaks against it, invoking the literal reading of the dogma about the Divine Covenant. God, back to back, calling some people to salvation, condemning others to eternal torment. The future share of a person is overwhelmed, however, by his own unknown. Luther, at the same time, pointing out the special sphere of buttya, “knowing” how the specialness in the mind can be seen the signs of obscurity that appear in it. To go about the sphere of human everyday life and about professional activity, which is successful, which is a sign of the ability (obviousness) of an individual in the face of the light and God. A similar position is taken by Calvin, who knows that the Will of God will be programing buttya people. Protestantism is practical to reduce free will to a minimum value. The fundamental paradox of the Protestant ethics strikes, however, for those who postulate the inactivity of the human will in the presence of God's grace, there, zmushyuyuchi people rozshukuvat "ciphers" of decoration, zoomed in on the activist type of specialness. With Protestantism polemіzuvav єzuїt L. de Molina (1535-1600): in the midst of seeing God’s general knowledge, the theory saw especially “middle knowledge” about those who could become infatuated, but specifically to understand for the sake of understanding singing. Tse umova Molina and pov'yazuvav іz living human will. Whose glance, having taken away his rose from Suarez, having taken into account that God remembers his grace to deprive these people of people, for an hour, I will help God not strangle the ST. Vchennya K. Yanseniya (1585-1638) truly inspired the ideas of Calvin and Luther - a person free to choose between good and evil, or even between different types of sin. A similar view was also taken by the mystic M. de Molinos, who affirmed the idea of ​​the passivity of the human soul before God (div. KVIETISM). Topic ST. showing itself and the philosophy of the New hour. For Hobbes, St. means us before the presence of a physical primus. Freedom to interpret it in an individual natural world: a person is more free then, the more opportunities for self-development appear before her. The freedom of the hulk and the "freedom" of the slave are divided only once in a few words: the first one does not have absolute freedom, it is impossible to say about the other that the wine is absolutely wrong. Vіdpovіdno to Spinoza vіlny God, because. If nothing else is determined by an internal law, a human being, like a part of nature, is not. Prote wine pragne freedom, translating non-violent ideas into viraz, affect - in rational love to God. The mind is to multiply freedom, suffering is fast, - respect Leibniz, razrіznyuchi freedom is negative (freedom for ...) and positive (freedom for ...). For Locke, the concept of freedom is equal to the freedom of diy; freedom is the essence of building a child, depending on your choice. The SV himself, opposes the mind, speaks out to the fundamental appointments of the people - such is the look of Rousseau. Transition from natural freedom, obmezheniya by the forces of the individual himself, to "moral freedom" is possible through victorious laws, like people punish themselves. Zgidno with Kant, SV. it is possible only for the sphere of moral laws, which are opposite to the laws of nature. For Fichte, freedom is the instrument for the enforcement of the moral law. Schelling to know his own version of the problem of St., while respecting others, as if they stink like “internal necessities of the day”, the freedom of a person is based on the joy of God and nature, butty and nebutty. It is with Hegel that Christianity is to bring into the minds of European people the idea of ​​those that history is a process in the attainment of freedom. Nietzsche respects the whole history of morality - the history of pardons for St. On yoga thought, SV. - fiction, "pardon of everything organic." Self-created will before power transfers purification of moral ideas of will and vidpovidalnosti. The Marxist philosophy conceived a mindful development in the fact that the associated philologists are able to rationally regulate the exchange of speeches between the suspility of that nature. The growth of the productive forces of the society creates material changes of mind for the development of individuals. The kingdom of rightful freedom was conceived in Marxism as communism, in which there is private power, exploitation, and by themselves the very foundation of primus. ST. - one of the central to understand the fundamental ontology of Heidegger. Freedom is the most important buttya, the “foundation of foundations”, which contains existence in a permanent situation of choice. In a similar rank, for Sartre, freedom is not the identity of an individual, but rather a yogo diy, but rather a supra-historical designation of the generic essence of a person. Freedom, choice and timchasity are the same, respecting the philosopher. Russian philosophy has the problem of freedom, SV. specially rozroblyalas Berdyaev. The world of objects, de-suffering that evil, resisting creativity, calling to hem the conservative forms of objects. The results of creativity will inevitably be activated, but the creative act itself will also inevitably be free. Mabut, dominating the trend in the interpretation of ST. (especially in the 20th century) there is a point of disgrace, for what kind of person is the head of the one who traps with her. You can only find clues for truthfulness at the "near-cord" vipads.

New philosophical dictionary. - Minsk: Book Dim. A. A. Gritsanov. 1999

Marvel at the same "Freedom of Will" in other dictionaries:

The concept of European moral philosophy, which was left to take shape in I. Kant at the significant intelligible property of an individual to moral self-destruction. In a retrospective plan (before or post-Kantian theories), the term "St." you can look… Philosophical Encyclopedia

The health of a person to self-development in children. In the early Greek culture of the understanding C.B. accentuated not so philosophically categorically, as legally significant. Vilna is a person who is a huge citizen of the polis, the one who is alive. History of Philosophy: Encyclopedia

Free will- Freedom of Will ♦ Libre Arbitre Freedom is a blessing, absolute and not determined by anything; “Buildings signify themselves, without being anything that signifies” (Marcel Conche, Aleatorica, V, 7). It’s worth to finish the mystical zdіbnist, what to lie down with suvoro ... Philosophical Dictionary of Sponville

The category, which means a philosophical and ethical problem, is self-determined, or a person is determined by his actions, that is the food about the intellect of the human will, two main positions appeared in the virishenni of such a person: determinism and indeterminism. Great Encyclopedic Dictionary

The great reformers of the church stood for the wrong will, and those who stood for the freedom of the will, the former ones fell asleep freedom, others the slavery of conscience. Henri Am'el You call yourself free. Will we see what, what will we want for what? Friedrich Nietzsche Mi… … An encyclopedia of aphorisms has been published

FREEDOM OF WILL, a category that signifies a philosophical and ethical problem is self-determined or a person is determined by his actions, that is. food about the ingenuity of the human will, the vision of which showed two main positions: determinism and ... Modern Encyclopedia

Free will- FREEDOM OF WILL, a category that signifies a philosophical and ethical problem of self-determination, or a person is determined by his actions, that is. food about the ingenuity of the human will, the vision of which showed two main positions: determinism and ... Illustrative encyclopedic dictionary

Free will:

all "for" and "against"

Gennady GOLOLOB, Cherkasy, Ukraine © Gennady Gololob, 2008

Mysterious power of human nature

Freedom of will is a more foldable manifestation, like a roaming, and guarding, analyzing that inventory. What is free will? In what way does she look? Yakі її posibility? How is she "working"? How to interact with the need? What is the right way to flaunt freedom? What should the Bible say about her? The axis of those is the number of food, vydpovisti on yakі mi we will try at tsіy stattі.

The thoughts of those who have such free will, and inspire reality, are more reasonable. Some recognize it as a reason, guarding the manifestations of free will in a practical life. Others vvazhayut її vygadkoy, skіlki vpevnі in the fact that everything in the world is subject to harsh laws, which include the reason for the wondrous quality of human nature. For some people, it’s not safe, for you should always take revenge on your own potential evil. For others, there is no mind, be-like goodness, shards without it, an impossible heroic deed, asceticism, heroism. There is only one person who can agree on all thoughts: freedom of will to take revenge on one’s own risk and respect it with care.

Sound free will to oppose the primus, the protege is not so, accept, do not entrust. Like a primus, you can be good and evil, prote, for guidance from the rest, you can even have a mysterious power - you won’t be weak and that’s a werewolf. Naskіlki won't be reversed, that yakі umu її stupennija to protilezhny choice - the subject of uninterrupted discussions among fahіvtsіv. The werewolf of human choice explains why freedom of will is either praised or reviled. When she is inspired.

Gennady Gololob

(nar. 1964) - the author of low publications from systematic theology and apologetics in various Christian periodicals and Merezhya. In 2001, I took a bachelor's degree in theology at the Donetsk Christian University. In 2008, the publisher of "The Bible for All" published his book "Freedom of Will: Between Slavery and Swavillam". Nina was a theological editor at the publishing house "Smyrna" (Cherkasi, Ukraine).

єtsya in a filthy choice and stands on the way to the direction, її adore. If, like a good decision, they turn around at the side of the evil one and follow the deadly path, they flinch, re-follow and curse. And in the meantime, ignoring all its super arrogance, there is a gift of God to people, even if it is the safest of all Yogo gifts!

What does the fact that free will is invested in our nature and supported by God mean? The shards of a person are not the result of blind natural forces, but the fact that we can have our Creator, without understanding God's idea of ​​how to free the will of a person, it is impossible to understand the whole phenomenon. Otherwise, apparently, only perebuvayuchy on biblical positions, we can reliably know that such freedom is in the air, and the freedom of the will of a person, a zokrema.

Different sciences about free will

Free will is vvazhayut by the subject of his education a lot of sciences: physiology, psychology, sociology and philosophy. Zrozumilo, in the skin, like opponents, and pribіchniki of freedom of will. In general, physiologists try to explain the spontaneity of a person's behavior in a squat manner - as if in a moody recovery in a recessive stubbornness (K. Lorenz, I. Pavlov). Z. Freud seriously undermined the omnipotence of the laws of recession with the additional help of the mechanism of functioning of the bridge. Instinctive pidhіd, at the same time, is clearly not suitable for a complete description of the

b.f. Skinner, Beyond Freedom and Dignity (London: Penguin, 1973), p. 210.

vedennya people. For example, explain such psychological phenomena as proof of conscience, internal struggle, repentance and instilling doubts, cowardice and acquiescence of guilt not in the mind. In a fatalistic way, all people were divided into altruists and hisists, not allowing the same transition from one camp to another.

In psychology, the last hour was spent changing the hearts of the soul into people, but on the cob of the last century, they were moved, if in 1912 the roci J.B. Watson, having voted that the subject of discipline can be behavior (English behavior), and not the knowledge of people. So just psychology opined in the slavery of sociological methodology, which corroborated the behavior of a person, which determines by pouring in from the side of his social sharpening. Watson is considered the founder of the behavioral movement in psychology, as if he had raised B.F. Skinner. So stay hung up on the possibility of "programming the correct behavior" of the skin people in a way to change the minds of your life. I finish my book "Beyond the Limits of Freedom and Goodness" (1971) with the words: "We haven't fought yet, but people can work for people"111.

Psychologists on the floor lightly considered it because of the fact that people were aware of those reasons, that, having said, it’s more than just the behavior of people to scientific caution, and then it’s better to give them all the objective data for analysis. The right reason for the pardon of pardon was the rejection of philosophical and religious excuses about the soul’s foundation, the understanding of knowledge. Zrozumіlo, for such an approach, people are deprived of

elk of its natural independence (autonomy). At the same time, a number of psychologists (for example, W. James, E. Fromm, V. Frankl, N. Khomsky) followed this rule, determining the autonomy of external (social) and internal (genetic) factors in the nature of people's behavior. In this rank, suffocating the psychology of methodological approaches to sociology, the power of the nation was called. Sociology itself explained the behavior of people like physiology, only a few laws in recession were put on utopian social laws to the type of Marxist determinism.

Philosophers posed more seriously to the point of problematics; The thinkers, who are fundamentally listed as having the basis of vipadkovost in the world and free will in people, are usually called determinists (Lat. "significators"). Їх opponents, smart bachiti with freedom of will and different manhood of the world self-sufficiency, are called voluntarists (Lat. "Vozvіllya"). In other words, the determinists make the world vipadical to the point of necessity, and the voluntarists - navpaki.

Representatives of the first directly (for example, P. Holbach, J. Lamette, P. Laplace) respected the human part of the mechanically-powered omniscience, to which behind the great rakhunka they turned on his independence. Here the stench followed the glances of the ancient stoicists, as if they learned that the "hearing share

I Holbach P. Healthy Gluzd. - M., 1941, p. 60.

Camus A. Rebellion of the people. Philosophy. Politics Art. - M. 1990, p. 121-122.

to lead, to drag the foolish." It is not surprising that Holbach called free will a "chimera"121.

In the history of philosophy, tsey pidkhid, who has lived in antiquity, at the New Hour, has become an alternative.

Adherents to voluntarism (for example, A. Schopenhauer, F. Nietzsche, J.P. Sartre, A. Camus, A. Bergson), on the other hand, invigorate people in the face of an ordered world with the very principle of yoga behavior. In case of any extreme virase, the point of the bula is the position of the absolute freedom of the will. For example, Albert Camus lashed out at the free will of the mind like an absolutely wrong choice:

"... Everything is permitted and nothing matters. There are no arguments "for", there are no arguments "against", and it is impossible to sue, nor to be true.

Here it is, opposing these two theories of free will is unsustainable. However, in the world of that, as their skin showed the same problems, a third one could not help but appear, as they tried to hide the short two in front. We call the representatives of the middle position "centrists". To tsikh philosophers we have seen, nasampered, R. Descartes, G.V. Leibniz, H. Wolf, I. Kant. The stench was vowed that the world did not start and did not follow the laws of physics, but that it was mutually dependent on vipadkovym processes, so it was by the will of the people, owing to the will of the people, that they could be self-reliant. In my mind, the freedom of will of a person represents a special look

іsnuvannya, scho rooted in potoybіchchoї reality. Like Viktor Frankl,

"Freedom to the mind of a person rises above the laws that govern nature, and to his own, more high equal buttya, which is autonomous, popry yogo fallow in the lower equal buttya" .

On this basis, the human will can independently rob oneself for the sake of it. to create a new causal and inherited series of phenomena. As if there is a moral character, a person can be seen as self-righteous and inspire self-signed "nature".

This position is taken by the Russian thinker and teacher Kostyantin Ushinsky as follows:

Pretty romatic process of power only people: only people, often with commemorative violence for their nervous organism, shooing vіdminnostі, podіbnosti, zv'azok i cause there, de їхі it is not visible: sorting through the method of your own enough, foldably understandable poov'yazuє tі, yakі zv'azyuyutsya, rozrivає tі, yakі mayut buti razirvani, shukaє novі... Jerelo tsієї freedom in the rozum process of people to know the freedom of її soul - її samosvіdomostі, more free will, like tse mi nadaly, maybe the mother is less that istota, if we can build up not only to want, but to assimilate our spiritual act of wanting: just for the sake of wisdom, we can repair our desire".

On this occasion, the successor of the pedagogical school of Ushinskiy V. Sukhomlynskiy spoke about the need for the development of "smart currying with your bajans".

Understandably, the centrist position was satisfied with neither extreme determinism nor extreme voluntarism. The first one, to the one who calls the will deceitful to the senses, as if he does not have any real expectations for himself; the other, to the one who respects the unfortunate person to turn to the savillas of the will of the will. Just as behind the manifestations of determinants, a person is a slave of the outer environment, then a slave of the sovereign swaville is a slave of the voluntarists of the wines. Free will is brought to uniqueness of two extreme nights, like Fedir Stepun:

"In the face of truth, freedom transforms into swaville, into anarchy, into a struggle against everyone; in the face of specialty, it transforms into a passive listener, into a disciplinary battalion of the German-order, Prussian-barracks, or large-party type."

Come out, that determinism must have fettered free will, and voluntarism - rozkovuvav. With whom the utopian looks like the rest itself. Shche Zh.Zh. Rousseau hung up against the idea of ​​the absolute freedom of the human being, wanting to have great sympathy for the idea of ​​freedom. Vіn stverdzhuvav, that the absolute freedom of a person is impossible, oskolki її intermedium with itself її іsnuvannya. To reach a person's absolute freedom, it is necessary

Frankl V. Lyudina in search of sensation. - M:

Progress. 1990, p. 162-163.

and Ushinskiy K.D. Pedagogical create. IN

6 vols. v. 5. - M: Pedagogy. 1990, p. 457. Stepun F.A. About freedom // Dosvid Russian liberalism. - M. 1997, p. 358.

it would be better to kill yourself not less than all people and inspire God, but yourself. The human nature is scuttled to instill its natural exchange. Vtіm, for whom Rousseau's nutrition is not right, the shards of his own people are not shy to inspire material minds of life. So you can guess, abstract, dream, show, plan thinly. The protégé of the French philanthropist is right on the whole with that which absolute freedom is impossible for death. In this sphere of my own, I can show free will, but it can be absolute.

The centrist position has replaced the superechku in the middle of the human community. Having taken special poignancy, having nourished my will, having read it to the mind of the people’s witness. In psychology, pribіchniki to voluntarism see the thought of those who have no mind, and the will is the virish clerk of mental life. True, people are the only thing, building to go against the arguments of the mind, which can be swayed, for example, by suicide. However, what are those who are going to rob? Zovsіm nі, vіdmova vіd rozumu zovsіm not obov'yazkova for will. Leslie Stevenson in his book "Ten theories about the nature of man" wrote:

"I can’t understand the free spirit, I can’t understand why it’s not possible for reasons (it would have broken yoga vipadkovym, and therefore, it’s unlikely that yoga could be condemned to the one who had blamed yoga), but let’s admit that it won’t come through vibra side

Prote, bring the mind to the mind only by a drive, but not by the cause of the adoption of the decision by the will. "Our "I" cannot be left behind by the passive looking motives and can get into nothing, which I threaten, motives, otherwise it will be prompted at the same time in the face of the decision" and motives, acceptance of the final decision, in view of which to lay down a specific svіdomy vchinok, to lay down in the "judgment" of the will of the people. In this sense, the will of the building is unacceptable to instill absolute knowledge, brought to the sight of people by God Himself. And here we need to move into the realm of the biblical. And then a systematic theology.

Free will in the Bible

To the biblical point of view, the centrist position of secular thinkers is close to sight. According to the Bible, a person has two natures: material and spiritual, the first is ordered by the laws of physical reality, and the other is not. The first one is called freedom, the friend is called the freedom of the bazhannya, and offended by the difference of freedom, obviously, to diverge in science. Zrozumilo, and inner freedom is aware of the struggle of development

L. Stevenson, D. Haberman. Ten Theories of Human Nature, N.Y.: Oxford University Press, 3d ed., 1998. Russian Vision: Slovo, 2004; cit. by: http://yanko.lib.ru/books/philosoph/

stevenson=10_theories_of_human_nature=ann.htm. Levitsky S.A. Tragedy of freedom. - Frank-furt-am-Main: Posiv. 1984, p. fourteen.

special motives, pochuttiv and rational arguments, but do not rest on her such power as the law of nature over the freedom of ovnishnoy behavior. Here, there is a place to pour in, but not a primus stove, about which we will talk below. To bring up the cause of the "primary sin" cannot again have dominion over the people's svodomistyu (Rom. 7:18-19).

The butt of a large part of the power of free will is the ambiguous reaction of two sinami to the father’s order from the parable of Christ: “One man had two blues; : I don’t want to, but then, having repented, pishov. I, pіdіyshovshi to the other, vіn having said to yourself. Like Bachimo, the freedom of the will of a person transfers the beast not only from good to evil, like Augustine from mercy to good, but from evil to good. Let's take into account the fact that with two sons Christ defeated the number of categories of people: the Pharisees and the Mitars.

What is the fact of the reversibility of freedom of will, a particular kind of necessity? Chi є inseparable tse svaville? No, shards, the Word of God points to the possibility of a non-musical infusion into free will from the side of accepting the truth and love. Tse means that the will is built up to self-exchange and self-control. For example, the knowledge of the truth can be learned for the free will of meaning. Shards of moral knowledge of the building should not be poured into the freedom of the will, we are talking about the need for vihovennia, especially in childish vice cholo-

centurion. Text of Proverbs. 20:5 to take revenge on oneself for the important truth: "Think in the heart of a person - deep water, but a sensible person will use them." In this rank, knowing vikonu is an important role in the right mindfulness of the will to self-control and spiritual discipline, with which it does not interfere with choice. Tse in the latest weather is the vision of Stevenson's thought.

The free will of the sinner is realized by evil. Win the building to goodness, accept it, in the sphere of your own change and death (Luke 6:32; Rom. 7:18). Vykoristovuyuchi tsyu vnutrishnyu zdatnіst, God's grace to dіє through neviruyuchih people that have zvnіshny їkhnyu zhittі. Shards of free will are not degraded in sinners, in the light of a new year, they are quickened by God’s proposition to turn around (But. 4:7; Isa. 45:22; Er. 33:3; Eze. 18:30; El. 2:12-14; Zech. 1:3, Mal. 3:7; Mt. 16:24; Di 5:4; Jak. 4:7-10; 1 Cor. 6:12; 7:36; 9:17; 2 Cor. ( 8:17; Cl. 2:18, 23; Phm. 1:14; Heb. 10:23; 12:10

In such a rank, my Bachimo, that the punishment for the sin of Adam, which consumed all the people, was deprived of the body of the people, and that was temporal, and not eternal, earthly, and not spiritual, werewolf, and not residual. God did not allow Adam in Eden with all His grace, but instead deprived him of that її thing, as if the building of people did not sue their sin and call Yogo for help. In such an order, the act of "original sin", which, having enchantingly corrected the bodily nature of a person, stand before the front of grace (Jv. 1:9; 6:44; Dії 17:27; Rom. 2:4). Vaughn strikes the weak

the will of a person who awakens in spiritual paralysis and non-government, and in such a rite to work її building to accept salvation by faith and repentance (Mt. 23:37; Luke 13:1-7; John 5:40; 6:67; Dії. 13:46). Shards of this ardent grace are ready to bring people to remembrance of special sinfulness and sponkaє її shukati salvation, God peeps at her singing in His request to be saved (Deut. 4:29; Ps. 26: 8; ). :13-14; Matt. 23:37; Luke 11:2-13; John 5:40; Di 17:27; 2 Cor. 4:2; Gal. 6:10; 1 Tim. 4:10: Heb. 3:78; 4:2; 5:9).

How can freedom of will often build up (only at one’s own countryside) repair the legacy of “original sin”, how can one be free in the mind of God? It is impossible for an idea, however, Scripture does not characterize the will of the Lord as a charm. Navpaki, it’s depicting God’s baptism, zokrema at the nurse’s ward, let’s lull that out of Yogo to the transfer of the future people’s bazhan. For example, the Lord "knowing" in advance the behavior of not only the believers, but also the intercessors (But. 18:21; Vih. 3:19; 2 Pet. 2:9), but Yogo's prophecy did not signify them until death. Otzhe, Yogo transferring that adjective (Rom. 8:29) may not be an absolute, but an intellectual character. God does not take away until such a trust is enough, but rather whispers the humble and usvіdomlyuyuchih their staleness in the sight of New people (Ps. 36:11; 39:5; 149:4; App. 15:33; 21:4; 29:23).

As such a camp of an unrepentant person, then the freedom of a Christian imposes on him the same responsibility for his salvation. Text 1 Thess. 5:21-22 kazh: "Try everything, well-

trim your foot. Treat yourself in the face of every kind of evil." First, "trimatize", appropriately designate "evil." And here God did not deprive the freedom of the people, as if they could hear God, without any cursing. evil and good lie down in the sight of God, which is given to people by those criteria, for which it is necessary to “take everything into consideration.” In other words, in the New Testament doctrine of the freedom of the human will, it is presented as a lienness of a person in the knowledge of God, so is the freedom of putting up to that knowledge. all the same, she will work independently.

Paul's words about the freedom of the will of the people at її svidomosti and її lack of freedom at yogis (Rom. 7:14-25) show the duality of the problem of freedom. For yoga, the freedom of a person can be two equal: outer (at the tops) and inner (at the witness). In the vchinkah, the freedom of the people is already surrounded, so the Bazhans, as a rule, are allowed to do it in a practical way. Tse means that in such moods to the people, that you do not grasp, it is necessary to show condescension. Vіn mozhe d_ti nebіbnogo result, ale z vіdrazu, but pіznіshe. The axis of why is Jesus Christ, having forgiven the mitars and the harlot, and judging the thoughts of the Pharisees, not respecting the present-day homelessness.

Without a doubt, for the spiritual manifestation of freedom and the realization of moral perfection, the knowledge of the truth is necessary. For this sensiu, who is not aware of freedom, it is like spiritual slavery, and, on the contrary, the slavery of righteousness is rightful freedom, the shards allow people to come out of an evil warehouse.

own will (Jv. 8:36; Rom. 8:16). If there is freedom of will, which self-organizes, voluntarily chooses spiritual slavery, then it becomes self-exchange and self-significance (rooted in one's own choice).

The statements about the freedom of the will of the people of the authors of the New Testament rely on theological assertion about the insensitivity of the nature of the will of God. Tse I explain why the grace of God, zustrichayuchis іz zavіmі and svіdomim support people, naє їy vozlivіstvo vіkinut ryatіvnyy yatіvіvі і God zusilla yоgo savіnnya (Іov. 37:23; Matt. 18:33-34; 21:43; 22:12- 13; 23:37; Mark 10:21; Luke 4:2829 (Jor 4:22); 8:13; 9:53; John 5:40; 15:5-6; Di 14:6- 20; 26:19; Jude 4-6; Rom. 8:13; 10:16; 1 Cor. (Col. 1:23; Heb. 4:2; 6:6-8; Ann. 3: 20) Less mental propositions and perebuvannya in the order of a specific person can explain the fall into grace, faith and God, described in the Bible (1 Sam. 10:1) (por.

1 King. 9:16,17); 3 Kings 11:4,9-10 (prob. 1 Chr. 28:9); Ієр. 17:13; Єz. 18:24,26; 33:18; Mt. 10:33; 13:11-15.21; Mk. 4:17; 14:21; OK. 8:9,10,13; 15:24; 22:32; Іn. 16:1; Yak. 4:4; 2 Pet. 2:1; 1 In. 2:15; Rome. 11:20-23; 1 Cor. 6:9-10; 8:11; 15:2; Gal. 5:21; Kilk. 2:6-8; 1 Thess. 3:2-5; 1 Tim. 3:6;

2 Tim. 4:10 (thor. Cl. 4:14; Phm. 1:24); Heb. 6:12; 10:26-27).

Zrozumіlo, umovnіt priynyattya poryatunka as a gift may є on vazі as a form of synergy chi vzaєmodії. Textual representations of a synergistic concept are found in such passages of the New Testament, like Matt. 25:29; Mk. 16:20; OK. 17:5-6; 2 Pet. 1:5.8; Rome. 1:10; 8:26; 1 Cor. 10:13; 2 Cor. 1:10-11; 9:10; FLP. 1:19. Grace of God checks

people of singing zustrіchnyh diy, and only for qієї wise to be granted їy. The butt of the biblical variety of synergy among the adopters of the order is the text of Іс. 59:1: "From, the hand of the Lord did not hurry on those to rap, and Yogo's ear was not tight for this, so that it was a little, but your iniquities committed it against you and your God, and your sins turned up Yogo's face in you, so that they would not a little." Like Bachimo, God can (like you want to) vryatuvat all people, but the sins of people (more precisely, the internal prejudice to these sins) do not allow Yom to develop his ability. Ale why? For him, God, who is tolerant of evil, is no more until the song of the world (But. 15:16; Er. 44:22; Eze. 7:4,9; Mt. 23:3233; 1 Thess. 2:16).

Those that God's will or Yogo's admonition does not surround the freedom of the will of a person can be seen from the intellectual prophecies of God, or such applications, like the ideas of the text of 1 Kings. 23:7-13. Returning to God through the priestly ephod, David, having taken God's advice about the lives of the inhabitants of Keil, handed it over to Saul. Before us is the fact of God's providence. Chi little wono primus character? No, shards David filled the place early in the morning, so that God didn’t spit it out before God. Moreover, in my right, I manifested the free will of David. Yakby David did not hasten to shovatsya, namiri Meshkantsiv could become a reality. God guarded David not out of obvious, but out of real insecurity. Father, God, having better not to pull David out of the hands of Yogo's enemies, but to take Yogo's breath of grace, the shards of that shukav

Yogo please. Come out, David's perseverance did not stop the prophecy of God, and it did not work out. Otzhe, not every transfer is called, as if not all transfer is called. This kind of God's omniscience is called mental knowledge, the shards of this creation lie in the minds, which are conjured from the human side, and that way there is a werewolf.

To the wickedness of God’s unconditional will, it’s eloquent to witness and God’s promise to vryatuvat all people without blame (Mt. 11:28; Mk. 16:15; John 1:29; 3:16-17; 12:32; Di 4:12; 2 Peter 3:9; 1 John 2:2; Rom. 10:12,18; 11:32; 14:15; 6-11; 1 Tim. 2:4,6; 4:10; Tit. 2: 11; Heb 2:9,15; Rev 22:17). Well, God bazhaє, but if you don’t influence your own bazhanni, it means that Yogo’s will is wise and can’t be reached for the help of primus entrances. Oskіlki God can have moral reasons for self-exchange, non-musical and intelligent character Yogo spit on people explain why people can repair opir tsy spit.

The New Testament theologian characterizes God with great tolerance for erring people (Luke 13:8; John 12:47-48; 1 Pet. 3:20; 2 Pet. 3:9,15; Rom. 2:4; 3 :26 ), which allows Yom to pay for repentance (for example, Israel for Moses and his death) or to confess for Yogo’s manifestness (for example, Ninevitians, Ahab, Hezekiah) His own punishment of guilt. For the sake of reason, God quickly and harshly punishes only extreme manifestations of evil, expressions, importantly, looking at pride (for example, Nebuchadnezzar, Belshazzar),

1 "About throw that grace", 8.17.

the greatest sinners of Vin are given a chance of repentance and the possibility of correcting for His help (Prip. 14:17).

Free will for a Christian theologian

The freedom of will in the Christian theologian was quarreled with two positions: the statement about the "first sin" of Augustine and the statement about the absolute name of Calvin. Augustine was the first in the history of Christian theology, having declared that God is building a people, we do not please our own intentions with them. “If blessed may be given to people, you will definitely become blessed, but if it’s not guilty, it’s given to you, you don’t forget yoga” (“Pro dokor and grace”, par. 34). “God, having educated us with Christ before the creation of the world, having appointed us to adoption, not to the one that we small ourselves, be holy and blameless, ale Vіn having chosen and ordained us so that we could be such” (“About the Mindfulness of the Saints”, pair 57). Like Bachimo, there is not a single word about the fall of the sin... Here we are not up to it, if the sovereign God destroys and rages.

Truthfully, on the back of the head, Augustine did not hang out the thought that God would please God and His people to supersede the supremacy of Yogo rule. Vіn just vchiv, that a sinful person is not in a position to deserve a good order, not to be encouraged to accept yoga as a gift. Adam's sin simply by allowing freedom of will: "The human will does not reach grace through freedom, but rather freedom reaches through grace"191.

Augustine, however, having rushed into the food, I had a pardon. On the right, in the fact that for the sake of saving God, God still cares about people. Obviously, not right, but believe that repentance. Augustine knew that, but twisted from this position in an even more wondrous way: God will work to replace us, those whom we help. Prote for such a vikladі pitanya vinikaє, at the extreme approach, one problem. Heba God can repent instead of a sinner? Khiba Vіn is guilty of the deputy of us schomitі vіdchuvati all the life and life of our fall? Why can't we ourselves experience all the painful traces of evil in our own hands? Obviously, God is shameful for us, but do not replace us. Tse is our fault, how can we know, do not perish. One God's vikrittya is not enough here. It is necessary to wait for him with a free will. Tse is our power of action, like a God, you can take it less, but do not work with a one-sided rank.

Having reconsidered himself in the fact that God cannot allow, but rather everything in our life, Augustine zishtovhnuvsya with the problem of the lack of evidence of the real proof of the main arguments of his theory. Since God is good and omnipotent, how could evil be blamed on earth? At the whispers, there is evidence of the inquisition of Augustine deyshov, with a turbulent Christian look, a visnovka: evil may be on earth to that which God Himself has so indulged, let it be passively allowed. In such a way, Augustine tried to explain the vitality of evil, that very reason for hell. Zvіdsi i yogo vimoga physically crack down on heretics: "Who can love us more, lower God? I, prote, Win not

Restaє not only read us with kindness, but lyakat us with grumpiness.

However, here Augustine checked one more shepherd: for the help of the idea of ​​"original sin" it was impossible to explain the evil of Satan and the unburned angels. And the axis here, unbearably tormented by the discovery of the chain, Augustine was abashed to introduce evil into the very nature of God - accept from the looker the doctrine of the feudal baptism - some creations by Him to the order, others to death. The world was divided into two camps in such a manner that it was impossible to move from one to the next and back. Because of the freedom of the will of people Augustine gave the place to children in the middle of good, but in the middle of evil. Viberati between them and others could no longer. Otzhe, some people became objects of God's mercy, others - Yogo hatred. So, to the insane right of God to violence, let it be good, the understanding of "deception" came to an understanding, not in the Evangelical, but in the Manichean meaning. In this rank, until the end of his life, Augustine became the voice of ideas, close to quiet, like a thousand years later John Calvin.

Augustine slacked off with two pardons: turning God into a dictator, who does not allow anything and human freedom, and the people - on the culture of worthlessness, in which the "image of God" will appear. Vіn did not realize that absolute svaville at the will of God was not goodness, but a vice. This understanding meant that God allowed the right to control Vlasnu's will, as he took away the building, however, as well as to destroy, so destroy people, the roblyach is absolutely

it is enough to navitt by appointment to that same sinner. However, Augustine, having created a biblical revelation not only about the nature of God, but also about the nature of man. Vіn not remembering the sinner's important zdіbnosti, like the Lord did not forgive, but to remake - humility. Humility is a vice, but great is honesty, prost honesty, accessible both to Christians and to non-human people. Without it, it would be impossible to b їхнє repentance and, later, forgiveness. The axis of zdatnist is God and having robbed the mind from the human side for people to take away His unappreciated mercy. The essence of the pardon of Augustine after Bernard of Clairvaux in simple terms: "Take away the freedom of will - and you won't be, why you'll be angry; take away the grace - and you won't be, why you'll be angry." If in the nonsense of Pelagia it was not consumed in the Savior, then in the nonsense of Augustine it is a sign of self-reproach. Whose glances had more nonsense, judge Chitachev.

From the power of understanding the nature of mindfulness, look at such theologians as Jean Calvin and Jacob Arminius. Calvin, having respected that God does not allow any freedom in the world created by Him, but all ordained, moreover, this firmness meant that in this "everything" must be included and evil. Zvіdsi i nezdatnіst before God nourishes morality, including those for which "it is recognized as eternal life, And in the others - eternal damnation "1101.

At the sight of Calvin, Yakob Armi-niy did not look at the will of God like

primushuyuchu - not to death, not to the point.

"As [God] has conquered the strength, such ... creation can repair the opera, it means, we should say that it’s not inevitable, but it’s acceptable, if you want to see the flow singfully, God is far away."

And if you doubt and hesitate about it, thoughtlessly respecting the Lord as an absolute tyrant, then you should follow the respect for the coming words of Jesus Christ: like birds picking up their fawns, and you didn't want to!(Matt. 23:37).

Well, the problem of slavery of the will through the "original sin" Arminy virishuvav for the help of vchennya about the front or the front (revival) of grace, as if taking into account the universal. The remainder neutralized the traces of the "original sin" of the flooring, that the will of the people was manifested by the creation of God's call to salvation. God to that and vmagaє vіd people's faith, and not to rob її, that "having decided to grant people sufficient grace, so that they could believe it."

In such a rank, for Time, the human will is built to believe

Calvin. J. Institutes of the Christian religion. V.1.2. Philadelphia, w. y., V.2, P. 925.

James Arminius, The Writings of James Arminius

(3 vols), tr. James Nichols and W. R. Bagnall (Baker,

1956), vol. 1, P. 291.

James Arminius, The Writings of James Arminius (3 vols), tr. James Nichols and W. R. Bagnall (Baker, 1956), vol. 1, P. 383.

cause the non-musical action, like the implicit confusion of Christ, so the universal action of the Holy Spirit. “By itself” (the most important guarded by Arminiya) a person is not able to build goodness, but in front of the grace to work the building to the last. In other words, just as God can theoretically work everything, but practically cannot work evil, so the human will, theoretically, cannot bring goodness by itself, but in fact, it is necessary to build on the back of the head the insane that universal infusion of the frontal grace.

Necessity of self-exchange of free will

Why is God so patient to the first and solitary sins and impatient to the coming sins and tribulations? Tse with the peculiarities of the human will. For zdіysnennya fully aware of the choice, which only th can carry all the power, freedom of will can be used not only for good, but also for evil, moreover, it manifests itself in a new way. Only then, if you choose between them, you will be aware, and also, in the future. Until the end of the ages, the freedom of will is rebuked at the camp of a childish swaville. Vaughn cannot be robbed of evidence, the shards cannot be able to know the names of both alternative ones.

Evil, obviously, the free will knows from special disobedience to the will of the Lord. Vidpovidno she knows and super arrogance of evil for її nature,

Frankl V. Lyudina in search of sensation. - M: Progress. 1990, p. 77.

what to wear in your own primordial "image of God". Obviously, the price for the first recognition of evil is real. Tse punishment, which is invariably seen on the її earthly share, will not lie before the eternal share of the people. Residual litigation for wickedness of a person is more likely to be judged for repeated, and more systematic, sin. Robbery of sin again and in front of their inner and God's best support, the will to "grow" into the sin of the floor (Ps. 36:8; Mt. 24:12), which resounds with him, so that in the end of the hut you waste your building until the condemnation of the sin (Jer. 13:23; 2 Tim. 2:25).

In such a rank, for God, the first importance is gained not by the fact that a person has sinned, but by those who choose to work for their sin. Like Frankl, "a person is not free of minds. Aleone is free to take a position on reaching them. Think not to be smart about it in full. Look at it - at the borders of the border - lie down, why get out, why give up minds"1131. Therefore, free will, you can allow yourself to try everything, including evil, but you don’t have the moral right to get into that evil, saving friendship with truth.

Vilna or autonomous will, having grown familiar with the Divine truth, knows the most powerful changes, so that one cannot be deprived of the primary swaville in the childish camp. The truth is to put її in the camp of the inevitable choice, so that the skin is broken by the will of the vibіr - chi bik good chi evil - brings її either to one, or to another. Viber will be good, it will be easier to come

good will come; if you choose evil, it’s easier to take root in someone else’s evil. The truth is called to help the will to self-sign in goodness, but it won’t stop until the new. F. Dostoyevsky opposes religious values: "knowers of Christ, people to know themselves."

Zrozumіlo, Divine authority consecrated and svіtskі moral tsіnnostі, oskіlki ґruntuyutsya on svіtchennyah voice sovіstі. All the knowledge of the building to help the free will is called upon to self-criticism and self-exchange, for it is the only way of self-improvement. Well, in a childish (primary) camp, freedom of will assumes self-development and the loss of spiritual self-identity, at the very least, it will be freed up to self-control, then, and repentance. If a person is allowed to build up to repentance, then he becomes the subject of "baking heart", created once by God. Such people do not have the ability to lie, and the stench is rebuffed by the sovereignty of the enemy of human souls, the devil.

Now we are becoming aware that free will has not one, but two of its own enemies: the primus of the callous, which shifts all the evidence to another, and the primus of the internal, which is inspired by the spirit of the future. Vlasne kazhuchi, for the creation of the freedom of free will, the necessary search will become the same

}