From today's perspective, behind the apparent opposition between rationalism and empiricism that gradually formed after18th century, there is actually a profound agreement, that is, the strict distinction between accidental knowledge about the world and inevitable knowledge about eternal things: Descartes and Leibniz pointed out that only analytical knowledge is inevitable, but this knowledge is not about the world, but some tautological propositions, which are expressed in some inevitable contents; Moreover, they can't be obtained through experience, but only from innate things, which leaves a reasonable proof for the existence of God. Similarly, Becker clearly distinguishes between what appears in our perception and what cannot be effectively introduced into perception, such as the existence of matter. The purpose of Becker's distinction is to prove that "existence is perceived", but it also shows his attitude towards the material world, that is, to exclude atheistic explanations about the existence of the world from empirical perception. From the opposition between rationalism and empiricism, we can see that they actually have completely different attitudes towards the distinction between these two kinds of knowledge: rationalism obviously opposes accidental knowledge about the world and emphasizes the grasp of inevitable knowledge of eternal things; Empiricism points out that even the propositions of mathematics and geometry are derived from experience, which is also a summary of empirical materials.
Hume played an important role in the formation of western modern positivism. Although he is usually regarded as the main representative of empiricism, he is very different from Locke's and Becker's empiricism in dealing with the relationship between the two kinds of knowledge, and it is this difference that makes contemporary philosophers put Hume in the camp of positivism. Logical positivists regard Hume as one of the pioneers of his thought, while Minsky of colac directly calls him "the real originator of positivism philosophy".
Hume distinguishes between "impression" and "idea", but points out that knowledge about the relationship between ideas does not need empirical observation outside ideas: they are only composed of similar, opposite and different degrees of nature and quantitative relations. The study of these relations is the content of mathematics, and has nothing to do with the outside world. The truth value of mathematical propositions depends on the concepts used in these propositions and the self-evident reasoning relationship between them. Hume thus pointed out that although the judgments about facts tell us about the content of existence, they do not contain the knowledge of inevitability. Therefore, human experience knowledge about fact judgment is limited, and we can't get knowledge about inevitability from such knowledge. The essence of Hume's skepticism is to deny that the so-called "law" proposition reflects the inevitability of things themselves, pointing out that inevitability can only exist in our hearts and in our thinking habits produced by association. Hume's criticism of the concepts of causality and noumenon led later positivists to completely abandon the metaphysics of realism, deny the existence of any innate object of knowledge, give up the pursuit of inevitable causality in science and advocate the position of probability theory on knowledge. It can be said that the whole positivist philosophical trend of thought revived from the beginning of 19 century developed along Hume's skeptical and critical thinking.
Of course, the revival of European positivism in the19th century was also related to the philosophical background at that time. According to the analysis of the famous contemporary historians of philosophy, such as Frederic Lastun and hamlin, there are two completely different philosophical tendencies in European philosophy in the19th century. One is Hegel's idealism, which is dominant in German philosophy, and the other is empiricism, which is dominant in British and French philosophy and their opposition. [5] Hegel's absolute spiritual system established by logical deduction of thoughts was criticized by Schopenhauer of the same age and Nietzsche and Kierkegaard later from different standpoints and angles, thus forming the voluntarism, survival philosophy and so-called post-Hegelian philosophy that surged in the second half of the19th century. Of course, a new hegelianism also appeared in Hegel's philosophy. Although these different ideas have different forms and viewpoints, they can all be regarded as different reactions to Hegel's idealism, which made the influence of Hegel's philosophy continue until the end of 19. But in the philosophical circles of Britain and France in the19th century, the situation is completely different.
In Britain, james mill and Jeremy Bentham were the most influential philosophers at the beginning of19th century. James mill was the father of Mill, who later became the greatest representative of English positivism philosophy. His Analysis of Human Mind Phenomenon, published in 1829, became a popular manual of Lenovo at that time. The basic principle of this kind of associationism mainly comes from Hume, but it also combines the general principles of psychology put forward by British psychologist david hartley in Observation of Man (1749). According to these principles, all psychological phenomena can be deduced from some atomic feelings, because all concepts depend on impressions, and all complex impressions depend on simpler impressions. Bentham regards psychological hedonism as the dominant principle of human behavior, and points out that pain and happiness are the "masters" of human beings, from which the famous utilitarian moral principle is derived, that is, the only purpose of human behavior is to obtain the maximum amount of happiness. This theory was further pushed to the extreme by hutcheson. But Bentham himself did not fully realize that the principle of moral psychology he advocated would produce such utilitarianism. In his Introduction to Morality and Legislative Principles (1789), he only indicated a generally accepted legislative standard and a specific standard for punishment, that is, the degree of punishment can only be considered reasonable if it has universal functions. Mill's utilitarianism (1863) is actually the further development of Bentham's theory, and it has more universal moral significance.
However, while British empiricism prevailed and hegelianism was at the end of the road and would be replaced by Neo-Kantian, hegelianism began to rise gradually in Britain (mainly in Oxford). However, this British hegelianism is different from German. It pays more attention to the epistemological level of ideological development, with some shadow of British empiricism. Moreover, idealist philosophers like Bradley even denied that they were hegelianism. The characteristic of hegelianism in England is to modify Hegel's pure spiritual concept with Kant's epistemology. The main representatives are Green, bernard bosanquet and Bradley. Green opposes the emphasis of empiricism or sensualism on atomic feeling, and thinks that understanding of reality must include understanding of relationship, but relationship itself is not brought by relationship, but given by mind. Bao Sangkui inherited Hegel's tradition, especially in logic and aesthetics, and was regarded as the most orthodox hegelianism. Of course, Bradley was the greatest absolute idealist in Britain in the19th century. However, his thoughts were mainly formed in the middle and late period of19th century, and his main works Principles of Logic (1883) and Representation and Reality (1893) were published in the late period of19th century, so his thoughts were not correct. In France, due to the profound influence of the Enlightenment in the18th century, the French philosophy in the19th century had obvious social and political color from the beginning. Philosophers don't care about abstract metaphysical problems like German or English philosophy, but care about very specific problems. For example, les idéologues, a famous French philosopher group in the early19th century, clearly took the study of the origin of human thought and language expression as one of its important purposes. Dester de Tracy, one of the main representatives, clearly pointed out in the first volume of Principles of Ideology (180 1) that what he wanted to care about was not ideology in the usual sense, but human language ability and other natural abilities, and pointed out that this kind of research was to provide a basis for logic, ethics and economics. He pointed out that such abilities mainly include emotion, memory, judgment and will. Main de Bi Ran, the most famous French philosopher, took the study of human thinking ability as his work direction from 65438 to the beginning of 2009. His article "The Influence of Habit on Thinking Ability" published in 1802 won him an award from the French Academy. 1805 won another prize for an article about ideas and was elected as an academician of the French Academy. [6] Unlike German philosophers, French philosophers do not resort to innate ideas when discussing the origin of ideological ability or ideas, but rather obtain resources from physics, physiology, chemistry or psychology more materialistically, and regard the formation of human ideas and languages as a natural process, which is the product of various reactions in the human brain. The most typical example is Cabanis's famous saying: "The brain secretes thoughts just like the liver secretes bile". This feature of French philosophy is the profound ideological root of Comte's positive philosophy.
/kloc-French philosophy in the 0/9th century not only emphasized the search for ideological resources from various natural sciences, but also paid special attention to political and social issues. Philosophers' thoughts often had obvious political orientation and social philosophical purposes. From a historical point of view, this is deeply influenced by the French Revolution, but from a philosophical point of view, it is closely related to the romantic tradition of French philosophy. In the field of political philosophy, the French official philosophy in the first half of19th century is called eclecticism. It strongly advocated the institutionalized constitutional monarchy and opposed the dictatorship in Napoleon's time, but it also opposed the view that the revolution had not been successful advocated by social theorists at that time. The elitism represented by Paul Royer-Collard, Victor Cousin and Teodoro Simon RuFroy reflects the spirit of compromise of the bourgeoisie. They regard their political theory as a wise elitism, which can take the essence of different systems and combine them into an effective political and social structure. Their philosophical positions are materialism and atheism as well as Kandilak's sensualism. In the field of social philosophy, the so-called social reformers, mainly represented by Mary Charles Fourier, Count Saint-Simon and proudhon, insist that the French Revolution did not complete its historical mission, and only a certain degree of reform is needed to establish an ideal social structure. Their social ideas are usually regarded as utopia and deeply criticized by Marx and others, but their social ideals embody the unique romantic spirit of French philosophers and ordinary intellectuals. This is also the ideological background of Comte's empiricism philosophy.