Henri Saint Simon. Early socialism

SAINT-SIMON (Saint-Simon) Claude Henri de Rouvroy (1760-1825), French. utopian socialist, Count. Ch. op. S.-S. - ´Letters from a Resident of Geneva´ (1802), ´Introduction to Scientific Works of the 19th Century´ (1807), ´Essay on the Science of Man´ (1813-1816), ´Catechism of Industrialists´ (1823-24), ´New Christianity´ (1825 ). Suggested next. periodization of the history of the development of society: savagery (primitive communal system), ancient society, feudalism, capitalism and socialism (´industrialism´). Looking for universal laws that govern nature and society, S.-S. sought to create a philosophical system that could help in building a rational society.

Great Definition

Incomplete definition ↓

Saint-Simon, Henri

1760-1825) - French thinker, sociologist, author of the utopian social projects "Industrial System", "New Christianity". A descendant of an old family of French aristocrats, a student of d'Alembert, mathematician and encyclopedist. The young man enters military service, participates in the war for the independence of the North American colonies against Great Britain. In 1783 he returned to France and, having retired, went on a trip to Europe. In the autumn of 1789 he arrives at his homeland, in Picardy. Follows with interest the course of the revolution, promoting its slogans of freedom, equality and brotherhood. Renounces his nobility and title of count, calling himself "citizen Bonom". During the Convention, he supported the Jacobins, then became a supporter of the Directory and Consulate of Napoleon Bonaparte. From 1797 he turned to scientific knowledge: he listened to lectures at the Polytechnic and Medical Schools, visited England and Germany for educational purposes. Comte was his secretary and co-author for some time. By the end of life around S.-S. a small circle of students and followers rallied (B.P. Anfantin, S.A. Bazar, O. Rodrigue, etc.), who then formed the school of Saint-Simonism, which lasted until the mid-1830s. Major works: "Letters from a Genevan inhabitant to contemporaries" (1802), "Essay on the science of man" (1813-1816), "Work on universal gravitation" (1813-1822), "On the industrial system" (1821), "Catechism of industrialists "(1823-1824), "New Christianity" (1825).

S.-S., seeing that the revolution in France did not achieve its goal, that it did not build a new society, came to the conclusion that the revolutions themselves, generated by the elements of poverty and the desire of the poor for equality and the redistribution of wealth, lead society into a state of chaos and anarchy . To avoid such upheavals in the future, being a rationalist in the spirit of the 19th century, he set himself the goal of creating and implementing a scientific social system that would make it possible to reduce "crises that peoples must experience for themselves and which no force in the world can prevent, to simple changes in their governments and finances." The only way to achieve this goal is S.-S. saw in the fact that people should have a society that is most beneficial to the largest mass and which is capable of improving the situation of the numerous poor class. This made S.-S. turn to the problems of historical development in general.

Sharing the views of the French materialists and speaking out against deism, S.-S. came to the conclusion that the laws of "social physics" and, above all, the universal nature of Newton's law of universal gravitation apply to social phenomena. Two provisions - the idea of ​​regularity, the objectivity of the development of nature and society and the idea of ​​the progressive, progressive development of mankind - constitute the essence of the philosophical views of S.-S. The main criterion for progress is the development of scientific knowledge, morality, religion, and another indicator is a derivative of it - the well-being and happiness of the majority of society.

Accordingly, history, according to S.-S., passed in its movement from the lowest social forms to the highest three stages of development: 1) "theological" (from primitive idolatry to polytheism, on which slavery was based); 2) "metaphysical", based on the monotheism of Christianity, which led to the feudal system; 3) "positive" - ​​the future social system, when the single God will be replaced by the single law of attraction and a scientific worldview will arise with its bearers - secular scientists and "industrialists". The society of the future, according to S.-S., is a social ideal embodied in the "industrial system", the transition to which is a universal historical inevitability: "All peoples on earth strive for one goal, it is to move from government, feudal, military regime to administrative, industrial and peaceful ... "

Historical views of S.-S. were a significant step forward in understanding the meaning and driving forces of social development. S.-S. considered history as a change of creative and destructive periods, as it later became customary to say among the Saint-Simonists, the eras of "organic" and "critical". He was the first to see and understand the basis of society in industrial production (industry), assigned the most important role in economic activity to forms of ownership, as well as to classes that are in a certain relationship to these forms. S.-S. ideas were expressed about the inevitability of a unifying trend in the development of mankind (primarily Europe) through the establishment of a worldwide association of peoples and the erasure of national boundaries.

Some thoughts of S.-S. laid the foundation for a number of specific sociological theories. For example, the theory of bureaucracy has its theoretical origins in S.-S., who was the first to draw attention to the role of organization and management in the development of society; the idea of ​​a special appointment of people with the knowledge and abilities necessary to achieve social goals, laid the foundation for the theory of technocracy S.-S., along with the French encyclopedists, for the first time divided the concepts of "civil society" and "state" at the theoretical level, introduced the terms " industrialization", "industrial (industrial) society". Ideas S.-S. had a great influence on the development of socialist teachings in France, Germany, Italy and Russia. Ideas S.-S. about the role of knowledge carriers in the historical process have been developed in modern concepts of techno- and expertocracy.

Great Definition

Incomplete definition ↓

Henri de Saint-Simon(1760-1825) lived a life that would have been enough for several action-packed novels. A descendant of Charlemagne, an illustrious count, a brilliantly educated person, devoted his life to serving the idea of ​​liberating humanity from the yoke of exploitation and ignorance.

In early writings, Saint-Simon's admiration for science was like idolatry, but he did not want to send this cult alone and recommended it for general acceptance. Saint-Simon in his first publication ("Letters from a Citizen of Geneva to his Contemporaries", 1803) proclaims the creation of the "Religion of Newton" and recommends the formation of a "Council of Newton", which would consist of 21 outstanding scientists, scholars and artists. The members of this Council could become the authoritative priests of the new social order. The same essential idea of ​​a society headed by a scientific elite is contained in his last work, which was published immediately after his death (New Christianity, 1825). Between the first and last compositions there is a significant change in the views of Saint-Simon. From physics as a paradigm for social science, he comes to the conclusion that biology and physiology can preferably become the foundation of sociology. From the intellectuals as the elite layer of the new society, Saint-Simon comes to understand that the leading role in society should be played by people of industry and commerce. But he did not change his initial conviction that it was the experts who could and should be at the head of society, and that the world order, social justice, the well-being of the masses required them to have unlimited power. The democratic republic was not the political ideal of Saint-Simon.

Scientific knowledge of human and social phenomena, according to Saint-Simon, must first of all use the methodology of natural science. He was convinced that all phenomena (whether physical, chemical, biological or social) reflect the action of one principle. After numerous consultations with his intuition, he comes to the conclusion that this monistic principle is Newton's law of gravitational attraction. Saint-Simon, as usual, does not explain this, but simply writes a pamphlet on universal gravity (1813), where he urges pundits to follow his insight. To describe the science of society, Saint-Simon uses the concepts of "social physics" or "social psychology", which is typical of early positivist literature.

In French positivism at the beginning of the 19th century. the descriptive and prescriptive orientations of science were inseparable. And this was expressed in the division of human intellectual development allegedly into three stages: "theological", "metaphysical" and "positive". The so-called "law of three stages" would later become the central concept of Comte's philosophy of history. Positivism, according to this view, is not only the concept that gave the name of the last stage, but also serves as a directive to the methodological rules that should govern scientific activity. The essence of the law of "three stages" was stated by Saint-Simon in 1813, four years before the meeting with Comte, long before the latter began working as a secretary for Saint-Simon.

Saint-Simon had no doubt that the past, present and future of human society were governed by law. The laws of history are the laws of fate, which inevitably lead society to a certain end, to a beautiful social order, intuitively seen by Saint-Simon. He was not an absolute determinist or fatalist. According to his ideas, the general laws of history are unshakable, their ultimate goal is inevitable. However, it is in human power to determine the details of a beautiful future, and, more importantly, to facilitate and speed up the work of these laws. On this path, a person not only must individually contribute to historical dynamics, but is simply morally obliged to act in harmony with historical law. Saint-Simon considered it a moral crime to attempt to stop or divert the force of history. The moral prowess of man, then, was to assist this process. On this path, everyone was obliged morally and intellectually to recognize Saint-Simon as their master and teacher and to join his teachings.

It was these aspects of the teachings of Saint-Simon that attracted Karl Marx, then they were developed by Marx and his followers. K. Marx and V.I. Lenin was criticized by Saint-Simon for his overly detailed description of the future socialist order. But despite this, there is an obelisk on Red Square in Moscow, on which the name of Henri de Saint-Simon is carved among those who are recognized as the forerunners of scientific communism.

This is how Marx and Engels christened the views of the early socialist thinkers. But were all early socialists so utopian? Or, perhaps, in their theories there is something that is relevant today? I adhere to the latter point of view and believe that even today in the teachings of the representatives of early socialism one can find something that could be adopted by the modern left movement; something that is not, for example, in Marxism; something that would help in creating a system in which there would be freedom, social justice and economic efficiency, harmonious relations between people and between man and nature.

“At all times there were people who dreamed of a better life for mankind and believed in its possibility on earth. These people were usually critical of the reality of their time. Often they had to fight this reality, and they became heroes and martyrs. society, they analyzed and criticized the socio-economic structure of this society. Offering the reorganization of society, these people tried to outline and justify a more just and humane system. Their ideas go beyond political economy, but they play an important role in this science.

Socialist and communist ideas developed in many works of the 16th-18th centuries, differing in their scientific and literary merits and in their fate. But this was only the prehistory of utopian socialism. It experiences its classical period in the first half of the 19th century.

From Count to Beggar

“I am descended from Charlemagne, my father was called the Count of Rouvroy de Saint-Simon, I am the closest relative of the Duke de Saint-Simon.” In these lines one could see only noble arrogance if we did not know what kind of person Saint-Simon was. With them, he begins an autobiographical passage written in 1808, when the former count, now a citizen, Saint-Simon, lived on the means of his servant. The life of this remarkable man is as full of complexities and contradictions as his teaching. It has great wealth and poverty, military exploits and prison, the delight of the benefactor of mankind and an attempt at suicide, the betrayal of friends and the firm faith of the disciples.

Claude Henri Saint-Simon de Rouvroy was born in Paris in 1760 and grew up in an ancestral castle in northern France (now the Somme department). He received a good home education. Love of freedom and firmness of character showed up early in the young aristocrat. At the age of 13, he refused the first communion, saying that he did not believe in the sacraments of religion and was not going to be hypocritical. Soon, another feature was revealed in him, which surprised his relatives a lot: the conviction of his high social vocation. There is a story that the 15-year-old Saint-Simon ordered his servant to wake him up every day with the words: “Get up, count, great things await you.”

But great deeds are still far away, but for now, Saint-Simon, as is customary in their family, enters military service and leads a boring garrison life for about three years. The young officer gets rid of it when he goes to America as a volunteer in the French expeditionary force sent to help the rebellious American colonies against England. Saint-Simon later proudly wrote that he had served under Washington. He proved to be a brave man and was awarded the Order of the newly emerged United States.

During a sea voyage, Saint-Simon was captured by the British and sent to Jamaica, where he stayed until the conclusion of peace in 1783. He returned to France as a hero and soon received a regiment under command. A brilliant career opened up before the young Comte Saint-Simon. But this idle life soon bored him. Traveling to Holland and then to Spain reveals a new face of Saint-Simon - the face of an adventurer and a projector. It seems that his indefatigable energy and inventive mind, having not yet found a true purpose, are looking for a way out in this projecting. In Holland, he is preparing a naval expedition to recapture India from the British. In Spain, he is drafting a large canal to connect Madrid with the sea and organizes, not without success, a campaign of postal and passenger transportation.

Brought up on the ideas of the Encyclopedists and on the experience of the American Revolution, Saint-Simon enthusiastically accepted the events of 1789. For about two years, Saint-Simon has been quite active in the revolution, but only “at the local level”: he lives in a small town near the former family estate . He does not regret the loss of the estate, but he officially renounces the count's title and ancient name and takes the name of citizen Bonhomme (bonhomme - simpleton, peasant).

In 1791, a sharp and at first glance, again, strange turn takes place in the life of citizen Bonom. He leaves for Paris and enters the field of land speculation, which during this period took on a huge scale in connection with the sale of property confiscated by the state from the nobility and the church. As partners, he chooses the German diplomat Baron Redern, whom he knew from Spain, as his partner. Success exceeds all expectations. By 1794, Saint-Simon is already very rich, but here the punishing right hand of the Jacobin revolution falls on his head. A counter-revolutionary Thermidorian coup saves a prisoner from the guillotine. After spending about a year in prison, he is released, and again embarks on speculation, now safe. In 1796, the joint wealth of Saint-Simon and Redern is estimated at 4 million francs.

But this is where the career of a successful speculator ends. Baron Redern returns to Paris, prudently hiding abroad during the terror, and lays claim to all their joint fortune, since the operations were carried out on his behalf. This strange combination of diabolical dexterity and childish innocence in Saint-Simon is incomprehensible! After much debate, he is forced to be satisfied with the compensation of 150 thousand francs, which Redern gives him.

Saint-Simon, who managed to be a warrior and an adventurer, a patriot and a speculator, turns into a diligent schoolboy. Fascinated by the great successes of the natural sciences, he, with his usual fervor and energy, takes up their study. He uses the rest of his wealth to maintain a hospitable home, where he receives the leading scientists of Paris. For several years, Saint-Simon travels around Europe. Around 1805, it finally turns out that nothing is left of his money, and he finds himself on the verge of poverty.

Later, in reviewing his life, Saint-Simon was inclined to depict his ups and downs as a series of conscious experiences he went through in preparation for his true work as a social reformer. This is, of course, an illusion. His life was a natural manifestation of the personality of Saint-Simon, conditioned by the era and its events, remarkably original and talented, but also extremely contradictory. Already at that time, he had a reputation as a strange and extravagant person. Often mediocrity is accepted by society as the norm, and talent seems extravagant, and sometimes suspicious.

The seal of great originality also lies on the first printed work of Saint-Simon - “Letters from a Genevan inhabitant to his contemporaries” (1803). This is already a utopian plan for the reorganization of society, although set out in a rudimentary, vague form. Two things are remarkable in this little essay. First, Saint-Simon portrayed the French Revolution as a class struggle between three major classes—the nobility, the bourgeoisie, and the have-nots (the proletariat). Engels called it "an eminently brilliant discovery." Secondly, he presciently outlined the role of science in the transformation of society. Of scientists, Saint-Simon wrote: “Look at the history of the progress of the human mind, and you will see that we owe almost all of its exemplary works to people who stood apart and were often subjected to persecution. When they were made academicians, they almost always fell asleep in their chairs, and if they wrote, it was only with trepidation and only in order to express some unimportant truth. On the other hand, he spoke of obstacles in the path of true science: “Almost always, the occupations to which they (scientists.—A.A.) are forced to devote themselves in order to earn their living, already at the very beginning of their activity, distract them from the most important ideas. How often have they lacked the experience or travel necessary to develop their views! How many times have they been deprived of the necessary staff to give their work the full scope of which they were capable! Calling on scientists to oppose the forces of inertia and take the place of leaders in a restructured society, the author exclaims: “Mathematicians! After all, you are in charge, start!”

These quotes are enough to represent the literary style of Saint-Simon - energetic, pathetic, sometimes exalted. From the pages of his writings rises a restless, rebellious man, rooting for the fate of mankind.

Teacher

The last 20 years of Saint-Simon's life are filled with hardship, struggle and intense creativity. Finding himself without funds, he began to look for any income and at one time worked as a copyist of papers in a pawnshop. In 1805, he happened to meet Diar, his former servant, who in his time, serving with Saint-Simon, managed to acquire a certain fortune. For two years Saint-Simon lived with Diar, and until the latter's death in 1810 he used his help. The story of Don Quixote and Sancho Panza was repeated in this peculiar couple! With the money of Diar, Saint-Simon published in 1808 his second work - "Introduction to the Scientific Works of the 19th Century." He printed this and several other works in small editions and sent them to prominent scientists and politicians, asking for criticism and help in further work. But it was the voice of one crying in the wilderness.

In 1810-1812. Saint-Simon has reached the limit of need. He wrote that he had sold all his possessions, down to his clothes, that he lived on bread and water alone and had no fuel or candles. However, the harder he had, the harder he worked. It was during these years that his views on society were finally formed, which he outlined in a number of mature works published starting from 1814. He lives on occasional handouts from philanthropists, proudly declaring that, without blushing, he can ask for help from anyone, because this help is needed him for works whose sole purpose is the public good.

Public attention was drawn to Saint-Simon by his pamphlet on the post-war structure of Europe. In this pamphlet, Saint-Simon for the first time says his favorite and famous phrase: "The golden age of mankind is not behind us, but ahead." The substantiation of this thesis, the development of paths to the "golden age" - such is the content of the further activity of Saint-Simon.

The life of Saint-Simon by the age of 60 is somewhat getting better. He has students and successors. On the other hand, the preaching of the peaceful transformation of society, addressed to its naturally enlightened "leaders" - bankers, industrialists, merchants - attracts the attention of some people among this class. Saint-Simon gets the opportunity to print his writings, and they become quite widely known. Rich followers provide him with the opportunity to live in abundance and work hard. His personal life is arranged: with him, the faithful Madame Julian is the closest friend, secretary, housekeeper. He now dictates his works to her or to one of the students.

But both in life and in his writings, Saint-Simon remains a rebel, an enthusiast, a man of impulse and fantasy. A group of bankers and rich people who gave money for the publication of one of Saint-Simon's writings publicly dissociate themselves from his ideas and claim that he misled them and betrayed their confidence. Shortly thereafter, Saint-Simon comes to trial on charges of insulting the royal family: he published a “Parable”, in which, stating that France would lose nothing if members of the royal family, and at the same time all the aristocrats, high officials, suddenly magically disappear without a trace, priests, etc., but will lose a lot if the best scientists, artists, craftsmen, and artisans disappear. The jury acquitted him, finding here only an amusing paradox.

If this is rather a tragicomic episode in the life of Saint-Simon, then the suicide attempt in March 1823 is truly tragic. Saint-Simon shot himself in the head with a pistol, survived, but lost one eye. It is impossible to fully explain any suicide, and it is hardly worth guessing about the reasons for Saint-Simon's act. In a farewell letter to a close friend (where he also asks to take care of Madame Julian), Saint-Simon speaks of his disillusionment with life caused by people's weak interest in his ideas. However, having barely recovered from his wound, he again enthusiastically sets to work and in 1823-1824. publishes his most finished and finished work - "The Catechism of the Industrialists". During 1824 Saint-Simon worked feverishly on his last book, The New Christianity, striving to give the future "industrial society" a new religion, taking from Christianity only its original humanism. In May 1825, a few weeks after the publication of The New Christianity, Claude Henri Saint-Simon died.

Saint-Simonism

The author of an article on Saint-Simon in a French biographical dictionary wrote in 1863: “Saint-Simon was neither a madman nor a prophet; it was simply an ill-formed mind that did not rise above mediocrity in its audacity. Despite the great hype that was raised around his memory, he already belongs to oblivion, and he is not one of those who are resurrected from oblivion.

History has laughed wickedly at this self-satisfied philistine. More than 100 years have passed since his "sentence", and the name and ideas of Saint-Simon continue to attract attention and interest.

It can be said that Saint-Simonism went through four stages in its development. The first is represented by the works of Saint-Simon until 1814-1815. During this period, its main features were the cult of science and scientists, a rather abstract humanism. The socio-economic ideas of Saint-Simonism exist only in embryo.

The works, propaganda and practical activities of the disciples in the period from the death of Saint-Simon to 1831 represent the third stage of Saint-Simonism and, in essence, its heyday. Saint-Simonism becomes a truly socialist doctrine, since it actually requires the elimination of private ownership of the means of production, the distribution of goods according to work and ability, social organization and production planning. These ideas are most fully and systematically expressed in public lectures, which in 1828-1829. read in Paris by the closest students of Saint-Simon S. A. Bazaar, B. P. Enfantin, B. O. Rodrigue. These lectures were subsequently published under the title Exposition of the Doctrine of Saint-Simon. Bazaar (1791-1832) played a leading role in the socialist development of Saint-Simon's ideas.

The students gave Saint-Simon's views on classes and property a more obvious socialist direction. They no longer regard the industrialists as a single and homogeneous social class, but say that the exploitation to which it is subjected by the owners falls with all its weight on the worker. The worker, they write, is "exploited materially, intellectually and morally, as the slave was once exploited." The capitalist-entrepreneurs here are already "participating in the privileges of exploitation."

Saint-Simonists associate exploitation with the very institution of private property. In the vices of a social system based on private property, they also see the main cause of the crises and anarchy of production inherent in capitalism. True, this profound thought is not supported by any analysis of the mechanism of crises, but it is another justification for their most important demand - a sharp restriction of private property by abolishing the right to inherit. The only heir should be the state, which will further transfer the production funds to entrepreneurs, as it were, on lease, by proxy. The heads of enterprises will thereby become trusted representatives of society. Thus, private property is gradually transformed into public property.

The new word of the Saint-Simonists also consisted in the fact that they sought to find the material foundations of the future system in the bowels of the old society. Socialism, according to their ideas, should have arisen as a natural result of the development of productive forces. They saw such an embryo of the future planned organization of production in the interests of society in the capitalist credit and banking system. True, later these profound ideas of the Saint-Simonists turned into “credit fantasies” of a petty-bourgeois and frankly bourgeois character. But the very idea that a socialist society can use the mechanism of large banks created by capitalism for public accounting, control and management of the economy, the classics of Marxism-Leninism considered a brilliant conjecture.

Like Saint-Simon, the students paid much attention to the role of science in the development and transformation of society. Scientists and the most talented entrepreneurs were to take over the political and economic leadership of society in the future. Political leadership will gradually come to naught, since under the future system the need for “management of people” will disappear, and only “management of things,” that is, production, will remain. At the same time, the Saint-Simonists sharply criticized the position of science and scientists in the then reality: “... in exchange for mercy, the power alien to science demands from the scientist, reduced to the role of a petitioner, complete political and moral slavery ... Between a scientific corporation and a teaching corporation there is a complete divergence; not afraid to sin against the truth, we can say that they speak different languages. No general measures are taken to ensure that scientific progress, as it is achieved, passes directly into the field of education...”.

In the writings of Saint-Simon and his students, we do not find a special interpretation of the main categories of political economy. They did not analyze the creation and distribution of value, the laws of wages, profits, land rent. In part, they were content with the accepted ideas of the bourgeois political economy of that era. But the main thing was that their thought developed in a fundamentally different direction and set different tasks. Their merit in economic science lies in the fact that they opposed the fundamental dogma of the bourgeois classics and the “Say school” about the naturalness and eternity of the capitalist system. Thus, the question of the laws of the economy of this system was transferred to a completely different plane. A new task was set before political economy: to show how the capitalist mode of production arose and developed historically, what its contradictions are, why and how it must give way to socialism. The Saint-Simonists could not solve this problem, but even posing it was a great achievement.

Saint-Simon himself praised Say for delineating the subject of political economy as a special science and separating it from politics. The disciples, without touching upon this issue, subjected Say and his followers to sharp criticism and pointed directly to the apologetic nature of their teaching. Noting that these economists do not attempt to show how modern property relations arose, the Saint-Simonists say: “It is true that they claim to have shown how the formation, distribution and consumption of wealth takes place, but they are little concerned with the question of whether the wealth created by labor will be distributed according to origin and to a large extent consumed by idle people.

The period beginning in 1831 represents the fourth stage and the collapse of Saint-Simonism. Lacking any firm position among the working class, the Saint-Simonists found themselves completely bewildered in the face of the first revolutionary uprisings of the French proletariat. They were further alienated from the working class and even from the democratic student youth by the religious sectarian overtones that Saint-Simonism assumed in those years. Enfantin became the “supreme father” of the Saint-Simonist church, a kind of religious commune was founded, and a special uniform was introduced (jackets fastened at the back). There were sharp divisions within the movement between the various groups of Saint-Simon's followers. Disputes centered around the question of gender relations and the position of women in the commune. In November 1831 Bazaar left the church with a group of his supporters. Soon the Orleanist government, which came to power after the July Revolution of 1830, organized a lawsuit against Enfantin and his group, accusing them of insulting morality and preaching dangerous ideas. Enfantin was sentenced to one year in prison. The movement disintegrated organizationally, some of its members continued to preach Saint-Simonism scattered and unsuccessfully, some joined other socialist currents, while others turned into respectable bourgeois.

Nevertheless, the influence of Saint-Simonism on the further development of socialist ideas in France, and to some extent in other countries, was very great. The strength of the Saint-Simonists lay in the fact that, for all the absurdities of their religion, they had a bold and consistent program of struggle against bourgeois society.

A. I. Herzen said beautifully about them: “Surface and non-surface people quite laughed at Father Enfanten (Anfanten. - A. A.) and at his apostles; the time for a different recognition is coming for these forerunners of socialism.

Solemnly and poetically, these enthusiastic youths appeared in the middle of the philistine world with their uncut waistcoats, with grown beards. They proclaimed a new faith, they had something to say and it was in the name of what to call before their court the old order of things, which wanted to judge them according to the Napoleonic code and the Orleans religion.

« Henri Saint-Simon belonged to the camp of utopian socialists, he also left a very noticeable mark on the philosophy of history. In his views, far from everything is logical and consistent, however, many of his ideas had a huge impact on a whole galaxy of historians and philosophers, and also became one of the components of Marxist teachings. The worldview of Saint-Simon himself was particularly influenced by the French Revolution and the industrial revolution, which was in full swing in England and began in France. The main ideas of the philosophy of history of Saint-Simon:

1) Development of ideas of progress and progressive development of the historical process. Saint-Simon does not show the absoluteness, but the relativity of progress, that is a higher era surpasses the previous one not in everything, but only in some important points, and in some ways it may be inferior to it. The main criteria for progress, according to Saint-Simon, are the degree of exploitation (and personal freedom) of the main producer and, as a result, the level of productivity of his labor (for example, the labor of a serf is more productive than the labor of a slave; the labor of a hired worker is more productive than a serf).

2) The inconsistency and unevenness of the historical process, leading to a natural change in all social and gift forms. Saint-Simon represents the rhythm of the historical process in the form of a change of so-called "positive", "organic" epochs by "critical" epochs. In other words, the historical process, according to Saint-Simon, is carried out in the form of forward movement, broken by sharp crises. These crises occur when a contradiction arises between the real correlation of social forces in society and the form of its political organization. This fundamentally distinguishes his ideas from the views of the romantics, who emphasized only slow (organic) development, and to a certain extent brings them closer to the dialectical law of the transition of quantity into quality. Hegel.

3) Staged. Saint-Simon goes much further in this regard. Hegel(or even Savigny) and considers the historical process not only as a chain of historical peoples or special ages, but also as a change in certain stages of social development. The stages distinguished by him and his periodization of history will be discussed further.

4) Analysis of property relations. The socio-political institutions of each stage and, in general, the socio-political structure of society, Saint-Simon considered dependent on property relations. Changes in property relations lead to a change in the stages of history and in the end must inevitably lead to the socialist organization of society.

5) A new look at the driving forces of the historical process. Along with the progress of reason and morality, he attached great importance to economic development and class struggle, and also considered critical epochs (in fact, revolutions and social changes) as the most important factor in development.

6) The idea of ​​the class struggle as the main content, if not her history, then at least the history of Europe in the period after the Crusades. This idea of ​​Saint-Simon was developed by French historians.

7) The idea of ​​industrialism. Saint-Simon substantiated the idea, which was extremely important for that time, that the future belongs to the industrial class. Thus, he is the forerunner of the ideas of the industrial revolution.

Grinin L.E. , From Confucius to Comte: the formation of the theory, methodology and philosophy of history, M., "Urss", 2012, p. 168-170.

(Claude Henri de Rouvroy, Comte de Saint-Simon, fr. Claude Henri de Rouvroy, Comte de Saint-Simon, 1760-1825) is a well-known social reformer, founder of the school of utopian socialism.

Biography

He came from a family that considered Charlemagne to be its ancestor. In his upbringing, as he himself claimed, d'Alembert took part (these data are not confirmed by independent sources).

At the age of thirteen, he had the courage to tell his deeply religious father Balthazar Henri de Rouvroy de Saint-Simon Marquis Sandricourt (1721-1783) that he did not want to fast and take communion, for which he locked him in Saint-Lazare prison. Very early on, the idea of ​​fame as the most worthy motive for human actions entered his worldview. While still a teenager, he ordered the lackey to wake himself up only with the following words: “Get up, count, you have to do great things.”

Strange plans constantly swarmed in his head. He joins the detachment sent by the French government to help the North American colonies that have revolted against England; participates in the struggle for five years and, finally, is captured by the British. Released at the end of the war, he travels to Mexico and proposes to the Spanish government a project to connect the Atlantic and Great Oceans through a canal. Coldly received, he returned to his homeland, where he received the post of commandant of the fortress in Metz and, under the guidance of Monge, studied mathematical sciences.

Soon he retires, goes to Holland and tries to convince the government to form a French-Dutch colonial alliance against England, but, having failed in this, he goes to Spain with a canal project that was supposed to connect Madrid with the sea. The revolution that broke out in France forced him to return to his homeland, but, in his own words, he did not want to actively interfere in the revolutionary movement, because he was deeply convinced of the fragility of the old order.

In 1790, he briefly served as mayor in the district where his estate was located. In the same year, he spoke in favor of the abolition of noble titles and privileges (in the era of the Restoration, however, he continued to bear the title of count). At the same time, S. was engaged in buying up national property and acquired in this way a fairly significant amount. He subsequently explained his speculations by the desire to "promote the progress of enlightenment and improve the lot of mankind" by "founding a scientific school of improvement and organizing a large industrial establishment." During the terror, S.-Simon was imprisoned, from where he left only after 9 Thermidor.

Thoughts and ideas

In 1797, he intended "to pave a new physical and mathematical path for human understanding, forcing science to take a general step forward and leaving the initiative in this matter to the French school." To this end, at the age of forty, he takes up the study of the natural sciences, wishing to "state their current state and clarify the historical sequence in which scientific discoveries took place"; gets acquainted with the professors of the polytechnic, then of the medical school, in order to determine "the effect produced by scientific studies on those who indulge in them"; he tries to turn his house into a center of scientific and artistic life, for which he marries (in 1801) the daughter of a deceased friend.

The next year he divorced her and sought the hand of Mme de Stael, who seemed to him the only woman capable of furthering his scientific plan. For this he went to the estate of Mme de Stael on the shores of Lake Geneva, but was not successful. During his stay in Geneva, S. published his first work: "Letters from a Geneva resident to his contemporaries" (1802). He demands here the unrestricted domination of art and science, which are called upon to organize society. The militant type of humanity must disappear and be replaced by the scientific: "Away, Alexandra, give way to the disciples of Archimedes."

Labor is the categorical imperative of the new society. Everyone will have to exert their strength in a way that is beneficial to humanity: the poor will feed the rich, who will work with his head, and if he is incapable of this, then he must work with his hands. Spiritual power in the new society should belong to scientists, secular power to property owners, and the right to choose the bearers of both powers to all the people. In essence, the content of secular power has not been clarified: it has nothing left to do, since the entire organization of society, the entire direction of work is in the hands of spiritual power.

In general, the ideas expressed by S. are vague and sometimes even contradictory. Influenced by similar attempts made at the end of the eighteenth century, he proposes a new religion, revealed to him, he says, in a vision of God himself. A distinctive feature of this religion is "Newtonism": Newton is entrusted by God with the "guidance of light and the management of the inhabitants of all planets"; the place of the temples will be taken by the “Newton mausoleums”, etc. Having made a trip to Germany and England (1802) and having spent his last funds on this, S. returned to France and was forced to take a position as a scribe in a pawnshop, which gave him 1000 francs. per year for ten hours a day, until one of his acquaintances, Dear, offered him to live on his means in order to be able to continue his scientific studies.

In 1810, Diar died, and S. again became terribly poor, asking for help from rich people. Not always having the means to print his works, he personally copied them in several dozen copies and sent them to various scientists or dignitaries (“Mémoire sur la science de l’homme”, “Mémoire sur la gravitation universelle”).

In 1808 he published Introduction to Scientific Works of the 19th Century. Science, in his opinion, until that time was engaged only in experiments, investigated only facts; it was very fruitful, but it's time to take a common point of view. All particular sciences are only elements of a certain general science, which is precisely positive philosophy. Both in its whole and in its parts, science must have only a "relative and positive character"; human knowledge has already reached such a state in which it is necessary to generalize it and build a complete building out of it.

This idea is supplemented by another - about the systematic organization of further scientific research. S. also speaks of the "usefulness of the new scientific system," of the classification of sciences and its connection with the history of the development of mankind in his following pamphlets: Lettres au bureau des Longitudes and Nouvelle Encyclop é die. In his Note on the Science of Man, he demands the creation of a special positive "science of man" that would study humanity from a purely scientific point of view, just as the exact sciences study the inorganic world. Mankind develops in the same natural way as everything organic, and this development leads to the highest perfection.

It is impossible to consider the individual from any one side - either from the political or from the economic; it is necessary to take the fullness of phenomena, all their diversity and trace their interdependence and interaction (an idea implemented by one of S.'s students, O. Comte, in the creation of sociology). Finally, in the Note on Universal Gravity, he seeks to find an explanation for all phenomena in the law of universal gravitation. Events 1814 - 15 years. distracted S. from purely scientific issues and directed his thoughts to political issues, and then social, resulting in several political pamphlets.

In The Reorganization of European Society, written in collaboration with Og. Thierry, he insists on the need for an alliance between France and England, which would allow these two countries to introduce constitutional orders into all other European states; then all of them together would form a pan-European parliament, which would be the supreme resolver of disagreements between individual states, would create a code of morals and would set as its main task the organization of public works, the construction of canals, the organization of resettlement of the surplus population to other countries.

The same idea is expressed by S. and in the subsequent "Opinions sur les mesures à prendre contre la coalition de 1815". S. had the opportunity to publish these pamphlets because his family agreed to pay him a pension for refusing to inherit. In the ensuing struggle between industrial and clerical-feudal interests, between "people of industry with people of parchment", he took the side of the first, with whose assistance he began to publish the collection "L'industrie" (1817 - 18) with the epigraph: "everything through industry everything for her." Understanding “industrialism” as a new industrial direction, in contrast to the former aristocracy, and not yet noticing among the “industrials” themselves the opposition of the interests of capital and labor, he proves that only labor gives the right to exist and that modern society should consist of those who work mentally and physically.

The same defense of "industrialists against courtesans and nobles, that is, bees against drones" S.-S. leads to Politique (1819), L'Organisateur (1819-20), Système industriel (1821-22), Catéchisme des industriels (1822-23). The place of the military-theocratic state, which has outlived itself, must be occupied by an industrial-scientific state; military service must give way to the general duty of labor; like the 18th century was predominantly critical, destroying the barriers to the formation of a new social order, so the XIX century. must be creative, must create an industrial state based on the results of science.

The Organisateur contains the famous Parabola, in which he makes the assumption that France will suddenly lose three thousand of her first physicists, chemists, physiologists and other scientists, artists, as well as the most capable technicians, bankers, merchants, manufacturers, farmers, artisans, etc. What will be the consequences? Since these people "make up the flower of French society ... the nation will become a body without a soul ... And it will need at least a whole generation to compensate for its losses." But suppose the sudden death of three thousand people of a different kind - members of the royal house, dignitaries, state advisers, ministers, bishops, cardinals, chief masters of the ceremonies, chief masters of ceremonies, prefects and subprefects, etc. and, “in addition, ten thousand proprietors, the most rich, of those who live in a lordly way" - and what? The good-natured French will be very upset out of the goodness of their hearts, but "from this accident no political evil will happen to the state", since soon there will be thousands of people ready and able to take the places of the dead. Modern society, from the point of view of S.-S., is “truly light inside out, since those who represent positive utility are placed in a subordinate position” in relation to people who are incapable, ignorant and immoral. - Since the Duke of Berry was killed shortly after, S.-S. was brought to trial as a moral accomplice in a crime.

The jury acquitted him, and he soon wrote a pamphlet "On the Bourbons and the Stuarts", where, drawing a parallel between these two dynasties, he predicted the fate of the Stuarts to the Bourbons. More and more, however, S. begins to come to the conclusion that the rights of industrialists also impose on them certain duties in relation to the proletariat. His rich patrons did not like the new direction, and, having lost their support, he soon found himself again in extreme need, which forced him to encroach on his life (1823). The wound was non-fatal. S. lost only one eye.

A subscription was opened in his favor, and the sums collected allowed him to continue his writing activity. Catéchisme politique des industriels (one of the editions of which was written by O. Comte) was followed by Opinions littéraires, philosophiques et industrielles (1825), where his new attitude towards the working class was finally determined. He points here to the fundamental contradiction between capital and labor, from the interaction of which the liberal bourgeoisie arose. The aim of the revolution of the last century, he says, was political freedom, while the aim of our age must be humanity and fraternity. The middle class deprived the landed proprietors of power, but itself took their place; his guiding star was naked selfishness. To fight it, to put brotherhood in its place, S. demands an alliance between the royal power and the workers, on the banner of which the attainment of the greatest possible economic equality would be inscribed.

"The industrial principle is based on the principle of complete equality." Political freedom is a necessary consequence of progressive development; but once it is achieved, it ceases to be the final goal. Individualism has overdeveloped the already strong egoism in man; now it is necessary to try to organize production on the principles of association, which will soon lead to the development of natural feelings of solidarity and mutual brotherly devotion. The slogan of individualism is the struggle of people against each other; the slogan of the principle of association is the struggle of people in alliance with each other against nature. The main task of statesmen in an industrial state is to take care of labor. Closely approaching the principle of the right to work, S. foresaw that the proletariat would soon organize itself and demand the right to participate in power; the best policy, therefore, is to unite the holders of power with real workers against idle capital. S.'s swan song was New Christianity. Recognizing the divine origin of Christianity, he thinks, however, that God at revelation is applied to the degree of understanding of people, as a result of which even the disciples of Christ did not have access to divine truth in its entirety. That is why the main commandment of Christ, “love your neighbor as yourself,” can and should now be expressed differently: “every society should take care of the fastest possible improvement in the moral and physical condition of the poorest class; it must be organized in such a way as will most contribute to the achievement of this goal.

The new Christianity must be a transformation of the old: it has not yet come, it is ahead and will lead to universal happiness. "The golden age, which blind tradition has hitherto placed in the past, is actually ahead of us." The new Christians will also have a cult, there will be dogmas; “But the moral teaching will be the most important thing for them, and the cult and dogmas will be only a kind of appendage.” Pointing to the successes of mathematics and natural science, S. expressed regret that the most important science, "which forms the very society and serves as its foundation - moral science" - is neglected. In 1825, Mr.. S. died (in Paris) in the presence of his students.

Before his death, he said: “They think that every religious system must disappear, because the decrepitude of Catholicism has been proven. This is a deep delusion; religion cannot leave the world, it only changes its appearance... My whole life is summed up in one thought: to ensure people the free development of their abilities... The fate of the workers will be arranged; the future belongs to us."

From the earliest years, dreaming of great deeds and glory, convinced that "usually only those who escaped from the asylum of lunatics get into Valhalla of glory" and that "it is necessary to be inspired to accomplish great things", really carried away by his plans and ideas to self-forgetfulness, sometimes to the prophetic ecstasy, S. often changed one idea to another and became a reformer in the field of science, then in the field of politics, social structure, and even morality and religion. "Inventor of ideas" and a master in the art of captivating people and directing them to scientific research, he had many students (Og. Comte and Og. Thierry - the most famous; both parted ways with him: the second - when S. became indifferent to political issues and focused all his attention on the social, the first - when S. began to introduce a religious and mystical element into his teaching) and gave them important guiding ideas, for the proof of which he always needed, however, in the studies of his students.

He did not express his teaching in a systematic way; his very thought was often vague. The so-called system of S.-Simonism was created not by him, but by his students.

In all areas, he only outlined new directions. Not satisfied with the concepts of "personality" and "state", which were operated on in the 18th century. and liberalism of the nineteenth century, it gives between them a place and even a predominant meaning to "society", in which the individual is an organic particle, the state in relation to the individual is something derivative. Society at any given moment is determined by a certain organization of material forces and by a certain world outlook corresponding to this organization. The course of historical events depends on the change - very slow - in the ratio of material particles. The laws that govern social changes are subject to scientific study, after which it will be possible to establish precise rules to guide society.

This explains the indifference of S. to politics and the emphasis on the social side of the life of peoples; hence his condemnation of the former historical science, which, in his words, was a mere biography of power. The idea of ​​the need to transform history is closely connected with his views on the economic evolution of Europe, to which he even gave a general formula: the history of Europe was for him the transformation of a military society into an industrial one, and the evolution of labor seemed to him as a sequence of slavery, serfdom and free mercenary work, behind which, in turn, the stage of social work (travail sociétaire) must follow. In general, with all his teachings about society, S. connected his name with the first stage of the evolution of positivism, and the views expressed by him in recent years regarding the working class made him the founder of socialism.

Leonhard Euler (German Leonhard Euler; April 4 (April 15), 1707, Basel - September 7 (September 18), 1783, St. Petersburg) - an outstanding mathematician who made a significant contribution to the development of mathematics, as well as mechanics, physics, astronomy and a number of applied sciences . Euler is the most prolific mathematician in history, author of over 800 papers on calculus, differential geometry, number theory, approximation,...

Albert Einstein (German: Albert Einstein, see German pronunciation of the name (info)), (March 14, 1879 - April 18, 1955) - physicist; one of the founders of modern physical theory; creator of the Special and General theories of relativity; winner of the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1921; his name is strongly associated with the genius and power of human thinking. Foreign corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences (1922), foreign honorary member ...

Friedrich Engels (German Friedrich Engels; November 28, 1820, Barmen, now the Wuppertal area - August 5, 1895, London) - one of the founders of Marxism, friend and ally of Karl Marx. Biography Friedrich Engels was born on November 28, 1820 in the family of a successful textile manufacturer. His father, Friedrich Engels, a pietist, sought to give his children a religious upbringing. Until the age of 14, Engels ...