UDC

113+128:165.745

DOI

10.17238/issn2227-6564.2019.2.125

Authors

Vladimir I. Krasikov
All-Russian State University of Justice;
ul. Azovskaya 2, korp. 1, Moscow, 117638, Russian Federation;
e-mail: KrasVladIv@gmail.com

Abstract

This article is devoted to the identification, analysis and comparison of the ontological schemes of two main approaches in the understanding of life. This was done using the key texts of the leading representatives of vitalism (Aristotle and Hans Driesch) and evolutionism (Charles Darwin). Aristotle understands the universe as a rational centre with a huge but poorly formed material periphery and a more active, organizationally superior vitasphere. According to Driesch’s concept of neo-vitalism, the world is a combination of the extended and non-spatial; specific expediency differentiates the world and harmonizes it. Darwin’s formula for the natural system of Life is as follows: Progression – Struggle for existence – Divergence and Extinction – Perfect forms. Vitalism, both old and new, makes cautious attempts to solve the question of the relationship between the complexities of the material substrate and of the organizing form (entelechy): they are dialectical and individual. However, vitalism is unable to describe the mechanisms of this relationship, probably due to the unimaginable plurality of specific options for such a relationship. That is why it provides only the abstract characteristics of entelechy. The ontological scheme of evolutionism suggests a number of mechanisms that reveal the laws and direction of the development of the living in its interaction with the changing external conditions. At the same time, each of the mechanisms allows for certain intrinsic properties that are not clear by nature, such as: progression, natural selection, congenital variations, and the pursuit of perfection.

Keywords

Aristotle, Hans Driesch, Charles Darwin, ontological scheme, vitalism, evolutionism

References

1. Sheldrake R. Novaya nauka o zhizni [A New Science of Life]. Moscow, 2005. 352 p.
2. Mainzer K. Slozhnosistemnoe myshlenie: Materiya, razum, chelovechestvo. Novyy sintez [Complicated Thinking: Matter, Mind, Humanity. A New Synthesis]. Moscow, 2009. 464 p.
3. Capra F. The Web of Life: A New Scientific Understanding of Living Systems. New York, 1996. 347 p. (Russ. ed.: Kapra F. Pautina zhizni. Novoe nauchnoe ponimanie zhivykh sistem. Moscow, 2003. 336 p.).
4. Koonin E.V. The Logic of Chance: The Nature and Origin of Biological Evolution. PH Professional Business, 2011. 528 p. (Russ. ed.: Kunin E.V. Logika sluchaya. O prirode i proiskhozhdenii biologicheskoy evolyutsii. Moscow, 2014. 603 p.).
5. Chaykovskiy Yu.V. Zaklyuchitel’nye mysli [Final Thoughts]. Moscow, 2016. 175 p.
6. Markov A. Evolyutsiya. Klassicheskie idei v svete novykh otkrytiy [Evolution. Classical Ideas in the Light of New Discoveries]. Moscow, 2014. 656 p.
7. Markov A.V. Rozhdenie slozhnosti. Evolyutsionnaya biologiya segodnya [The Birth of Complexity. Evolutionary Biology Today]. Moscow, 2012. 527 p.
8. Bogatykh B.A. Fraktal’naya priroda zhivogo [The Fractal Nature of the Living]. Moscow, 2012. 256 p.
9. Mayr E. Evolyutsiya [Evolution]. Evolyutsiya [Evolution]. Moscow, 1981, pp. 11–31.
10. Liseev I.K. Stanovlenie novoy paradigmatiki v biologicheskikh issledovaniyakh [The Formation of New Paradigmatics in Biological Research]. Filosofiya nauki. Vyp. 7. Formirovanie sovremennoy estestvennonauchnoy paradigmy [Philosophy of Science. Iss. 7. The Formation of the Modern Paradigm of Natural Sciences]. Moscow, 2001, pp. 106–122.