The category of reality, which is a mutual mediation of the phenomenon and the law, is defined as an entity in philosophy. This is the organic unity of reality in all its diversity or diversity in unity. The law determines that reality is uniform, but there is such a thing as a phenomenon that brings diversity to reality. Thus, the essence in philosophy is uniformity and diversity as a form and content.
The sides are external and internal
Form is the unity of the diverse, and the content is seen as diversity in unity (or the diversity of unity). This means that form and content are a law and a phenomenon in the aspect of essence in philosophy, these are moments of essence. Each of the philosophical directions considers this question in its own way. Therefore, it is better to stay at the most popular. Since the essence in philosophy is an organic complex reality that combines the external and internal sides, it can be considered in various areas of manifestation.
Freedom, for example, exists in the realm of possibilities, while community and the organism exist in the realm of species. The sphere of quality contains the typical and the individual, and the sphere of measure is the norm. Development and behavior are the sphere of types of movement, and numerous complex contradictions, harmony, unity, antagonism, struggle are from the sphere of contradiction. The origin and essence of philosophy - the object, subject and activity are in the sphere of formation. It should be noted that the category of essence in philosophy is the most controversial and complex. She has come a difficult long way in her formation, formation, development. Nevertheless, philosophers of far from all directions recognize the category of essence in philosophy.
Empirics at a Glance
Empirical philosophers do not recognize this category, since they believe that it belongs exclusively to the sphere of consciousness, and not reality. Some are opposed literally before aggression. For example, Bertrand Russell wrote with pathos that the essence of the science of philosophy is stupid and completely devoid of accuracy. All empirically oriented philosophers support his point of view, especially such as Russell himself, who tend to the natural-scientific non-biological side of empiricism.
They do not like complex organic concepts-categories corresponding to identity, things, the whole, universal and the like, because the essence and structure of philosophy for them do not combine, the essence does not fit into the system of concepts. However, their nihilism in relation to this category is simply disastrous, it is the same as denying the existence of a living organism, its vital activity and development. Philosophy is the essence of the world, because the specifics of the living in comparison with the inanimate and organic in comparison with the inorganic, as well as development along with a simple change or a norm along with an inorganic measure, unity in comparison with simple connections and you can continue for a very long time - all this is the specificity of the entity.
One more extreme
Philosophers, prone to idealism and organicism, absolutize the essence, moreover, they endow it with a certain independent existence. Absolutization is expressed in the fact that idealists can discover essence anywhere, even in the inorganic world itself, but it simply cannot be there - the essence of a stone, the essence of a thunderstorm, the essence of a planet, the essence of a molecule … It's even funny. They invent, imagine their own world, full of animated, spiritualized entities, and in their purely religious view of a personal supernatural being they see the essence of the Universe in it.
Even Hegel absolutized the essence, but nevertheless, he was the first to bring out its portrait categorical and logical, the first to try to reasonably evaluate it and to clear it of the layers of religious, mystical and scholastic. The teachings of this philosopher about the essence are unusually complex and ambiguous, there are many brilliant insights in it, but there are also speculations.
Essence and phenomenon
Most often, this ratio is considered as the ratio of external and internal, which is a greatly simplified view. If we say that the phenomenon is given directly in us in sensations, and the essence is hidden behind this phenomenon and is given indirectly through this phenomenon, and not directly - it will be correct. A man in his knowledge goes from observed phenomena to the discovery of essences. In this case, the essence is a cognitive phenomenon, thereby internal, which we always seek and try to comprehend.
But you can go in other ways! For example, from internal to external. Any number of cases when it is precisely the phenomena that are hidden from us, since we are not able to observe them: radio waves, radioactivity, and the like. However, knowing them, we seem to discover the essence. Here is a philosophy - essence and existence may not be completely connected with each other. The cognitive element does not at all denote the very category of definition of reality. The essence can be the essence of things, it can characterize an imaginary or inorganic object.
Is an entity a phenomenon?
An entity can really be a phenomenon if it is not discovered, hidden, not amenable to cognition, that is, it is an object of cognition. This is especially true for those phenomena that are complex, confused or have such a large-scale character that they resemble wildlife phenomena.
Therefore, the essence, considered as a cognitive object, is imaginary, imaginary and invalid. It acts and exists only in cognitive activity, characterizing only one of its sides - the object of activity. Here it must be remembered that both the object and the activity are categories that correspond to the essence. The essence as an element of knowledge is the reflected light, which is obtained from the real essence, that is, our activity.
Human nature
The essence is complex and organic, direct and indirect, according to the categorical definition - external and internal. It is especially convenient to observe the example of a human being, our own. Everyone carries it in themselves. It was given to us unconditionally and directly by virtue of birth, subsequent development and all life activities. It is internal, because it is inside us and does not always manifest itself, sometimes it doesn’t even let us know about ourselves, so we don’t fully know it ourselves.
But it is also external - in all its manifestations: in actions, in behavior, in activity and its subjective results. We know this part of our essence well. For example, Bach died a long time ago, and his essence continues to live in his fugues (and, of course, in other works). Thus, the fugues in relation to Bach himself are an external entity, since they are the results of creative activity. Here, the relation of essence and phenomenon is especially clearly visible.
Law and Phenomenon
Even inveterate philosophers quite often confuse these two relationships, because they have a common category - a phenomenon. If we consider the essence of the phenomenon and the law of the phenomenon separately from each other, in separate pairs of categories or categorical definitions, you may get the idea that the phenomenon of essence opposes in the same way as the law opposes the phenomenon. Then there is the danger of likening or equating the essence of the law.
We consider the essence as consistent with the law and single-order, as everything universal, internal. However, there are two pairs, absolutely, moreover, different categorical definitions that have a phenomenon in their composition - the same category! This anomaly would not exist if these pairs were considered not as independent and independent subsystems, but as parts of one subsystem: law-essence-phenomenon. Then the essence would not look like a single-order category with the law. It would unite the phenomenon and the law, since it has the features of both of them.
Law and Essence
In practice, people always distinguish between essence and law. The law is universal, that is, general in reality, which opposes the individual and the specific (a phenomenon in this case). The essence, even as a law, possessing the advantages of the universal and the general, at the same time does not lose the quality of the phenomenon - specific, individual, concrete. The essence of man is specific and universal, singular and unique, individual and typical, unique and serial.
Here we can recall the extensive work of Karl Marx on the human essence, which is not an abstract, individual concept, but a combination of established social relations. There he criticizes the teachings of Ludwig Feuerbach, who claimed that only a natural entity is inherent in man. Fair. But Marx also reacted rather inattentively to the individual side of the human essence, he dismissively spoke about the abstract, which fills the essence of an individual individual. It was quite expensive for his followers.
