The primacy of consciousness over matter is recognized by some philosophers. So what comes first - matter or consciousness? Social being and social consciousness

2. Do we know the world?

Further, it should be noted that both sides of this question of philosophy have an alternative solution: either-or. Depending on how philosophers answer the first side of the main question of philosophy, they are divided into materialists and idealists, two fundamentally different general orientations in the world are formed: materialism and idealism. Materialism proceeds from the principle of the primacy of matter in relation to consciousness. Idealism, in contrast to materialism, proves the primacy of consciousness and the secondary nature of matter. The primacy of matter means that it is an absolute beginning, exists outside of consciousness. In principle, there is nothing in the world that is not matter, its property or product of development. In addition to material reality, there is no special spiritual, ideal substance outside of matter.

The secondary nature of consciousness means that it: 1) arises only at a certain level of development of matter, 2) does not exist outside of matter, being its property, the result of the activity of a highly organized material organ - the brain; 3) is a reflection of matter; the content of consciousness is determined by the external world.

Next, it is necessary to consider the question of the forms of materialism and idealism, each of which has gone a long way in its development. There are the following main forms of materialism: 1) spontaneous, naive materialism of ancient thinkers (Democritus, Heraclitus, Epicurus); 2) metaphysical materialism of the 16th-18th centuries. (Bacon, Spinoza, Diderot, Holbach, Helvetius); 3) dialectical materialism created by K. Marx, F. Engels, V. I. Lenin.

Idealism, in turn, affirms the substantiality and primacy of the ideal factor, consciousness, and for the most part denies the possibility of knowing the world.

It is necessary to consider the question of varieties of idealism. There are two main forms of idealism: objective and subjective, depending on what kind of consciousness is taken as the fundamental principle of the world.

Objective idealism (Plato, Hegel, neo-Thomists) takes the impersonal, objectively existing spiritual principle as the fundamental principle of the world, which turns into the forms of the external world, nature, human history. Such an absolutized consciousness is declared primary; it rises both above matter and above an individual person.

Subjective idealism considers various forms of consciousness of an individual person, a subject, to be primary. Subjective idealists declare the world to be a set of sensations, perceptions, ideas. They deny the objective existence of the external world. But regardless of these differences, the essence of all forms of idealism remains the same - they all somehow recognize the creation of the world by the spirit.

The essence of the second side of the main question of philosophy, according to the definition of F. Engels, is “how do our thoughts about the world around us relate to this world itself? Is our thinking able to cognize the real world, can we, in our ideas and concepts of the real world, constitute a true reflection of reality? Most philosophers and, above all, materialists, give a positive answer to these questions, i.e. recognize the fundamental possibility of knowing the world.

But along with them there are philosophers who deny the cognizability of the world. Philosophical doctrine which denies the fundamental possibility of knowing the world is called agnosticism. Elements of agnosticism in the form of skepticism arose in ancient Greek philosophy, and agnosticism received its classical form in the philosophy of D. Hume (1711–1776) and I. Kant (1724–1804).

In the history of philosophy there have existed and now there are also a large number of philosophical schools, whose representatives occupy an intermediate, inconsistent position between materialism and idealism, eclectically combine elements of both directions, declaring the uselessness of the main question of philosophy and focusing mainly on positivist (concretely descriptive) methodology. At present, modern philosophy continues the materialistic line, and idealism is represented by various philosophical currents: existentialism, postpositivism, hermeneutics, neo-Thomism and other areas. In recent decades, postmodernism has emerged in the West as an ideology that generalizes and includes many idealistic currents. Postmodernism manifests its essence through the denial of the objectivity of the world, the role of science and scientific knowledge, assertion of the subjectivity of the results of cognitive activity.

The modern stage in the development of philosophy is characterized by the interaction of materialism and idealism in the form of a dialogue. Modern materialism recognizes the possibility of the determining role of the subjective factor within individual historical processes, while many idealistic trends have included elements of dialectics, recognition of the decisive role of socio-economic conditions in the development of society, and other significant provisions. materialistic theory. So, from what has been considered, it follows that an alternative solution to the main question of philosophy theoretically predetermines the polarization of philosophy into materialism and idealism as two main directions (see Fig. 1.3).

The basic question of philosophy determines the general principles philosophical outlook, the process of cognition of the world, speaking and the main issue of epistemology; significantly affects the understanding of the general theoretical problems of science, politics, morality, art, etc.

Modern Philosophy as a new stage in the development of theoretical thought reflects the state of society and the position of man in the world in relation to the post-industrial era and the corresponding level of scientific achievements. It is a theoretical model of an emerging information technology civilization, contributes to finding solutions to the global problems of mankind, understanding of deep integration processes in the world community, and a correct understanding of other pressing problems.

Rice. 1.3. The main question of philosophy is about the relation of consciousness to matter

Philosophy acts as a universal method of cognition. The specificity of the philosophical method is determined by the nature of the solution of a number of fundamental problems:

Does the world evolve or does it remain static?

Is the world a single whole or is it a mechanical collection of objects?

What is the source of development?

What is the direction of the development of the world: from the lowest to the highest, or is it a simple repetition?

Depending on the solution of these issues in philosophy, there are 2 methods of research: dialectics And metaphysics.

One of the important features of scientific knowledge in comparison with ordinary knowledge is its organization and the use of a number of research methods. In this case, the method is understood as a set of techniques, methods, rules of cognitive, theoretical and practical, transformative activities of people. These techniques, rules, in the final analysis, are not established arbitrarily, but are developed based on the laws of the objects under study themselves. Therefore, the methods of cognition are as diverse as reality itself. The study of methods of cognition and practical activity is the task of a special discipline - methodology.

With all the differences and variety of methods, they can be divided into several main groups:

1. General, philosophical methods, the scope of which is the widest. Among them is the dialectical materialist method.

2. General scientific methods that find application in all or almost all sciences. Their originality and difference from general methods is that they are not used at all, but only at certain stages of the process of cognition. For example, induction plays a leading role at the empirical, and deduction - at the theoretical level of knowledge, analysis prevails at the initial stage of the study, and synthesis - at the final one. At the same time, in the general scientific methods themselves, as a rule, the requirements of general methods find their manifestation and refraction.

3. Private or special methods specific to individual sciences or areas of practice. These are methods of chemistry or physics, biology or mathematics, methods of metalworking or construction.

4. Finally, a special group of methods is formed by techniques, which are techniques and methods developed to solve some special, particular problem. The choice of the correct methodology is an important condition for the success of the study.

In the 21st century materialistic philosophy is defined as a new methodology, on the basis of which all scientific disciplines appeared as elements of a single knowledge about the evolution of the Universe and man.

Control questions

1. Define philosophy.

2. Name the main structural elements of philosophical knowledge.

3. What is the relationship between worldview and philosophy?

4. What historical types of worldview do you know? Give them a brief description. How are they different from philosophy?

5. How is the main question of philosophy formulated and what is its ideological and methodological significance?

6. What are the philosophical and methodological functions of philosophy?

7. Why is the study of philosophy necessary for a specialist in any branch of knowledge: an engineer, a doctor, a teacher, etc.?

Bibliography

1. Alekseev P.V. Philosophy - science // Philosophy: textbook. /
P. V. Alekseev, A. V. Panin.– M.: Prospekt, 1999. – S. 52–55.

2. Alekseev P.V. Philosophy: textbook. / P. V. Alekseev, A. V. Panin.- M., 2003. - 603 p.

3. Aristotle. Op. in 4 volumes. - M., 1975. - V.1. - P.119.

4. Introduction in philosophy: textbook. for universities / ed. F. S. Fayzullina. - Ufa, 1996.

5. Wilhelm W. What is philosophy? // Reader in Philosophy. – M.: Prospekt, 1998. – S. 45–53.

6. Hegel G. W. F. Conditions for Philosophizing // Reader
in philosophy. – M.: Prospekt, 1998. – P.13–20.

7. Gorelov A. A. The tree of spiritual life. - M., 1994.

8. Grot N. Ya. Philosophy as a branch of art // Reader in Philosophy. – M.: Prospekt, 1998. – S. 53–57.

9. Kogan L. A. On the Future of Philosophy // Questions of Philosophy. - 1996. - No. 7.

10. Brief philosophical encyclopedia. - M., 1994.

11. Merleau-Ponty M. In defense of philosophy. - M., 1996. – 240 s.

12. Ortega y Gasset H. What is philosophy? - M., 1991. - 403 p.

13. Basics Philosophy: textbook. allowance / ed. F. S. Fayzullina. - Ufa, 2002. - 375 p.

14. Radugin A. A. Philosophy: a course of lectures. - M.: Center, 1996. - 333 p.

15. Modern philosophical dictionary. - M.: Politizdat, 1998. - 1250 p.

16. Philosophy: studies. / ed. V. I. Lavrinenko. - M., 1999. - 584 p.

17. Philosophy: studies. for universities. - Rostov n / a: Phoenix, 1995.

18. What is philosophy? (Materials of the "Round Table") // Bulletin of the Moscow University. - 1995. - No. 2–3.

Topics of abstracts and reports

1. Place and role of philosophy in the system of modern scientific knowledge.

2. The value of studying philosophy for a specialist with a higher education.

3. Mythology as a historical type of worldview. Mythology and Modernity.

4. Philosophy and private sciences.

5. Religion and mythology: a comparative analysis.

6. General and special in religion and science.

7. Relationship between philosophy and art.

THEME 2.

HISTORICAL TYPES OF PHILOSOPHY

At the main philosophical question: "What is primary - matter or consciousness?" - there are moments - existential and cognitive. Existential, in other words, the ontological side, is to find a solution to the main problem of philosophy. And the essence of the cognitive, or epistemological side, is to resolve the question of whether we know or do not know the world.

Depending on the data of the two sides, four main directions are distinguished. This is a physical view (materialism) and idealistic, experimental (empiricism) and rationalistic.

Ontology has the following directions: materialism (classical and vulgar), idealism (objective and subjective), dualism, deism.

The epistemological side is represented by five directions. This is Gnosticism and later agnosticism. Three more - empiricism, rationalism, sensationalism.

Democritus line

In literature, materialism is often referred to as the line of Democritus. Its supporters considered the correct answer to the question of what is primary - matter or consciousness, matter. In accordance with this, the postulates of the materialists sound like this:

• matter really exists, and it is independent of consciousness;
• matter is an autonomous substance; it needs only itself and develops according to its inner law;
• consciousness is a property to reflect itself, which belongs to highly organized matter;
• consciousness is not an independent substance, it is being.

Among the materialist philosophers who pose the main question of what is primary - matter or consciousness, one can single out:

• Democritus;
• Thales, Anaximander, Anaximenes (Miletian school);
• Epicurus, Bacon, Locke, Spinoza, Diderot;
• Herzen, Chernyshevsky;
• Marx, Engels, Lenin.

Fascination with natural

Separately allocate vulgar materialism. He is represented by Focht, Moleschott. In this direction, when they start talking about what is more primary - matter or consciousness, the role of matter is absolutized.

Philosophers are fond of studying the material with the help of the exact sciences: physics, mathematics, chemistry. They ignore consciousness as an entity and its ability to influence matter. According to representatives of vulgar materialism, the human brain gives out a thought, and the consciousness, like the liver, secretes bile. This direction does not recognize the qualitative difference between mind and matter.

According to modern researchers, when the question is raised of what is primary - matter or consciousness, the philosophy of materialism, relying on the exact and natural sciences, logically proves its postulates. But there is also a weak side - a meager explanation of the essence of consciousness, the lack of interpretation of many phenomena of the surrounding world. Materialism dominated the philosophy of Greece (the era of democracy), in the states of the Hellenes, in England of the 17th century, in France of the 18th century, in the socialist countries of the 20th century.

Plato's line

Idealism is called Plato's line. Supporters of this trend believed that consciousness is primary, matter is secondary in solving the main philosophical problem. Idealism distinguishes two autonomous directions: objective and subjective.

Representatives of the first direction - Plato, Leibniz, Hegel and others. The second was supported by such philosophers as Berkeley and Hume. Plato is considered the founder of objective idealism. The views of this trend are characterized by the expression: "Only the idea is real and primary." Objective idealism says:

• the surrounding reality is the world of ideas and the world of things;
• the sphere of eidos (ideas) exists initially in the divine (universal) mind;
• the world of things is material and does not have a separate existence, but is the embodiment of ideas;
• each single thing is the embodiment of an eidos;
• the most important role for the transformation of an idea into a concrete thing is assigned to God the Creator;
• individual eidos exist objectively, independently of our consciousness.

Feelings and reason

Subjective idealism, saying that consciousness is primary, matter is secondary, asserts:

• everything exists only in the mind of the subject;
• ideas are in the human mind;
• images of physical things also exist only in the mind due to sensory sensations;
• neither matter nor eidos live separately from human consciousness.

The disadvantage of this theory is that there are no reliable and logical explanations for the very mechanism of converting eidos into a specific thing. Philosophical idealism dominated in the time of Plato in Greece, in the Middle Ages. And today it is common in the USA, Germany and some other countries of Western Europe.

Monism and dualism

Materialism, idealism - are attributed to monism, that is, the doctrine of one primary principle. Descartes founded dualism, the essence of which lies in the theses:

• there are two independent substances: physical and spiritual;
• the physical has properties of extension;
• the spiritual possesses thinking;
• in the world everything is derived either from one or from the second substance;
• physical things come from matter, and ideas from spiritual substance;
• matter and spirit are interconnected opposites of a single being.

In search of an answer to the basic question of philosophy: "What is primary - matter or consciousness?" - can be briefly formulated: matter and consciousness always exist and complement each other.

Other directions in philosophy

Pluralism claims that the world has many beginnings, like monads in the theory of G. Leibniz.

Deism recognizes the presence of God, who once created the world and no longer takes part in its further development, does not affect the actions and lives of people. Deists are represented by French Enlightenment philosophers of the 18th century - Voltaire and Rousseau. They did not oppose matter to consciousness and considered it spiritualized.

Eclecticism mixes the concepts of idealism and materialism.

The founder of empiricism was F. Bacon. In contrast to the idealistic statement: "Consciousness is primary in relation to matter" - empirical theory says that the basis of knowledge can only be experience and feelings. There is nothing in the mind (thoughts) that has not been obtained by experience before.

The denial of knowledge

Agnosticism is a direction that completely denies even a partial possibility of comprehending the world through one subjective experience. This concept was introduced by T. G. Huxley, and I. Kant was a prominent representative of agnosticism, who argued that the human mind has great possibilities, but they are limited. Based on this, the human mind gives rise to riddles and contradictions that have no chance of being resolved. In total, according to Kant, there are four such contradictions. One of them: God exists - God does not exist. According to Kant, even that which belongs to the cognitive capabilities of the human mind cannot be known, since consciousness has only the ability to display things in sensory sensations, but it cannot recognize the inner essence.

Today, supporters of the idea "Matter is primary - consciousness is derived from matter" can be found very rarely. The world has become religiously oriented, despite a significant difference in views. But despite the centuries-old search for thinkers, the main question of philosophy has not been unambiguously resolved. Neither Gnosticists nor ontologists could answer it. This problem actually remains unresolved for thinkers. In the 20th century, the Western school of philosophy shows a tendency to reduce attention towards the traditional main philosophical question. It is gradually losing its relevance.

Modern direction

Scientists such as Jaspers, Camus, Heidegger say that in the future a new philosophical problem- existentialism. This is a question of a person and his existence, management of a personal spiritual world, internal social relationships, freedom in choice, the meaning of life, one's place in society and a sense of happiness.

From the point of view of existentialism, human existence is a completely unique reality. It is impossible to apply inhuman measures of cause-and-effect relationships to it. Nothing external has power over people, they are the cause of themselves. Therefore, in existentialism they talk about the independence of people. Existence - this is the receptacle of freedom, the basis of which is a person who creates himself and is responsible for everything he does. It is interesting that in this direction there is a fusion of religiosity with atheism.

Since ancient times, man has been trying to know himself and find his place in the world around him. This problem has always interested thinkers. The search for answers sometimes took the whole life of a philosopher. The theme of the meaning of being is closely connected with the problem of the essence of man. These concepts are intertwined and often coincide, since together they deal with the highest phenomenon of the material world - man. But even today philosophy cannot give the only clear and correct answer to these questions.

Matter or consciousness? What is primary?

This is a long-standing philosophical dispute between materialists and theologians.
Materialists believe that matter first appeared.
Theologians believe that consciousness (God, holy spirit) first appeared.
My opinion is that our science currently does not have a complete understanding of either matter or consciousness.
What was at the very beginning, before the emergence of the Universe (before the Universal explosion and the formation of galaxies, stars, planets began? Nothing, i.e. emptiness (cold vacuum)
But something cannot come from nothing. This means that vacuum is some special form of matter. So the materialists are right? But let's wait to draw conclusions.
Let's consider the question of why the Universal explosion occurred, and one type of matter (vacuum) began to turn into another type of matter (stars and planets). Here we come to a simple answer - this was done by the Almighty) Higher Mind, the Holy Spirit). The following sentence immediately comes to mind: “In the beginning there was a word.” But who said ego? Supreme Mind, Supreme, Holy Spirit? So the theologians are right? But even now we will not draw quick conclusions.
In my opinion, two more words are missing in the chain of matter and consciousness - information and energy. And these concepts are no less complex than matter and consciousness.
And what if we assume that information (a word, a thought) can itself be transformed into energy, and energy, in turn, is one of the forms of matter (or turn into matter). But it means that there must be a primary source of information that gave this primary informational impulse. In my opinion, this is the Supreme Mind - a constant substance, which theologians call God (the Most High).
The cosmos is 95% dark matter and dark energy. And what do they know about these forms of matter (energy is also a special kind of matter). Nothing. Modern science deals only with those areas that can bring profit (filling wallets) or discoveries in the field of war (and these are profits for military monopolies). At the same time, discoveries and research in the military sectors lead to only one thing - to the destruction of man by man, the subordination of weak countries to stronger ones. For this reason, it is unprofitable for scientists to deal with the world around us (space).
In the end, I can only conclude that our modern science still knows almost nothing about the world around us. And, it seems to me, modern scientists, academicians do not seek to understand and study this world. This is clearly seen in historical science, which has been simplified to the limit and is not going to be studied. true story The earth and its peoples. Apparently this is very beneficial to modern historians.
It is better to keep the people in the dark (illiterate), it is easier to manage them.

This is the basic question of philosophy, to which I have a fairly simple answer.

Consciousness does not exist outside of matter, and there is evidence for this. If consciousness existed outside of matter, then a person would receive consciousness as a kind of program in a ready-made form from the outside. But that doesn't happen. Any adult person will say that his consciousness was not given to him from the outside in a ready-made form, but it was created by himself under the influence of many factors: social priorities (for example, in some Muslim countries, people are deprived of a choice and they are forced to choose only Islam), their moral values ​​derived from upbringing; their own interests; their own abilities; your temperament; their education; the presence or absence of a critical (analytical) mind. The evolution (change) of a person's consciousness in the process of his growing up proves that consciousness exists in a person and is created by him, and is not given from the outside in a finished form. Therefore, matter is primary, and human consciousness is secondary.

But a person's consciousness affects the quality of the material (external) world in which this person lives. Therefore, human consciousness is primary in relation to the quality of the external world. If a person's consciousness is qualitative, then external world that a person creates around himself will be of high quality.

In the Bible, “God” is called the “Holy Spirit”, and the phrase “Holy Spirit” is translated from the allegorical as a perfect (qualitative) consciousness. The Bible carries a perfect consciousness (“All Scripture is inspired by God ...”), and it was created for this, so that each person would acquire a perfect (qualitative) consciousness (“Holy Spirit” = wisdom), with the help of which he could create around himself a qualitative the material world and a qualitative (perfect) social structure - the dictatorship of the Law (alegorically: "God's Kingdom on earth").

In addition to what has been said, I would like to add proof that there is no "Creator", in whom all religious people believe, exists. And I have a simple proof of this. And this proof is based on practice. In practice, no one can create matter from nothing. Matter can be transformed from one state to another, but it is impossible in principle to create matter from nothing. And if matter cannot be created from nothing, then matter cannot be called creation. And if matter cannot be called a creation, then there is no "Creator", because the "Creator" can exist only in a causal connection with the creation. And if there is no creation, then there is no "Creator". This is a simple proof that the "Creator", in which all religious people believe, does not exist. And the biblical "God" is not the "Creator", but the Law, truth, idea (atheistic teaching of Christ), wisdom (atheistic consciousness of Christ), justice. (See diagram above).

Reviews

The question of what is primary, what is secondary, as universal does not make sense, its meaning is always specific and this is a matter of technology, not philosophy. The main question of philosophy is the laws of transformation of one quality into another.
In this case, the author has complete uncertainty with the concept of matter. If matter (the root of the mother) is what everything is born from and what gives birth to everything, then consciousness (spirit) is no less material than substance and we can only talk about the spiritual and material components of everything that exists, distinguishing, but not opposing them to each other . With this understanding of matter, the question "What is primary - matter, or spirit?" just as inappropriate as the questions: "What is primary - matter, or time?", "matter, or space, movement, ...?"

*** If matter (the mother root) is what everything is born from and what gives birth to everything, then consciousness (spirit) is no less material than substance ***
Consciousness cannot be felt and its presence cannot be checked with instruments, therefore consciousness cannot be material. But the consciousness of a person can be determined only by his words, deeds and deeds, which are essentially material.

And if matter is "that from which everything is born and that which gives birth to everything," then matter is still primary.

As I suggested, you identify the material with the corporeal (material). The spiritual is also felt - we feel our every thought, we feel consciousness and its tension, we work with our own and other people's images, we feel their strength of resistance to change.
Humanity quite recently, with the advent of computers, has grown to a direct scientific study of informational (spiritual) interaction. The conceptual apparatus has not yet been properly developed, the methods of measurement, too, but there are already some developments.

*** The spiritual is also felt - we feel our every thought, we feel consciousness ***
It is possible that we feel our own consciousness. With this I can agree. But we do not feel the thoughts and consciousness of others. We can feel the bodies of others, but consciousness and thoughts cannot. This is the difference between matter and consciousness.
Bible (Old and New Testaments) has been around for almost 2000 (plus/minus) years. And in it the consciousness of Christ is expressed through the teaching of Christ. But only I managed to understand the consciousness of Christ, which in essence is the consciousness of a wise atheist.
If we feel our own consciousness, then only good psychologists can feel the consciousness of others with careful analysis and armed with special knowledge.

He gave the nose to smell, the tongue to taste, the skin to touch, the ear to sound, and the eyes to see the environment. And he gave the brain to analyze the information received by these organs, and build images of the surrounding reality in this brain, in order to understand what surrounds it, what is being done here, why, why and for what, and most importantly - how it all happens. This is in order not to do stupid things, but on the contrary, to adopt the working methods of the surrounding mechanism of nature and learn how to benefit from this environment. He looked around, thought about it and decided that everything that affects his sense organs will be called matter. Sources of smell, taste, sound, impact on the skin, what he sees - that will be matter. It does not matter why it is this that affects him, and not something else, such a task did not occur to him, something else is important - he wanted to control this matter in such a way that it gave him only pleasant sensations. This is where his work began. He cooks delicious food, makes at home, warms up if it's cold, invents pleasant music, surrounds with pleasant pictures, caresses, loves to be pleasant. But at the same time, he understands that in his little world he is still defenseless, and from an unknown part of the environment one can expect any misfortune, catastrophe, and a hunch came that apparently from somewhere someone manages this whole economy, and it is necessary to understand who exactly and why he treats people differently. Some decided that somewhere out there in the unknown God is hiding and he controls everything. Others objected. They said that everything is governed by the general laws of the universe and there is no God. You just need to understand these laws, take them into account and adapt to live in the current conditions.

But let me, - the supporters of God were alarmed, further we will call them idealists or theists, - after all, it is God who created everything, including us, people, we need to understand what he needs from us, and try to satisfy him with our behavior!

Nothing of the kind, - said the opponents - materialists, they are atheists, - there is no master over us, we are our own masters and will live as we like. Let's better understand what this thing is - the universe with all its laws, and we will benefit from this thing. We want to live forever and always get pleasure, in other words, get happiness. There is only matter in the world, it has always been and always will be, but you yourself invented God. Matter is the head of everything.

Oh, say the idealists, you are getting the message that God will punish us all. God is the head of everything! - But then they decided not to punish everyone, but only materialists. But one must live in one collective, and the question arose - how should a common life be valued? As it is necessary for God, or as it is necessary for pleasures? It is said - "God and mammon are incompatible." And so the irreconcilable war began.

Thus, the question of the first cause of all things has become the most important of all questions. This is not a question of philosophy, but of practical activity and even survival.

Let's try to figure it out.

In order to give a definition of matter and assess the root cause of existence, a person first had to master the ability to think, think logically, develop imagination, that is, become reasonable. And here the mind in this matter has become primary. It was the mind that decided what it would call matter and what non-matter. Here is a quote from Lenin.

This means that there is a certain objective reality, it represents the entire universe, and it somehow declares itself in its parts to a person by influencing his meager sense organs. So what is called matter? Is it an unknown objective reality? Or only that which directly affects the sense organs?

It must be assumed that only what is now directly affecting these organs. I cannot call matter what I do not see, what I do not feel. And this means that if I see a tree from the window, then this is a material object, and if I turn away, then the tree remains only in memory, I do not see it, and therefore I cannot consider it material. I can even photograph it, and then the paper with the image of the tree will be a material object, but not the tree itself. I cannot consider as material those objects that I saw yesterday, today those objects are no longer there, today, or rather now, there are already other objects. Today my table is not the same as it was yesterday. That is, matter has an instantaneous character. Every moment the matter is renewed. For the same reason, I cannot consider invisible people, invisible cities, mountains, rivers as material objects. But those cities, mountains, rivers, of course, exist, they are in the sphere of objective reality, but for me now they are not material. There is the whole universe, but it cannot be called material, because I cannot see and feel it all at once. I can build images of the universe in my head, images of the past, future, but they remain only in my head, which means they are not material. The laws that scientists deduce are described on paper; this is also not matter. These are only images that say how some objects affect others, what actions are caused by others. A magnetic field, an electric field, even radiation, when they do not directly affect our sense organs, cannot be considered material. The devices that capture them tell us only that there is such an objective reality beyond our sensations. And we draw her images in our head already according to the data of these devices.

So what comes first - objective reality or matter? Of course, the objective reality.

So, we work only with images of objective reality, and this activity falls under the definition of objective idealism. According to the existing images, we build speculative models of the interaction of parts of the universe, models of processes. We want to get a model that could be confirmed by experiments, and since not everything lends itself to experiments, for example, the model of the entire universe with its past and future cannot be verified by experiment, we are trying to come up with plausibility criteria.

So what can serve as such a criterion?

The presence in the model of structural and functional connectivity of parts of the universe in single system, consistency, consistency, compliance with scientific discoveries, but this is not the main thing. The target orientation of the universal transformations along the irreversible time vector should be outlined, the reason that caused the inevitability of the appearance of the universe with all current transformations, their ultimate goal and how this goal can neutralize the initial reason should be shown. Since human logic does not work without basic axioms, the set of axioms should be minimal. And the fewer indefinable entities, the more plausible and understandable the model. And it should be as logical and understandable as possible, it should not prompt unresolvable questions. And this means that it should indicate the meaning of everything that exists, including intelligent beings - people, their role in the system of universal transformations.

It becomes obvious that it is impossible to build such a model in which there would be no source of the appearance of everything that exists, the source of physical laws and transformation procedures.

God is such a source. It is an indefinable entity. It is present in the worldviews of both theists and atheists. For atheists, it is hidden under the term "Nobody". His actions are defined by the phrase "by themselves". As a result, everything that exists appeared "by itself" from that unknown source. For theists, God is personalized and, although he does not have a clear definition, nevertheless, as an object, he can be included in the model of the universe. The god of atheists hidden behind "Nobody" has no mind, does not fit into any models, and therefore their models exclude any reasonable actions on the part of their god. Transformation procedures become meaningless, indefinite, aimless. They have the concept of "chance" and this "chance" becomes the second god. His actions do not have any logic, no consistency, but he has a control force, and therefore the universe is plunging into chaos. Under the influence and with the participation of both gods - the one that sits behind "Nobody" and issues physical laws, and "Accidents" a man appeared. According to this logic, being a product of two meaningless gods, a person cannot have either the meaning of life, or goal-setting, and even reason, since the source of reason is absent. And since there is no purposefulness in the universal procedures, then there cannot be an irreversible vector of time directed into the future. Such a worldview of atheists contradicts objective reality and does not meet the criteria of plausibility.

It follows that the source of the universe is a certain rational subject, and therefore consciousness becomes primary in relation to the matter that the person created by him feels.

And here are the last questions - why did God need to inspire a person with the need to divide everything into consciousness and matter? And why it is this matter that a person should see, and not another. I believe that on the first question - only so that with a consciousness estranged from matter, a person could understand the presence of God, his tasks and determine his place in their solution, and on the second - God gave only that understanding of matter that can induce in him the awareness of objective reality , necessary and sufficient for the solution of further divine tasks assigned to him.