Traditional Orthodox Philosophy: A General Outline #
By Kiril Mikhailov
In the 17th century, Francis Bacon developed the concept of “pure knowledge,” free from prejudice and superstition—a concept of tremendous importance to world science, and one that, with only minor modifications, still reigns today. With the exception of anti- and irrationalist philosophical schools, which did not significantly influence the development of science, the phantom of “pure knowledge” dominated Western and Westernizing minds until the 20th century. Over the past hundred years, several attempts have been made to reconsider the role of science in the world, along with the very content of science and scientific knowledge itself. One such attempt—quite revolutionary in nature—is the famous book by Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Kuhn eloquently demonstrated that the basis of scientific progress, which drives the global socio-economic system, is not scientific innovation or sudden invention, but the paradigm (a generally accepted model of thought), which spreads like an infection through the minds of those who call themselves scientists. Thus, it is difficult to speak of knowledge as a pure unfolding of the intellect, as a cleansing from idols and stereotypes.
Another notable myth is the idea that science sets the true direction for the development of society. Philosophy, politics, and art are usually considered secondary, derivative spheres, dependent on the level of development of productive forces, which, in turn, are determined by the pace and structure of scientific and technological progress. If the foundation of social existence is science, and if science is defined not by the power of “pure knowledge” but by confidence in the correctness of its own representation—not by concrete facts but by the paradigm through which those facts are interpreted—then it becomes difficult to speak of the purity and independence of intellectual progress. In Kuhn’s words, “Normal science, the activity in which most scientists inevitably spend almost all their time, is based on the assumption that the scientific community knows what the world is like. Much of the success of science is due to the community’s determination to defend that assumption, if necessary at considerable cost” (2:28). If we accept this assumption, then why must we consider secular, profane knowledge to be the standard? Why is internal scientific struggle, conceptual debate, seen as legitimate or even necessary, while religious knowledge—openly declaring its supernatural character—is considered unscientific or even anti-scientific?
If we are consistent in our adherence to the principle of ideological pluralism, we must accept religious knowledge as one of the forms in the search for truth. If we acknowledge that scientific and technological progress is entirely conditioned by the selectiveness of paradigms, then a religious worldview cannot be dismissed merely because it posits God as the supreme foundation of world order.
In this work, I do not seek to defend the right of the Orthodox Christian understanding of being—I simply use it. If three centuries of pursuit of intellectual power break upon images, fabrications, and myths, who can forbid one from speaking scientifically about the world from a Christian point of view? As an Old Orthodox Christian (Old Believer), I am convinced that the Orthodox version of Christianity offers the fullest revelation of the Truth. But since polemics and apologetics lie outside the scope of this outline, I will only attempt to present, in the broadest terms, the Orthodox Christian vision of the world.
Orthodox Epistemology (Theory of Knowledge) #
From the Orthodox point of view, religion and science, in principle, cannot contradict one another—yet neither are they equivalent. As S. L. Frank rightly observed, science is based on the perception of facts, limited by our cognitive abilities and mental constructs, which do not allow the workings of the intellect to go beyond the constraints of human thought (3:4–5). Religion, on the other hand, is grounded in union with the object of faith—God—and therefore offers not relative but essential, contemplative knowledge. Religious knowledge is dogmatic and, in a sense, esoteric, since not all are able to receive it; the majority accept religious knowledge through faith. However, at its deepest core lies not merely faith, but the revelations of God to His holy ascetics—the Fathers. The “caste-like” nature of religious knowledge, in contrast to scientific (exoteric) knowledge, encrypts the insights granted to seers into dogmas. A person lacking mystical insight can access religious knowledge only by means of faith.
From the Christian perspective, only a part of creation is revealed to man (“For we know in part…” – 1 Corinthians 13:9). It is in principle impossible to gain full knowledge of the essential foundations of being. Therefore, any empirical description of reality inevitably runs into interpretive gaps, which are either filled with pseudo-scientific myths or used to claim that science and enlightenment are unnecessary due to the limitations of human perception. A complete explanation of the world is possible only through faith in the Lord and His Word, coupled with the rational study of that Word.
Orthodox Ontology (Doctrine of Being) #
Orthodox philosophy begins with the postulate that the world is created, that it is a creature. Fullness of being belongs to God alone. All of nature could neither have arisen nor continue to exist without the power of His life-giving Spirit. The world—both material and spiritual—is secondary to the will of the Creator and bears the imprint of His creative act. Accordingly, through attentive and impartial study of the world, even a non-believer who is consistent and self-critical cannot help but see the Creator as the cause of all existence: “For the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead” (Romans 1:20).
The world has a definite beginning that lies beyond the world itself—a volitional act of the Lord. World history is not spontaneous; it is moving toward a definite point—the Consummation of the Age—after which the material nature, corrupted by man’s fall into sin, will be destroyed, and in place of the known universe, “a new heaven and a new earth” shall be created (Revelation 21:1).
Since only the ideal (spiritual) principle possesses full being, any form of thought that becomes fixated on understanding matter as a self-moving end in itself is necessarily limited. Materialist thought, in striving not to see the Holy Spirit behind matter, is forced to construct illusions about the forces that hold the existing order together.
Thus, when we speak of ways of understanding the world, we must acknowledge their limitations. Any version of world-understanding may be relatively true in discerning the forces governing the world, but any concept that does not see God as the Source and Creator, the life-giving force and universal order of the Cosmos, is absolutely untrue.
Orthodox Philosophy of Nature #
Continuing this line of thought, Orthodox philosophy of nature speaks of the world as being spiritually infused. Christianity affirms that the world is governed by God through certain spiritual (angelic) powers. However, Scripture warns us not to regard these angelic forces as the source of creation (Colossians 2:18). One explanation for the origin of polytheism is the attribution of creative and self-sufficient power to these angelic beings. Thus, the biblical accounts of Lucifer show that he desired to be considered the source of the universe and was therefore cast into hell—a kind of alternate dimension (partially in contact with our own)—where he suffers from powerlessness and strives to regain his former might, but not through the power of God, rather through his own intellect and will. Since the devil possesses no creative power of his own, all his activity is inherently destructive toward all that God has made. For the devil, this is acceptable and even desirable, for his element is not creativity and building up, but restless action meant only to draw attention to himself.
With the appearance of humanity, Satan gained the opportunity to influence human minds and emotions and thereby affect the fate of man himself and the entire material world, which is connected to humanity—the summit and crown of creation. The sin of the forebears of the human race—Adam and Eve—became a hindrance to the natural forces established by the Lord. It is possible that this is the very reason for the world’s entropic (diminishing, centrifugal) processes. The quality of energy that sustains the universe is continually decreasing. In the long term, this will lead to the End of the World—an ultimate entropic state (a logical consequence of the Third Law of Thermodynamics). “The powers of the heavens shall be shaken” (Matthew 24:29). It is known that this process is hastened by human sinfulness and godlessness. Turning away from God, a person creates, by his own will, spaces in his life devoid of God’s grace, and these spaces are immediately filled with destructive demonic activity. Thus, man brings spiritual and material harm not only upon himself, but upon the entire universe. The period of world history before the End of the World is characterized as a general falling away from God (apostasy), which will cut off all streams of Divine energy that sustain the world. In a world deprived of divine grace, entropy will reach its maximum, and the world will collapse. However, the precise timing of the End of the World is known only to the Creator (Mark 13:32). A person may ask the Lord for knowledge of the time or try to discern it from indirect signs.
Orthodox philosophy denies evolution in any sense: the creation of the world is complete, and no qualitatively new material forms are emerging (see The Hexaemeron by St. Basil the Great, Homilies on the Book of Genesis by St. John Chrysostom, On Souls by St. Gregory the Theologian). Furthermore, nature was created at once, not in stages, as, for example, the Catholic philosopher Teilhard de Chardin believed. Humanity too was created all at once, not through evolution, and all people on earth are the genetic descendants of Adam and Eve.
Moreover, the processes of the world are marked by involution—degradation as a result of man’s departure from the One who created the world.
Orthodox Anthropology #
The Christian teaching about man, grounded in Scripture and the writings of the Church Fathers, speaks of the triune nature of man: spirit, soul, and body (1 Thessalonians 5:23). Human nature itself is dual: “For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would” (Galatians 5:17).
This axiom of conflict between body and soul should not be understood as an original condition—it reflects the current state of fallen humanity. In Adam’s original condition, there was no such contradiction: Adam possessed an immortal and incorruptible body (as did all of nature—see, for example, Sermon 38 by St. Symeon the New Theologian). This contradiction was overcome by Christ’s Resurrection, and it will not exist in the New World, which will be re-created after the End of the World. The souls of the righteous will receive new bodies in the likeness of Adam’s: “As the creature became corruptible when thy body became corruptible, so then, when thy body becomes incorruptible, the creature shall follow after it and be made like unto it…” (St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on the Epistle to the Romans, XIV, 5). The Son of God, the God-man Jesus Christ, by His sacrifice on the Cross for the sin of man and by His Resurrection, destroyed that sin for the sake of the eternal hope of all who believe in Him.
Thus, when speaking about human nature, we must neither equate the bodily and spiritual principles nor place the body above the soul. Philosophical schools that regard the soul either as a fabrication or as a byproduct of “higher nervous activity” (for example, Freudianism or Marxism) are, from the Orthodox point of view, false or one-sided. Orthodoxy likewise criticizes the modern secular assessment of mental illnesses and disorders. According to patristic psychiatry (e.g., Abba Dorotheos), the cause of psychological disturbances is a disunity between soul, mind, and body, brought about either by demonic influence or by a person’s own sinful behavior.
Sin is understood as a departure from the pattern of behavior and thought blessed by the Creator. When sin becomes habitual and firmly established as part of one’s personality, it becomes a vice (e.g., alcoholism), and to be healed of it by one’s own efforts—without invoking the Lord’s help—is nearly impossible.
The duality of human nature also gives rise to a duality in sinfulness: sins of the body (such as lust and sensual indulgence), and sins of the soul (such as pride and avarice). But there are also hybrid vices (e.g., homosexuality, drug addiction). Moreover, since man is a single whole in his duality, the sins of the body affect the mind and soul—and vice versa. Therefore, the root cause of physical and mental illness is sin. From the Orthodox perspective, true medicine must treat not only the body, but also the soul.
It is impossible for a person mired in sin or vice to attain Truth. The ideal of Orthodox anthropology is the restoration of the inner hierarchy: the body is to be subject to the spirit, and the spirit turned entirely toward God. This is why, for example, the enduring practice of fasting and the obligation of daily prayer rules exists.
A life without God has no true meaning—it only carries echoes of meaning, more or less intelligible to the mind. All worldly reference points are illusions: they either vanish as one delves more deeply into them, or else they dull and stupefy one’s spiritual and intellectual sensitivity. For this reason, the Church considers a decisive break with the worldly value system to be a necessary condition for becoming truly churched.
Orthodox Social and Political Philosophy #
In Orthodox social philosophy, the ideal relationship between the individual and society is sobornost’ (spiritual unity in freedom). (Western secular individualism and Eastern pagan collectivism are seen as distorted forms of communal existence.) However, sobornost’ cannot be understood apart from the Church. The holiest aspect of man is his personhood, made in the image and likeness of the Creator (Genesis 1:26). Salvation of the soul—the ultimate goal of the Christian life—can only be pursued individually; all spiritual life is deeply personal. Yet at the same time, salvation is possible only within the Church—the Body of Christ. Since the Lord is invisibly present in the Church, it is regarded as the highest and most complete form of society. Outside the Church, salvation is impossible. Therefore, all other forms of social and political organization are of a lower order.
Regarding the hierarchy of political forms (which are lower in status compared to the Church), there is no unanimous opinion among the holy fathers. However, many theologians and Orthodox philosophers recognize an interdependence between the apocalyptic philosophy of history and political philosophy in Christianity: “For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth [κατέχων] will let, until he be taken out of the way” (2 Thessalonians 2:7). Thus, the worldly order blessed by the Lord appears to be a form of autocracy headed by an Orthodox believing monarch—the leader of the nation and the defender of the faith. If the monarch fails to fulfill the role of “guardian of the faith” (katechon), a spiritual crisis befalls the entire nation.
The pre-schism concept of “Moscow as the Third Rome” identified the Russian tsar as the final guardian of Orthodoxy on earth. After the abandonment of true Orthodoxy during the 17th-century Schism, Old Orthodox Christians (Old Believers) ceased to regard the Russian sovereign as the keeper of the faith; indeed, many Old Believer writers proclaimed the arrival of the Antichrist.
Nevertheless, Old Orthodox Christians submit to secular authorities and laws but do not participate in their anti-Christian activities. “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation” (Romans 13:1–2).
Since, on nearly every level, modern politics lacks sacredness—the consecration of being a “servant of God”—and even lacks the conservative desire to preserve the immutable foundations of holiness, being instead based on manipulating the consumer instincts of individuals, modern politics can be described as lacking true being. It is devoid of the only genuine spiritual dimension and is engaged in turbo-capitalism—an inflation and simulation of human needs (1:525).
Thus, the traditionalism of Orthodox political and social philosophy affirms that the present globalized, technologized, and virtualized world is approaching its final stage—the kingdom of the Antichrist. It is impossible to resist this trend without stepping outside the current godless order of things. The only way to delay the arrival of global evil is through personal holiness, faith, and righteousness, through the greatest possible distancing of the Orthodox Church from this world, and through increasingly active Christian preaching.
Orthodox Philosophy of History #
Orthodoxy holds a regressive view of historical development. The world is moving toward the End of the World, yet this movement is not linear—it has a kind of cyclical character. Geometrically, it can be represented as a downward-unfolding spiral. History is a process of universal apostasy; therefore, from a spiritual standpoint, tomorrow is less promising than yesterday. The Orthodox Church strives in no way to adapt its teachings or worship to the spirit of the times, since the spirit of modernity is one of ever-increasing godlessness (spiritual decay). The historical ideal is the Early Christian Church, and as far as possible, this ideal should be upheld. Certain minor changes the Church introduces into her current spiritual practices (not into her foundations!) are made only because of the spiritual weakness of modern man.
According to Christian teaching, by the end of world history there will remain so few truly faithful Christians that their conduct will appear abnormal and provocative to the surrounding anti-Christian society.
The Orthodox model of global regression encompasses the falling away of Western Christians from the fullness of Orthodox doctrine in the 11th century, the lapse of the Orthodox East into Uniatism and New Rite practices, the falling away from the purity of the faith by the majority of Russians in the 17th century—led by both patriarch and tsar—and the destruction of the monarchy in 1917, which was replaced by a tyrannical, aggressively godless state.
Orthodox Axiology (Theory of Values) and Ethics #
Orthodoxy affirms the relativity of all worldly moral and value-based reference points. The only value that possesses true significance is Christian morality, as reflected in Holy Scripture and the teachings of the Holy Fathers. Elements of other value systems—whether national or confessional—may be recognized as acceptable within Orthodoxy, but this recognition does not entail any ecumenical affirmation of the salvific nature of those systems themselves. What matters is the experience of each culture, nation, and people in their journey toward God. However, to fully surrender to that experience is impermissible, lest Christian values be discarded or equated with secondary values—ethnic or national. The universal Good News of the Lord, crucified and risen for every human being on earth, has had, has, and will have no precedent or parallel.
At the same time, Orthodoxy opposes the erasure of God-given national uniqueness—it stands against globalization and Western-centrism (especially American-centrism), as well as against secular humanism, which ignores spiritual experience and propagates the falsehoods of liberalism, egalitarianism, natural law, economicism, democratism, and the like.
Orthodoxy stands opposed to turbo-capitalism, which inflames and artificially creates (through mass media) desires that blind the voice of reason and the soul within a person. It also rejects modern mass culture, which exalts sin and depravity, godlessness, and self-will as a norm of behavior.
Conclusion
Naturally, it is impossible within a few pages to convey even a surface-level presentation of the Orthodox Christian worldview—especially since I myself am not immune to error and bias.
This text was written because modern man, drowning in a sea of information, knows almost nothing about Christianity—a faith that has shaped the history of our homeland and of the world at large. In print, even in so-called “scholarly” literature, distorted, incomplete, one-sided, and false interpretations of Orthodoxy prevail.
This text was also written because, despite the proclaimed pluralism of opinions and perspectives, any attempt to speak or teach about the world from an Orthodox Christian point of view is met either with outcries about “clericalism” or with arrogant claims about the “unscientific” nature of the religious worldview. And this is despite the now widely acknowledged limitations of all research: the conditioning of perspectives (and even of research itself) by assumptions, prejudices, myths, and illusions. If it is impossible to describe the world with absolute accuracy and correctness from the standpoint of secular science, do we, as Orthodox Christians, not also have the right to present our own, traditional religious vision of the universe?