Transcript of Auguste Comte: Positivism and the Three Stages (European Philosophers)

Hey there, students! In this lecture, I'm going to talk to you about Auguste Comte's positive philosophy. That's his real name: "Au-goost." A lot of times, I have trouble speaking languages other than Southern, but I asked a French teacher on this one, so let's talk a little bit about our friend, Auguste Comte, and his positive philosophy. Now, first of all, let's clear up what we mean by the word, "positive." A lot of times, we're thinking in terms of "think positive thoughts." Think of flowers and... snowmen, or... whatever people find positive and happy. But keep in mind that "positive" doesn't always mean "positive." For example, like, I just got this test back from my doctor. Let's see what it says. AAAAAAAAHHHHHH! So... This is the kind of positive that we mean - that you're certain. There's no optimism here, necessarily, or pessimism. It's really neutral. It's just about being positive about knowing. And that is the basis of Comte's philosophy of positivism, that the only valid knowledge is the knowledge that we have gotten through the scientific method - through experimentation and observation. When he looks back at humanity, keep in mind that Comte is a positivist, but he's also looking back, kind of a philosopher of science, a historian of science, and he's looking back through society to see how we got to this positive stage that he saw materializing in the nineteenth century. And so the first of these three stages is the theological, or what he calls the fictitious stage. Second, the metaphysical - or abstract - stage. And the third, the positive - or scientific - stage. In each of these, religion is going to play a lesser role as it progresses and science is going to play a greater role as it progresses. First of all, let's talk about the theological stage. This is the oldest, the most primitive. Think about here, there's Prometheus trying to steal fire from Zeus while Zeus is taking a nap with a little boy. Why is this story there? Well, it's made up. People use the gods to explain stuff, but there was no rhyme or reason for what the gods did. If Zeus wants to keep fire from human beings, if he wants to throw lightning around, if he wants to go chase women (divine and mortal), if he wants to take a nap with a little boy of his choosing, he may do that. There's really no reason for it, no explanation. Zeus is god. He's powerful. He can do these things. And so, when you think about the theological stage, think of religion without science - that there's not any rhyme or reason for the way people think other than a god or gods control things and those gods or spirits are powerful. And this, itself, goes three stages or types. First of all, fetishism, where you have spirits that are embodied in nature and that sort of thing. If you watch Game of Thrones, think about the religion of the old gods - that there are spirits in the godswood and that sort of thing. Then, there's polytheism, like Egyptian religion, Greek religion, ancient Roman religion... these religions where you have these gods that are powerful and they rule over certain things but once again, no rhyme or reason. Why does it storm? Why does it flood? Because this god did this or something like that. We offer a sacrifice to Poseidon so that it doesn't storm while we're out at the sea. Then, finally, there's monotheism. The way I'd like to illustrate this is to think of the binding of Isaac, when Abraham is told by his God in the book of Genesis that your son, who I gave you miraculously and promised to make your descendants through him like sands on the seashore... I'd like you to sacrifice that son. And Abraham's thinking, "This doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but okay." And so, he goes to the top of the mountain and ties his son up and is about to sacrifice him and then all the sudden, here comes an angel! "J/K! LOL! HAHAHAHA! GET IT?" No. Abraham probably didn't get that, at all... BECAUSE IT DIDN'T MAKE SENSE! It seems like kind of a cruel joke. But why can the God of Abraham do this? Well, because He's powerful! And if He wants to test Abraham or play a joke on him, then whatever. He can do that because He's God. There doesn't have to be any rhyme or reason for it. So that is the theological stage. Now, progressing to the metaphysical stage, where people think in terms of an abstract power guiding the world according to certain fixed principles. In the metaphysical stage, we would find anyone from Plato and Aristotle, to Isaac Newton, to Voltaire, to Thomas Jefferson. These are people who are scientific in their mindset, but also believe in a higher power... believe in some sort of system. There's some sort of animus behind everything that makes sense. And we look at John Locke, as well, and we can see in the metaphysical stage, people think about universal laws based on abstract principles. John Locke, using the Christian religion as a justification, says that all people are created with the natural rights of life, liberty, and property. And everybody in the state of nature should have these rights. These are God-given. Well, this is based on an abstract principle. This is something that's supposed to make sense and Locke explains this as something that's divinely ordained that's in line with the constructs of the universe. And so, I look at this as more of a scientific religion. Locke was a religious man, but also a man of science - a man of reason. And this is illustrated best in a work of Locke's from 1695, one of his lesser-known works that was called On the Reasonableness of Christianity. In Locke's day, there were already people who were attacking Christianity as irrational and Locke wrote this pamphlet to defend Christianity and to show how Christianity, in his view, could be reasonable... that this is a religion with a God that we can count on to adhere to certain principles - not the Old Testament God who tells Abraham to sacrifice Isaac for no reason at all. And Locke, the proponent of religious toleration, believed that every religion should be tolerated except for atheism. He believed that if atheists were allowed to just run around doing their thing that when they have to swear an oath or something like that, they wouldn't keep it... The social fabric would totally tear apart. Why? Because religion gives us structure. And that is the biggest thing about this metaphysical stage is that there is some sort of structure behind this world that we experience. And finally, moving on to the positive stage. And this is the final stage, where someone looks at things based exclusively on the scientific method - on observation and experimentation. Disregard the metaphysical principles. Things may not always make sense and that's okay because what matters is what we see, what we can observe. Think about Einstein and his theory of relativity. I can't tell you anything about that, but it is a science independent of religion or metaphysics. Einstein says, "Okay, there's so something," and I'm like, "What's that?" and it's physics and E=MC2. Don't know what that is, either. Does physics even exist? I don't know! Somebody told me it did, but then again, somebody else told me it didn't. What am I supposed to think?! But... He's a scientist. He's smart. He observes stuff. Now, Newtonian physics... I can kind of wrap my brain around that. The law of universal gravitation... One thing spins around another thing and spins around another and everything's spinning around each other and... Okay, but at least I could get started explaining that, whereas this "new physics" I can't really, because it doesn't necessarily make sense. It doesn't fit into a metaphysical system where we can understand it, which is why in a lot of classrooms today, Newtonian physics is still taught even though it may be a little dated because people can actually at least feel like they're wrapping their brains around it, whereas relativity, I'm like, "HUH???" So, as a review, the three stages are the THEOLOGICAL, the METAPHYSICAL, and the POSITIVE. And as these progress, science becomes more predominant and religion becomes less predominant. And what's really important to understand about Comte is that he lays the foundation for a truly modernist philosophy. Think about the people who come after him - Darwin, Freud, and Nietzsche - these are people who in their fields of natural science, social science, and philosophy - that they are going to look at things totally independently of Christian metaphysics or any kind of metaphysics. Darwin is going to go to the Galapagos Islands. He's going to see things. He's going to write them down and he's going to go just on what he's observing. Freud is going to look at the family as something where this Darwinian competition is being played out, rather than this cohesive, divinely-ordained unit. And then, of course, Nietzsche is going to fundamentally challenge Christian philosophy in works such as The Antichrist. So, Comte is just setting the stage for these guys so they can go along and create this positive philosophy - this philosophy that does not rely on any kind of religion or metaphysics. So that's Comte for you. If you like what you saw, if you learned something, SUBSCRIBE to my channel. Visit my website. I've got instructional materials and that sort of thing. About to start some online tutoring and essay grading and all that stuff, so tomrichey.net - take a look there - @TomRichey on Twitter and Instagram [child's voice in background] and... yeah... also on YouTube, so make sure you've subscribed and I'll see you around. And it sounds like my daughter's home, so let me go ahead and wrap this up before she gets down here. Actually... Yeah, this is my daughter, Caroline. Say hey, Caroline. [Silence] Can you say hey? [Moans] How old are you? [Moans] I'm kind of like Jenna Marbles except instead of dogs, I've got this really cute kid. I guess I'm going to go watch Frozen with my daughter or something like that, but I'll be back with some more lectures, so stay tuned. Until next time! [Theme Music]