It is hardly possible to precisely determine the time of the appearance of philosophical anthropology as a separate philosophical discipline. One way or another, the philosophers of Ancient Greece, India, and China tried to solve the problem of man. Philosophical anthropology is the science of the essence of man, of his relationship to nature and society, himself, other people, his origin, the basic laws of his being.
The work of K. Helvetius “On Man” or “Anthropology” by I. Kant is already scientific research devoted to the problem of man. In the 20th century, philosophy is trying to solve the difficult task: to develop a unified systematic theory of man. I. Kant believed that a philosophy that answers four basic questions (what can I know? What should I do? What can I hope for? What is a person?), The first three questions should be reduced to the fourth, and all existing sciences - to anthropology. According to I. Kant, philosophical anthropology is a fundamental science, but it becomes it only when a person begins to think about who he is, where he came from, where he goes and how he differs from animals, and other issues.
What is the subject of this science? What questions is she exploring now, and will continue to study? The subject of philosophical anthropology: the essence of man, his origin, typologization, physiological and spiritual components of man, the system of human relations (to society, to the Other, nature, culture, etc.), the totality of the phenomena of human existence (labor, creativity, death, play , love, etc.)
M. Scheler wrote that in our era, for the first time in ten thousand years, the problem of man appeared - he does not know who he is, but he knows that he does not know this. The scientific works of M. Buber, M. Scheler, A. Gehlen, H. Plesner in philosophy served as the theme of the “anthropological turn”. More and more scientists are connected to anthropological problems and as a result two directions emerge: on the one hand, part of scientists are trying to connect all scientific knowledge and everything that exists with a person, and on the other, attempts are being made to overcome anthropology, as they say, “anthropological dream”, “anthropological madness ”and come to knowledge of objective, genuine being, ontology, free from man.
Scientists have been engaged in this scientific debate for more than a year, and discussions are not expected to end in the near future. As a result, philosophical anthropology all the time she must invent something, proving, for example, that without an anthropological justification all other concepts lose their internal logic and meaning. So, in physics and synergetics, the so-called anthropic principle appears, proving that the Universe must have properties that allow the development of intelligent life, that is, in this case, man.
Philosophical anthropology has recently begun to claim to occupy the position of a new fundamental science of man, and not just to be a section within the framework of philosophical science. In order to justify such an approach, she constantly makes attempts to create such a language that could voice the main secrets of human existence, its finiteness and touch on eternity, the greatness of its spirit and the lowlandness of animal passions, its integrity and inconsistency. It is interesting that sometimes scientists who are not supporters of philosophical anthropology, however, enriched its language, developed its categories with its original approaches to the analysis of human nature. So, for example, happened with representatives of postmodernism. They, creating their own language, involuntarily contributed to the development of the word, with the help of which a person could describe the meaning of his existence.
However, it should be noted that such a language has not yet been created, and philosophical anthropology has not yet become a systematized fundamental science of man.
Maybe it will never be such, but the need for those who think, seek the meaning of their existence and the essence of people in such a science will always be.