Klasik felsefede hakikat, insan bilgisinden bağımsız ve insan zihnini aşan nitelikte olmasından dolayı organik bir evren yaratmıştır. Rönesans ile birlikte ortaya çıkan hümanist kabuller, hakikatin aşkınlığı ve evrenin bütünlüğü iddialarının sorgulanmasına, hakikat için yeni bir referans noktası aranmasına neden olmuştur. Modern felsefe ile birlikte özne yeni kozmosun referansı kabul edilirken hakikate dair izlenecek yol da artık kaçınılmaz olarak öznenin zihinsel yetilerine bırakılmıştır. Akla duyulan bu güven, hakikate ulaşılabileceğine dair septik sorgulamaları da beraberinde getirmiştir. Modern felsefe Rönesans sonrası ortaya çıkan bu epistemolojik krize cevap vermek gayesiyle iki farklı yöntem geliştirmiştir. Bu yöntemler rasyonalizm ve ampirizmdir. Rasyonalizmin kurucusu Rene Descartes duyularla elde edilen a posteriori bilgiyi yanıltıcı olarak nitelendirerek eleştirmiştir. Öte yandan Francis Bacon soyut aklın a priori bilgisini idol öğretisinde yer bulan tiyatro idollerine benzetmiştir. Bu nedenle Bacon, Descartes'ın matematik ilkeleri ile kurmuş olduğu rasyonalizm öğretisini metafizik ve spekülatif olarak nitelendirmiştir. Bacon için bilgi bir güç olarak a posteriori niteliktedir ve ampirizm sayesinde teorik niteliğinden sıyrılarak pratik olana yönelmelidir. İki farklı yöntem ile hakikati bulma girişimi olarak gelişen modern epistemoloji, hakikate dair bilginin imkânlarının sorgulanacağı Aydınlanma felsefesinin temellerini atmıştır. Descartes ve Bacon tarafından öne sürülen iki yöntem arasında başlayan bu çatışma, Immanuel Kant'a kadar devam ederek modern bilincin epistemolojik yabancılaşma sürecinin de başlangıcı olmuştur

In classical philosophy, truth is independent from human knowledge and it transcends human mind. Therefore the classical belief of truth has created an organic universe idea. The humanist assumptions that have emerged with the Renaissance have led to questioning the transcendence of truth and the claim of the unity of the universe, and it has caused a search for a new reference point for truth. With Modern philosophy, the subject is taken as the new reference point for new cosmos understanding. For this reason, the way to follow the truth has been left to the mental capacities of the subject. However, this confident trust to subject’s reason has also brought skeptical questions about the possibilities of reaching the truth. Modern philosophy has developed two different methods as a response to this epistemological argument that emerged after the Renaissance. These are rationalism and empiricism. Founder of Rationalism Rene Descartes describes the a posteriori knowledge obtained with the senses as misleading. On the other hand Francis Bacon likens the idea of a priori knowledge of abstract reasoning to the theater idols in his idol teachings. For this reason Bacon describes the method of rationalism that Descartes founded with mathematical principles as metaphysical and speculative. For Bacon, knowledge is a power with its a posteriori nature. By means of empiricism, knowledge will move away from its theoretical character and become practical. Subject-based modern epistemology which developed as an attempt to find the truth by two different methods has laid the foundations of the Enlightenment philosophy that questions the possibilities of the knowledge of truth. The epistemological conflict that began between Descartes and Bacon continued as far as Immanuel Kant, and modern consciousness was also the beginning of the epistemological alienation process Philosophy has been separated from theology after Renaissance. The reason of this break is the nominalism that destroys the transcendence (Gökberk, 2015: 165). Now, philosophy has become an attempt to solve all kinds of problems that are preoccupation with human thought, not knowledge directed to a single purpose. Natural religion or understanding of reason as a religion based on human nature is taken from the philosophy of Stoa in this period. This understanding sees religion not as an inspiration but as a product of reason. Because nature and reason are synonymous in Stoa philosophy. The "lumen naturale", the light of nature, represents universal wisdom (Gökberk, 2015: 183). Because the humankind is a part of nature, his/her own nature is also based on this reason. With this acceptance of the fact that it is the main forces that unite the universe in the depths of nature, the Renaissance rejects the distinction between Earth and sky, the Aristotelian of the Middle Ages and the understanding of the dualistic nature. This rejection is the acceptance of the "live by nature" principle of early Stoa philosophy. Living according to the nature, which is regarded as the law of the universe, is now synonymous with living according to the mind encompassing the universe. Thus, nature has acquired a qualification that must be discovered directly with reason (Copleston, 2009: 21-22). The discovery of the nature and the mind of the Stoacs together with the Renaissance gave rise to the belief that absolute goodness for modern philosophy through mankind could take place in the material world/nature. The discovery of the nature and the mind of the Stoacs together with the Renaissance gave rise to the belief that absolute goodness for modern philosophy could take place in the material world/nature through man. The human will now be able to use the knowledge he gained from his/her knowledge of nature with his/her consciousness and senses to discover. Thus, while knowledge becomes power, at the same time it will enable material salvation, which humankind can dominate nature. The notion that nature and reason inherited from Stoa philosophy is one step forward with humanism. The break in classical thought has led to the search for a new authority on truth. Humanism is trying to take a person to the centre and answer it by accepting it as a reference. The rejection of classical acceptance and the taking of human reference have brought about fundamental changes in the judgment of cosmology. This change has inevitably led to the dissolution of the tradition and religion, which is thought to be the products of the vision of a static universe. Parallel to this, the political and social order that tradition and religion have brought about in the past has taken its share from this situation. Now all acceptance from the past by a new authority needs to be rearranged. The new authority mentioned is human and its abstract mind based on the consciousness of the subject, based on the assumption of a fundamental epistemology that the ontology has lost its priority (Cevizci, 2013: 19; Küçükalp, 2011: 74). The scientific revolution has emerged as the end result of the Renaissance thought with stoic character, combining intelligence and nature. In this context, Copernicus and his followers have advocated decreasing the causes related to the present, not multiplying them. The inevitable consequence of this situation has been the abandonment of the Aristotle-Ptolemy system, which is a consistent, earth-centered fixed world view adopted in the Middle Ages, which is contrary to the simple universal principles of nature. Galileo has developed a method that explains how to use mathematics instead of Aristotelian physics, which explains the movements of objects with the question. The common view of Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo is that nature does not operate with mysterious secrets but with simple and open principles. At the same time, it is based on the belief that nature is mechanical rather than organic (Gökberk, 2015: 214). Now with the collapse of the classical cosmos, the subject has been seen to be solitary "in a wide and impersonal universe" (Tarnas, 2015: 276). Perfection, which is supposed to belong to the sky, is based on mathematics and modern knowledge. Leading the scientific revolution, Copernicus, has started a process that is both world-destroying and world-building process. This process, which can be expressed as the expression of Tarnas' modern mind, created cosmological alienation by the destruction of Copernicus' understanding of the world on the planet. Then, Descartes' preliminary knowledge, based on metaphysics, makes cogito more delicate than the mind and turns it into an inevitable conflict with the empirical and transforms the cosmos into two separate pieces. The new universe is divided to two parts as res extensa and res cogitans (Capra, 2014: 69). Because of this, the ego cogito has associated the ontology with epistemology (Armağan, 2010: 108-109). Thus, while the subject-based monistic philosophy was determined, the subject inevitably overturned the ontological alienation. The modern consciousness, which finds the body, is surrounded by the ego-cogito of Descartes in the objective external world, working to recognize and judge; He started with Locke, continued with Hume, and tackled the epistemological alienation of the Enlightenment philosophy, which summarized with Kant, and attempted to reach the truth (Tarnas, 2014: 277-279). In the birth of the Enlightenment philosophy, Newton developed the character of definite science of nature, which is the fundamental paradigm of the idea of enlightenment, by synthesizing Bacon's inductive empiricism and deductive rationalism based on Descartes' mathematics. The Newtonian universe that has been shaped in the light of new understanding is a machine that operates according to definite mathematical laws and whose basic unit is an atom, which can be reached by experimentation and observation with knowledge (Küçükalp, 2011: 78). At the same time, the view of the universe as a mechanical quality has been made possible to explain it in a materialist framework with mathematical concepts (Köktaş, 2015: 641). Thus, the instrumentalisation of the knowledge that Bacon desires has been opened. It has become possible to dominate nature and society through causality and practically available knowledge (Cevizci, 2013, 40). Descartes' expressed will, which causes misunderstanding as evil, has created a problematic relationship with the understanding of deterministic mechanical nature and human freedom. The will that emerges as the cause of misunderstanding with the adoption of a universal and monist truth that exemplifies Descartes' geometric axioms; Locke has become the opinion of a subject with limited knowledge, a speculative problem of causality as a faction in Hume, and a moral liberty in Kant. Descartes, for the distinction between soul and body, defines humankind as an entity that can access to the both worlds, as Plato and Christian theology have expressed. With this qualification, humankind has become the only entity with self-awareness in the material world / nature. In this context, human beings have been accepted as possessing a consciousness for their moral actions to be able to reach a priori principles. However, the idea that science can be interpreted with reason on a scientific basis of ethics has allowed to spread to the new science of nature, philosophy and religion. Now philosophy and ethics have become a ground for new science of nature to create its own metaphysical dogmas (Gray, 2015: 151-154). Gassendi, who is a contemporary and empiricist hostile in this respect, rejected Descartes' rationalism for being similar to Scholastic philosophy. The approach put forward in his view is opening the door to a new metaphysical dogma on the basis of reason (Höffe, 2014: 181). On the other hand, empiricism is not as effective as rationalism in that it can develop an ethical theory in the metaphysical context due to the defence of a posteriori knowledge based on the senses. For this reason, many empiricists, especially Locke, have had a rationalistic tendency in ethical debates. Although modern philosophy and reason are regarded as a common characteristic in all people, some people claim that the power of rationality about ethics - philosophers - represents the truth, free of individual will. The fact that ethics is defined as a branch of physics combines with the claim that philosophers can see the principles of reason at a higher level. This has allowed philosophers to be able to philosophically base and direct morality. Thus, they have undertaken the task of researching which behaviors can be dictated by the authority of the patronage against ordinary people who are not allowed to make autonomous decisions (Küçükalp, 2011: 87; Bauman, 2011: 43). The inevitable result of this claim; it has led to the loss of the philosophical nature of the debates on ethics and, as Oakeshott pointed out, it has led philosophers to construct philosophical and moral theories of their own moral assumptions. However, the real purpose of philosophy is only to question the practical one and to turn to the meaning (Gray, 2004: 53). It seems that Descartes's interpretation of the ethics of universality in a scientific perspective fuelled the belief that the absolute moral principles that will bring humanity to well-being can be found with reason. This seemingly endless belief has inevitably led to a monistic understanding of morality based on reason, and thus the process of building modern society in this context.