RSS
 

Arquivo para a ‘Linguagens’ Categoria

Doctors are for the sick

09 Sep

The society of the beginnings of Christianity, not only religious Pharisaism but also the whole culture was that society was for the healthy, the Greek saying “healthy mind in healthy body” is a way of expressing this, the sick should live on the margins society, often outside the city walls.

Diseases were little known and medicine at the time was too expensive to have no purchasing power, even the fact that a paralytic was placed in the presence of Jesus descending through the ceiling, has a mistaken interpretation, they would not let him pass.

It is a fact that we already have chairs and seats in the queues for elders, pregnant women and the sick, but there is still a mentality of the community of the pure, the saints or the perfect, after all, efficiency cannot come from those who are not physically prepared for it.

This was how the pandemic was dealt with, many said that the sick isolate themselves and society will continue its rhythm, but what we saw was society as a whole losing its rhythm, and the result of this pressure gradually turned into many psychic diseases. , even for those who made them.

Treating and working with imperfection, illness and purity is only to promote the social integration of people, the idea of ​​being a “model” for others is a Kantian idea of ​​ethics, which can lead to an ethics and a partial view of sociability and what is imperfect.

In terms of religious culture, it leads to isolation, the formation of a bubble in which values ​​are reaffirmed, but many are excluded and are not invited to participate and live with differences, this is one of the main religious paradigms that Jesus broke in his time.

Talking to women, leaving space for children, healing lepers and cripples broke the Pharisaic concept of what was considered “unclean”, went against sinners and the sick.

It is true that the blind cannot guide the blind, but doctors are for the sick, says the biblical passage (Lk 15:1-3): “At that time, publicans and sinners came to Jesus to listen to him. The Pharisees, however, and the teachers of the Law criticized Jesus. “This man welcomes sinners and eats with them.” , then Jesus tells the parable of the lost sheep and then the prodigal son.

The Pharisaic mentality not only does not cure the sick, it becomes a social disease itself.

 

 

The Einstein Ring and the Spheres

08 Sep

It was the philosopher Sloterdijk who was the first to create the relationship between man and his spheres, from the maternal womb to the planet, he is largely right, also in criticizing cynical reason, the one that justifies spherical reality is largely correct, it is a metaphor, but very good.

Let us think of the fetus, which remains within the sphere of the uterus until it leaves and looks at its ex-sphere, the mother, will still feel her dependence for a long time, it happens that this sociological, anthropological, semiotic reality has its own topological properties that are hidden in the cynical reason.

One of them is to understand that there is an immunological relationship whose primary purpose is to protect, nourish, train and immunize homo from an unknown sapiens exterior, like the baby who at birth depends on the mother, he needs her immunological protection.

The search for other spaces, inhabiting the moon (the new mission finds it difficult) and mars (astronauts think it would be horrible to live there) does not resolve the planetary spherical relationship, in crisis, it is necessary to open up to the other and leave of the hut, some psychologists speculate about the hut syndrome, which the pandemic has accelerated, not wanting to leave a sheltered, spherical environment.

The super telescope James Webb photographs Einstein’s ring in a place far away and physically unreachable by man (the image), at least under current technological conditions, and the physicist’s prediction was “photographed” (actually the instruments are of frequencies and not of “photos”) with formidable precision, one can extend Sloterdijk’s metaphor.

Gerald’s 1916 theory of Gravity revolutionized physics by creating a physics that claimed that gravity is a curvature of the space-time continuum caused by the mass of objects, almost two massive objects were perfectly aligned with the Earth this space-time would deflect the photons forming rings around the alignment of these two objects.

An English physicist named Sir Oliver Lodge suggested that this phenomenon of a massive gravitational field would not only deflect light from an object behind it, but also magnify it forming a gravitational lens, and the recent James Webb photo confirms this phenomenon.

What is the metaphor, massive immunological spheres, cultures, religions or ideologies whose purpose is to protect themselves when close (or on a collision course which makes the metaphor more complicated) not only form a strong gravitational field that draws bodies around, they do not they only distort space-time, but they are also lenses that, if carefully observed, allow us to see what is behind.

So it is time to look beyond the differences, the imperfections of the spherological models and enable a gravitational attraction that helps to better understand the civilizing process.

 

 

The idolatry of perfection

07 Sep

Myths and idols were created precisely to divert the understanding of human nature, they change according to the contexts and the evolution of languages, but they have always been present in the history of humanity and thus they themselves must have human considerations.

Nietzsche warned us about the risks of living fed by idols (or ideas, which for him were synonymous), showed that by dominating our mind and conditioning our thinking, feeling and acting in the world, we become strict with our life and that of others, claimed to be a monstrous force, as a myth it can be said that its maximum expression is Narcissus (image) and this led to sameness, the lack of originality and diversity, the demand for the same.

In the name of some idealism, and in modernity it itself became a philosophy after Kant, people are capable of hurting and reaching the other who is outside their model, and even not allowing to build in life what they allowed themselves to be conquered by Is it over there.

The model of efficiency, productivity and social rigor is also a model of perfection.

This happens because the idealist model formulates that there is an ideal model to follow and reality is always imperfect and thus they prefer to follow the perfection of ideas and reach the absurdity of submitting others to their model of perfection, they believe that there is a top to be hit.

So it is not possible to formulate a human model to be followed, of course it is possible if we understand human imperfection as part of a process of hominization and civilization in which all other humans must have the same possibility of living and sharing the common environment.

Edgar Morin called this “planetary citizenship”, many political and religious models speak of solidarity, of rejection of hatred, but it is necessary to observe if they do not build something that excludes.

Today is the day of the Brazilian nation, so diverse and rich in races and ethnicities, any model that does not support the other is the type of idolatry of perfection that must be rejected, does not lead to solidarity.

Spinozian Ethics, a strong counterpoint to idealist ethics, formulated that reality is always equal to perfection, because perfection only makes sense when it is reality not something imagined or thought, so perfection is reality to the same extent that reality is perfect.

Without love and respect for the Other, for diversity and tolerance, every ideal model is imperfect.

 

 

Dark times and virtues

19 Aug

Dark time of politics, threats of war and pandemic do not completely hide the paths of the clearing, although its true meaning is debatable, neither the Renaissance nor the Enlightenment were in fact “clearings” and Sloterdijk has revised Heidegger’s clearing, it is possible in times of anger to see virtues that lead to the clearing.

Sloterdijk, in his book/essay “Time and Ira”, points out the exhaustion of traditional models of political processes, I argue from a historical review of the great global political impacts, inverting the biopolitics advocated by Foucault to a social psycho-politics.

He points to affections that he calls “thymotic”, especially anger, as well as its degenerate derivatives, resentment and the desire for revenge, for example (but there may be others such as incitement to hatred), become the fundamental driving force of history and politics, so it’s about mobilizing these forces, and the populists do it well, to mobilize the population.

Virtue, good proposals and the call for dialogue seem to lose strength, however, the author himself points out that psychic ecosystems (among them moral) can produce these “affections”.

Written in 2006, the author already showed that anger, whose capital is precisely the dispersed and globalized world anger, produces a cultural omnipresence that he calls the “metaphysics of revenge”, but does not develop that the types of moral “affections” can be an opposing force.

It was not without this force that the Greeks developed the concepts of the citizen of the polis, it was not without the encounter with the human (excessively anthropocentric, it is true) that the renaissance made a re-encounter with humanism, after its modern development, now check me out.

The virtues seem heroic, impossible and almost despicable, the theft of the public thing, dialogue and the de facto respect for democracy (polarization favors dictators), seem to have no other way out, but the virtues exist and they are subject to our humanity (Picture: Giotto: The Allegories of Virtues, 1303-5).

It is not just about the female figure, racial forces and the countless forgotten people in politics, the important thing is to highlight that a social turn must be composed of moral and social virtues.

The figure of the mother was even developed by the writer Máximo Gorki in his historic book “The mother”, which does not mean anything other than the generation of good virtues, also those that generate social justice and peace between men, the Greek Maieutics , Sloterdijk perhaps alludes to the “matrix in grêmio” (in the mother’s lap) in her spheres.

In biblical terms, the figure of Mary, forgotten by some and even despised by Christians, is nothing other than the memory that from her “birth” comes a redemption, a salvation and it is not by chance that she is seen as all virtuous.

The biblical passage in which Mary tells her cousin Elizabeth that she was pregnant with Jesus is clear in her cousin’s greeting (Mt 1:42-43): “With a loud cry, she exclaimed: “Blessed are you among women and blessed is the fruit from your belly! How can I deserve to have the mother of my Lord come to visit me? , being human (and divine through participation in childbirth) is within our reach.

SLOTERDIJK, P. Time and Wrath (Tempo e Ira), Brazilian edition: Estação Liberdade, 2006.

SLOTERDIJK, P. Spheres I: bubles (Esferas I: bolhas). São Paulo, Brazil: Estação Liberdade, 2016

 

 

 

Small worlds and closed circles

05 Aug

Small groups can potentiate their effects on a network, not only due to the ability to influence or cohesion, but also due to the degree of connectivity between nodes, which in technical language is called clustering, has nothing to do with closed circles, but the few connections are called Small Worlds.

This model of Social Networks (seen as a mathematical model of graphs and not just as media) observes a curious phenomenon called Small Worlds that was first proposed by Duncan J. Watts and Steven STrogatz in an article published in the journal Nature in 1998, the The model establishes that in a network there is a degree of separation between the points (network nodes) called six degrees of separation.

Albert L. Barabasi’s book “The New Science of Networks”, which expanded and corrected this model for larger scales, called scale-free, is thus described on pg. 47 of the book:

““The surprising discovery of Watts and Strogatz is that a few extra links are enough to drastically reduce the average separation between nodes…thanks to extensive bridges…connect nodes on the opposite side of the circle…”.(Barabasi, 2009).

So this is not the same as closed circles, since despite few connections, there must be bridges with nodes on the opposite side of the circle, so this “opening” is necessary, as mentioned for us on the opposite side of the circle.

This explains how many cultures and information expand or close according to the types of connectivity they have (the issue of clustering, in the graph p=0 to p=1) and due to the wider possibility of information today due to technology, the factors become more psychopolitical than geopolitical.

But it is also possible to explain the expansions of previous periods that depended on mobility and the “opening” of circles to other different cultures, Christianity for example, the book by Barabasi quotes, depended on the strategy of Paul of Tarsus which was to speak to the “Gentiles ” and to peoples who did not have Jewish culture, and from there it expanded into a network.

But they were a small group (12 apostles and then 72) but who traveled through the western world at the time, this idea of ​​small worlds is still present in Christianity until today, although numerous, the precepts of Love and Solidarity are not always observed, and this reduces it to closed circles.

The future is also expressed in Christian culture (Lk 12:31): “Do not be afraid, little flock, for it is the Father’s good pleasure to give you the Kingdom”, then the parable of the administrator is told. they do not know the time that will arrive and must always act waiting for you to arrive and find them attentive, in this case it refers to true treasures that we have already dealt with in previous posts.

 

 

Vanity and true treasures

29 Jul

For many the world, history and even personal happiness developsaround wealth, false treasures and some public recognition, in fact, everything is vanity and a large part of human energies are consumed in it, without finding true joy, not that euphoria, frenzy or catharsis, but that of gaudio and inner peace.
Socially, it means collaborating so that all the good around us spreads and everyone can be happy not with big undertakings, big parties or even other fleeting joys, all this is gathering false treasures.
There is a joy in the true perennials, that as a biblical verse says “where moth and rust corrode and where thieves break through and steal” (Mt 6,19), but those that exist in the bonds between good people, as Aristotle defined for the kind of true friendship.
Accumulating true values, true friendships and true goods that are not those that only material wealth confers, means more than having a virtuous life, it is a path that leads to inner peace and a balanced happiness that is beyond what happens and for this reason it tastes like eternity.
In times of wars, hatreds and false polarizations (these are not poles between what is eternally true and false, but temporal rivalries), they experience only the taste of a fleeting, narcotic happiness and a fleeting and short-lived intoxication.
It is better to cultivate values ​​and feelings that are durable, and they need love and dedication to spiritual asceticism, than to cling to the passenger who will later demand a more difficult and painful kind of renunciation precisely because it doesn’t taste like eternal.
Wise men, saints and great philosophers sought this type of gaudio (a more balanced and lasting happiness) but it is impossible to achieve it with temporal attachments: vanity, greed, oppression and feelings of low morality because they cannot have durability precisely for what they represent: its limitation in a time lapse.
In a society of performance, activism and low or little ability to perceive, live and contemplate what is really beautiful and eternal, only those who go beyond vanity and temporal pleasure can achieve this kind of joy, he precious jewels of eternal life.

 

Friendship and espirituality

22 Jul

Idealist philosophy places amgio and friendship in an ideal philosophical relationship, Aristotle nevertheless warns: “the friend is made quickly, while friendship [is a fruit that matures slowly”, the same can be said of spirituality, recognizing that we have a part spiritual and that it is part human, requires an exercise in spirituality.
It was Sloterdijk, one of the great thinkers of Germany today, who warned that we live in an “exercise society”, but warns that it is de-spiritualized.
High spirituality, before reaching the divine, must go through previous stages in the relationship with the Other, the one who is not a mirror, who does not have the same values ​​as us and this relationship can evolve or obstruct, being more difficult when there is an obstruction to maintain a relationship of respect and cordiality, as friendship and love are more distant.
It is possible to love those who obstruct everything, yes, it is possible first to maintain respect, then separate what are values ​​and real exercises in spirituality and what is just interest.
At this point, friendship has a very close relationship with the spiritual, it can be said that there is, in addition to friendship, reciprocity, a continuous flow of relationship between good people, what Aristotle defined as true friendship, for this you need good men.
There is no just society without just men, there are no friends without friendship exercises, and only on the basis of true reciprocity can friendship reach the spiritual level.

Only with good men can society be saved, says a curious biblical passage about Sodom (Gn 18,20-32) in which Abraham asks God if with a small number of just men society would be saved, and he reduces the number because he knows that there are few.
For those who believe the biblical verse, the teacher explains this question (Lk 1:5-8): “If one of you has a friend and goes to him at midnight and says to him, ‘Friend, lend me three loaves of bread, 6because a friend of mine has come on a trip and I have nothing to offer him,’ and if the other replies from within, ‘Don’t bother me! I have already locked the door, and my children and I are already in bed; I cannot get up to give you the loaves’; 8I tell you that even if the other does not get up to give them because he is your friend, he will get up at least because of his impertinence and give him whatever he needs.”
If one wants to achieve reciprocity, he must first take steps in respect and friendship, and the highest spirituality is to be able to love and respect enemies..

 

The idealistic concepts of friendship

21 Jul

We post that it is an exercise in rhetoric, but like any philosophy there is a seminal origin of a certain thought, Nietzsche starts from Platonic metaphysics stating that the game between friends of philosophy had a vice of conception that would be the will of truth, sometimes it was precisely she that there is a critique of the sophists relativizes it.
Based on this principle, Nietzsche will state that the philosopher must practice a certain “art of mistrust”, his main instrument being the hammer (Niettzsche in “Beyond Good and Evil”).
Deleuze states that Foucault would have declared that “Heidegger always fascinated him, but that he could only understand him through Nietzsche, with Nietzsche (and not the other way around)” (Deleuze, 1986, p. 120-121) and even though “surely , alongside Heidegger, but in a totally different way, the one who most profoundly renewed the image of thought” (Deleuze, 1990, p. 130-131).
Returning to the initial question, which is true friendship, after all if it is it and nothing else that allows for a broad relationship between the various concepts of friends in philosophy, being itself by definition (philo-friend) sophia (wisdom).
This is how Deleuze and Guattari develop the question of friendship, considering the different thinkers, the friend is for him, being more textual, it is a “trait of conceptual character” that has to do with “psychosocial characters” (Deleuze, Guattari, 1991, p. .68)
As we said, it is an emptying of the concept of friend, transformed into an object of subjective reflection, for this reason we say that they are idealist concepts, even when approaching clearly non-idealist authors such as Heidegger and Nietzsche.
We return to the Aristotelian concept that differentiates friendship for pleasure or for utility from true friendship and therefore the question of truth is essential, and even Plato considered it, although it divides the world of ideas (eidos for the Greeks) and the sensible world.
Also the concept of neighbor (one who is within a broad affection of friendship) and the partner (one to whom we associate ourselves for a certain happiness), concepts of Paul Ricoeur are essential points in our view for the reflection on friendship.
DELEUZE, Gilles. Pourparlers Paris: Minuit, 1990.
DELEUZE, Gilles; GUATTARI, Félix. Qu’est-ce que la philosophie? Paris: Minuit, 1991.

 

Friendship and concepts

20 Jul

We have already posted and explored the concepts of friendship in Aristotle for pleasure, for interest and true friendships, we also highlight the difference between the partner and the neighbor (Paul Ricoeur’s text) where in the first case there is only interest and once the friendship is over closes or diminishes.
What we want to explore a little bit now is what it means in an individualistic world and where interest reigns, what is the concepts of friendship and friend.
In another perspective, in which Deleuze and Guattari go so far as to say that the friend and friendship are “absent” concerns in philosophical thought, and the book “A friendship de Maurice Blachot” is mentioned as a rare exception, but there is already at the base of this discourse a clear distinction between friend and friendship.
So the philosopher is a “friend” of wisdom (philos-friend and sophia-wisdom), but there is a compulsory obligation due to “friendship” being the object of this relationship, and thus only these friends could participate in the friendship, that is, there is a requirement of wisdom.
The basis of this concept is in the “gaze” of a so-called “sage”, so they are concepts within each one, they are the eyes or look of each one on another person, but this look is a sensation that does not come from the eyes of the senses or of personal feelings, so they are a nobody’s gaze, a demand for observation, a selfie that must be seen by another.
But how can you be a friend while being nobody? This question makes more sense when it comes to a dimension in a highly differentiable plane, and thus it can be seen in certain historical, political and even religious contexts, where each thinker is taken individually as having a “look” of sage, or of pretended wisdom.
One can illustrate with Guattari and Deleuze himself, and thus we can divide friendship into concepts of different contexts: the Greek, the Nietzschean, the Heideggerian and the Focaultian.
Such an inquiry aims to explore the territory of friendship as a concept, because if, as we said, it is a highly differentiable dimension or plane, then it can be detected in certain historical periods or even in each thinker taken individually. We will then try to define and illustrate, from the elements that we have just lent to Deleuze and Guattari, in a way appropriate to the extension of this article, four types of friendship of the concept, the Greek, the Nietzschean, the Heideggerian and the Foucaultian, but it’s just a rhetorical exercise.
It can be worthwhile as an exercise in thought, friendship is simple and there can be, and there are, among simple people with little book culture, and there may not be among “cults”.
I venture to say that there is more true friendship between simple people, than Heidegger says in his Forest Path in which he lives with very simple people.

 

The being, the clearing and the necessary

15 Jul

Only through language do we possess an habitation of being, being in it we can have access to the clearing, and unfolding in this being-there we take care of our ex-sistence, and thus the clearing is the world and is in the world, in this truth Heidegger believed and it was through her that he wrote Letters to Humanism, which received the answer from Sloterdijk who states that the clearing would not be the habitat, much less what we today call environment or “house”, because we are in rupture with nature. , while Heidegger considers the human being to be the shepherd of being, Sloterdijk states that his task is to know how to guard the Being, both were not religious, Heidegger was religious for a period, but he abandoned it.
Long before the pandemic, Sloterdijk created the term co-immunity, alluding to the task of caring for the “sick” being here in a broad sense that includes the social, and such a task is used in the being, choosing it freely and impregnating itself. her or not, so it does not depend on the language he is used to, while the man lives a life of exercises, almost always empty, or with the term he used making an asceticism (ascension through exercises) despiritualized, that is, without taking care of himself as sick, but adhering to the disease.
So we live a life focused on action, performance, a set of exercises to explore ourselves, too bad Byung Chul Han focuses excessively on social media, they are also means as languages, but consumerism, activism and the search of an active being he finds only a false asceticism, even if religious, shallow because it does not take care of the sick.
For both Heidegger and Sloterdijk, it is not about the soul, nor about the divine elevation of man, it is only the civilizing process, but for Christians who understand how deep and important a true personal asceticism is, it is about the soul. and of eternal life.
The biblical passage that most reflects this is the one that reminds us of what is essential, I would even say that only one thing is necessary, to hear the voice from above, of full life and the true light of the clearing, Luke 10, 38-42, in which Jesus visits the house of Martha, “a certain woman” and Mary his sister, the reading says so they are not known women, as some exegetes say.
Martha is busy with chores, she certainly prepares something for the master, and Martha sits at his feet to listen to the master, and Martha gets mad at her sister who doesn’t help her.
But the master even rebukes her and says (Lk 10:41-42): “Martha, Martha! You worry and are agitated by many things. However, only one thing is necessary. Mary has chosen the better part and it will not be taken away from her.”
Only one thing is necessary, and that is not alienation but the clearing from which we are moving away.