Arquivo para a ‘Linguagens’ Categoria

The golden book

11 Mar

Written in 1962 and considered one of the great novels of the 20th century, the Golden Book (O Caderno Dourado in Spanish, in the photo), tells the story of Anna Wulf, a writer immersed in a personal crisis who decides to tell her story, from the black book for his literary life when he lived in South Africa, the red book on his left-wing political activism, the yellow his emotional life and the blue his daily life.
Doris Lessing, who won the Nobel Prize for Literature at the age of 85 (2007) when she expected nothing more, herself made a joke about it, but the recognition was deserved and little is known today of this consequent feminist and who refused to adhere to fashions and conjunctures followed his struggle.
Themes such as friendship, motherhood and sexuality have much deeper tones and outlines in this author, in novels such as “As grandmothers” (2007) where old age is seen in a different light, especially for women, or about politics in its book “The sweetest dream” that she suggests as an autobiographical one, and that reflects deeply on her humanitarian vision.
But if I had to highlight a novel by her, my favorite of the youth “Prisons we choose to live in” (1987), it attacks in a subtle and extraordinary way the question of political rhetoric (or what was decided to be politically correct) where it instigates individuals to come out of social constraints and build a better world, in fact and above everyday fashion.
He does not fail to attack in this novel ignorance and the lack of personal responsibility in the desire for applause and mere repetition of mottos, how current his speech would be, anticipating the times, because it was precisely because of the excess of rhetoric and the absence of concrete acts that we fell into pitfalls and we help contemporary ignorance and demagogy.
His sentence that seems to sum up his thinking was: “I cannot and will not hurt my conscience just to adhere to the fashion of the day”, and he said this not for conservatives, but for the apparently advanced positions of his time that were not directed towards attitudes concrete.


Ascent and asceticism

06 Mar

Asceticism then means a virtuous process by which through steps and exercises one can acquire a spirituality by placing the soul in the face of obstacles and situations where it can overcome itself and follow a path of ascension.

Some cases in which there are psychological barriers, self-help can be a panacea or even be contrary to the creation of a true asceticism, creating superstitions and new problems and new vices entering a vicious cycle that will need some professional help.

Moments of crisis and depression favor these cycles, but true asceticism is another way in which we feel that we are taking ever higher steps and we are able to overcome the natural and or imposed obstacles caused by life, serious illnesses, economic situations, etc.

The appeal for a magical solution to these problems does not mean spirituality or religiosity, but an opportunism with the person who suffers some short-term life problem, can in many cases even constitute crimes of extortion and personal or moral harassment.

Asceticism is a necessary human effort, the daily life demands a way of living well and that puts the soul in a necessary comfort for the solution of daily problems, so it is not just about religiosity or mere virtuosity, life asks us for ways to live well.

In any form of thought or culture, emptying yourself to elevate yourself is necessary for the smooth progress of perfect asceticism, the Greek epoché was nothing but this initial process to acquire new thoughts and allow the elevation of consciousness, intelligence and spirituality.

In Christianity, one of the biblical passages, which speaks in particular of the asceticism of Jesus, is the one he takes with him Peter, James, John and takes them to “a place apart”, says the evangelist Matthew Mt 17,1-4 : “And he was transfigured before them: his face shone like the sun and his clothes became white as light. In this, Moses and Elijah appeared, talking to Jesus.

Then Peter took the floor and said, “Lord, it is good for us to stay here. If you want, I will make three tents here: one for you, one for Moses and one for Elijah,” wanting to stay on this ascent.

The fact is that afterwards they “descend” from Mount Tabor (photo above), that is, they do not always remain in a high spirit, but there is another important thing in this asceticism that is the fact of the presence of Moses and Elias, of course both had already died for a long time, however, the presence of “men” with Jesus.



Between phenomenological reduction and eidetic variation

04 Mar

Asking about Husserl consciousness will propose a radical method to “search” the phenomenon, recovering and modifying a Greek concept that is the phenomenological reduction (epoché).

Epoché is suspension means in ancient Greek, that we do not erase from our conscience the judgment we have about things, but the Husserlian perspective is “in brackets” which is more realistic, because we cannot erase, at least completely, the memory, however forget what we think about what we learn about the experiential world.

Thus Husserl manages not to do a high attitude, like the Cartesian cogito that does not erase the ego, but a “natural attitude” to review how we relate to the things of the world. So learning something means capturing them as they are, so phenomenology seeks to focus the phenomenon in the sense of how it appears to us, without using what we already knew before and its applications of how it has already been seen, with the aim of reaching its!

Originality !, its “purity” of phenomenon, It means leaving aside all prejudices, theories, definitions and trying to acquire a new concept about concepts, without prejudices about the “thing”.

Epoché does not intend to doubt the existence of the world, nor, even less, to suppress it. The world around presents itself only in consciousness.

For Husserl, the objects of the world are already placed for us in different perspectives and we almost immediately adopt a meaning for it, in general what we do not know we attribute an essence and it should remain unchanged because we gave this object its original meaning.

Husserl’s second fundamental concept is eidetic variation, precisely what differentiates his view of eidos from contemporary idealistic culture, where he calls noema what is of the object itself, what is the thing, which the ancients call quality, while it calls of Greek noesis νόησις, it means the immediate apprehension that may not have the necessary dianóia, that is to say, to think about the thing that links it to the noema.

So the fixation on objects and the misunderstanding of their meaning on the other hand, is part of the contemporary world, this desynchrony between noema and noese.


Self-help, spirituality and psychology

02 Mar

The difference is quite large, but for many, including bookstores, these issues are in the same session, making a joke I would say that the first one gives the idea that you alone resolve yourself (self-help) and the second you need a professional, so it is more expensive. However, the issue is deeper and more serious.
Self-help has created a series of popular beliefs, for example, Rich Dad, poor son, so self-help suggests Rich Son, or Retired Young and Rich or Poor Father for young people, anyway the list is immense, if it were true everyone would say the same, but life does not have these magic formulas.
So, the objective of every self-knowledge process, including psychology is one, can be effective if it is based on real experiences and facts of a person’s life, so it cannot have a general formula, and this is as old as epistemic thinking “Know yourself”, but this must not be a doxa, that is, a mere unfounded opinion.
Clinical psychology, just to give an example, has found that our symptoms, our problems, our suffering arise and grow from unconscious sources, this means that there is a layer that we consciously have little access to, that give rise to what we are.
However, today there is an even more serious problem where charlatans and false promises of self-help reside, spirituality without a personal and social context, “unspiritualized asceticism” as stated by Peter Sloterdijk, a kind of catharsis or self-help that leads to fanaticism without spirituality.
Even to call it spirituality is a mistake, it is self-help with a manipulated religion and unfounded beliefs, but true spirituality exists, and it is a way of providing balance and helping us with unconscious sources of problems or even solutions.
Anyway, it would be good to separate the three fields, personal, social and work self-help formulas, clinical treatment of psychological problems and true spirituality that does not co-exist in all three, a form of personal or community asceticism that leads to improved relationships and greater happiness conviviality.


Powers and the Other

28 Feb

There is something beyond the will to power, yes there is a non-being, which does not depersonalize or imply a loss of identity, but in dialogue with the Other, with the one who is not my mirror.
The affirmation, the empowerment of people and groups in logical closings of identity, are neither original in the sense of preserving the dialogue with cultural traditions, nor are they in fact power because it implies submitting the Other that is one to some identity that is not his.
Thus, the true ontological identity, contrary to the logic that is individualistic or closed in groups, we often criticize the individualism of the Other because we do not admit its original identity (that which comes from races, cultures and traditions) and ultimately we do not admit the your Being, and to admit it you need a non-Being, that is, to see the Other as he is.
The powers in modernity have grown because of the impositions that the laws of the State, the rules of conduct and what has historically been called “Contract” which is nothing but making the right to conscience something that is subject to the rules and laws of the State. It is not about anarchy, rules of social coexistence that existed since the primitive man who was already known originally lived in groups: in caves, nomads or established in territories.
What leads to violence is to always submit the Other to our own will, our cultures, looking at the Other as less, less cultured, less “evolved” or another justification for not understanding and respecting different cultures, beliefs and ethnicities, so violence arrives.
The cult of the State, Hegel went so far as to say that it was eternal and it is not, many have changed throughout history from the Greek City-State to modern democratic societies, now in a new turmoil.
The biblical passage that the “devil” offers Jesus earthly powers and he rejects is this (Mark 4: 8-10): “again the devil took Jesus to a very high mountain. He showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory, and said to him, “I would give you all this, if you kneel before me, to worship me.” Jesus said to him, “Go away, Satan, because it is written, ‘You shall worship the Lord your God, and you will worship Him alone´”.


Will to or power

24 Feb

A little-known concept of Nietzsche is the will to power, as a “natural” driving force of man, in fact this led people to expand from the primitive world, the wars and empires of Alexander the Great, of which Aristotle was the tutor and then the Roman Empire, and the empires of modernity: Portuguese, French, Russian and American.

There are other great empires little mentioned in history: the great Manchu Qing dynasty of northern China invaded and defeated the Ming dynasty, was a minority ethnic group but dominated the whole of China and even had a brief restoration in 1917 and the great Mongol Empire was one of the largest in area, reaching Europe in the 13th and 14th centuries.

But power also refers to the individual’s desire for influence and power, today it is digital influencers, who are even financed and receive respect and credibility and many of them are unknown to the mainstream media, for example, the American PewDiePie is the youtuber with greater number of followers, we will return to the subject.

One can think of potency as an act and potency, so power would be the objective reached by potency, but Nietzsche himself warns that its meaning is different: “the will to power is neither a being nor a becoming, it is a pathos”, thus it must be analyzed in the triad ethos, pathos and logos.

Pathos is, therefore, that sense also used by Descartes, although Nietzsche denies reason as a principle, where the idea of ​​pathology comes from, which moves in imperfection.

Thus, one can think of the will to power (in the sense of Nietzsche) in three concepts, the cosmogonic, the historical or the psychological, each one establishes a special relationship with the diverse proposals present in modern society, the cosmogonic using Nietzsche’s terminology is a original law, without exception, that comes from the very reality of things.

Thus, its historical law is never deterministic nor has anything hidden, “… this Dionysian world of eternally-creating-myself-of, eternally-destroying-myself, without target, without will. .. ”, said in a fragment written in 1885, means that a set of forces that act in a diffuse way results in a state of eternal return, and therefore without an end.

Thus the will to be can also be understood as the insatiable desire to be more than what one is, if seen without an end, one can understand the psychological aspect more clearly.

It may seem distant from modern thought, but just look at reality and it will be realized that outside historical determinism, religious fundamentalism, the remaining proposal seems to be this, but Nietzsche himself can help us organize this, if it is possible to think something out of this state of “eternal return” that the will to power created.


An incomplete ontology: the affirmation of Being

21 Feb

The Wheel of Fortune is chance because the logic of laissez faire, chance brought to the economy, is also the logic of the affirmation of Being, in the classic sense; Being is and Non-Being is not, there is no becoming.
Non-Being is also Being, the affirmation, the will to Power, takes with it the logic of war, dualism, Manichaeism and its destiny is war, the difficulty of understanding the Other, the dialogue made as a form of hypocrisy , because in the end, it is the negation of the Other and the affirmation of Being, in the logic “we have the truth”, even if it is said in a religious way, it is its negation.
The impossibility of coexistence, from where physical violence arises, even psychological and moral violence, the unconscious desire to demoralize and undermine the Other, which is in this non-Being logic, and thus the moment that passes is lived in a false way, as fleeting and with the sense of maximum affirmation of the Being.
It seems crazy to say that non-Being is also, but it is precisely in its exercise that we deny war, we deny conflict as necessary, we make dualism become sincere dialogue and we can enter the logic of the Other and discover a complement of Being, while not-Being.
To affirm that the Non-Being is destroys the logic of power, exclusion, conflict, because it allows the Other to exist, denies psychopolitics because there is no need for the “psychic” oppression of the Other, to affirm the Same, the mirror, even which exercised collectively, is a selfish knot and tied exclusively to its own power and pleasure.
So say contemporary speeches about philosophy, which fill audiences and praise philosophers and eloquent religious: “you came to win, assert yourself, say you are the best”, etc.
The complete ontology is also opposed to religious fundamentalism and the Pharisaic, because it is also exercised as a non-Being, says the evangelist Mateus on the Master’s teaching to his disciples (Mt 5.38): “You have heard what has been said (yet the it is in our day): I look for another and tooth for tooth !, But I say to you: “do not face that it is evil” On the contrary, if someone slaps you on the right face, it also offers you the left! ”, here it is the “hidden” logic of non-Being.


Joy or happiness, gaudio and euphoria

20 Feb

Joy and happiness are not the same thing, although one can lead to the other and vice versa, joy is a feeling of satisfaction, of completeness or even fullness in its extreme, what I call gaudio, while happiness is the greatest good desired by the human being, so stated Aristotle, and although it may have nuances of values ​​it is the best definition.

In this sense, happiness is to live the moment well, even media and mystical philosophers agree, but the “virtuous” effort that makes conquest one of these moments, but it is clear that each one of this virtuous path can be lived with greatness and effort.

That struggle for which every moment can be lived with dignity and even joy, but the joy and true happiness is conquered with effort, virtuous exercise of a dignified path, while euphoria can be won in a fleeting moment, the joy and true happiness do not.

Joy is therefore an exercise beyond the obstacle and everyday problems, happiness is the possible achievement after a long journey in which reaching the summit depends on the last and decisive steps, often without breath and without clarity that the summit can be reached.

The Greeks said that “eudemonia” (“good”-eu from “spirit”-daimon) was conquered by arete, which can be seen both as “virtue” (the repeated practice of the virtuos, the virtual) as “excellence”.

It is also not fortune, in the Greek sense of the word it is not just money, but chance or luck, the goddess Fortuna became an iconographic image from the illuminations of medieval manuscripts to the stained glass windows of the churches (photo *), it was like that a luck cast at random, but it would be determined predestined.

Joy is joy when achieved by small daily efforts and it is not fleeting, while euphoria is not only escapes but can become deep sadness or even depression, for elaborate speeches living the moment that is wise, can be lived with joy or euphoria.

* The blindfolded goddess Fortuna, called the “wheel of Fortuna” was painted by Tadeuz Kuntze in 1754, oil on canvas in National Museum of Warsaw.


Between fantasy and imaginary

19 Feb

The imaginary is part of popular culture and tradition, countless cultures express themselves, seem myths and fantasies were from reality, but it differs from this in having an original source, that is, being part of a culture and expression of desires and perspectives cultural aspects of a people.
What Droysen, Heidegger and Gadamer speculated about romantic historicism, which Dilthey elaborated, is nothing but fantasy historicism, the future as a pure unrealizable dream while the future to come is part of the cultural tradition and that is why dialogue with tradition is necessary.
Fantasy is initially an attempt to escape, the absence of dialogue not in the prosaic sense of listening to the Other, of accepting difference, but of truly understanding and dialoguing by entering into the concepts and perspectives present in tradition, without understanding it, we listen and not the dialogue, the dialogue that Martin Buber, Paulo Freire and even Bakhtin spoke about.
The fantasies represent delusions of the soul, uncontrollable compulsive desires, and which often reach pathologies, it is not a childish fantasy of fairy tales or superheroes, these belong to the imaginary because the child still sees the future world as a possibility. The epic imaginary, both as historicism and as literature, highlights the deeds and glories, where the present appears as a result of a mythical past, but which is projected into the future, expresses the factual exaltation of memorable or extraordinary events.
The romantic imaginary is that of a lonely hero displaced in time, Don Quixote is a good expression of this imaginary, it represents a reaction to the philosophical saturation of determinism and rationalism, but he is stuck with the empirical sensory or the metaphors of the real.
These fantasies in general appeal to creativity, but say little about reality


Happiness and idealism, between subjects and objects

18 Feb

The development of idealistic thinking, the strongest and most profound of modernity, gave man a sense of dominance not only over nature, but also over his own possibilities and the reach of his will.
So the exploitation of natural resources, now with signs of exhaustion, also the exploitation of peoples and labor forces made human undertakings take off and now intending to conquer planets and the universe, but we discovered the human limits: desires, powers and wars.
The first and the main one is the finitude of life, even the oldest cultures always elaborated some eschatology about the previous and future life of humanity, modernity meanwhile tried to exploit its finitude to the fullest, what counts is the maximum happiness in short life for all of us, exploring it to the fullest is enough.
But idealism pointed out limits, if it is an unfinished project or if we have already plunged into another project, late modernity or postmodernity does not matter, the essence of this project was finitude, and what was called enlightenment, happiness, will and freedom it showed not only finitude, but also the monstrous aspects of this conception: absence of imagination (the subjectivity said of this way of thinking), the human and natural unbalance of forces, and the absence of peace.
The idealistic building built a society full of objectivity, of wonderful constructions, from the reach of the productive forces almost until their exhaustion, but war and cultural, religious and mainly ideological hatred, a fundamental part of this building.
Separating the human into two pieces, to later search him, subjectivity and objectivity, was nothing but a monumental building that disregarded the human essential: the absence of forms of happiness that contemplate everyone and the search for solidary means of power.
It is not that God died, but that we killed him, if there is no divine bond between men, he can never exist transcendently, in fact, idealistic transcendence is nothing other than the separation between subject and objects, unified by this fallacy of objectivity.
Without recovering real dreams, real happiness, and the social means for this, we sleepwalk in the dark, as stated by Edgar Morin.