RSS
 

Arquivo para a ‘Noosfera’ Categoria

Counterfeiting and beliefs

22 Nov

For Popper, to support the objective world, he hoped to provoke what he called “philosophers of belief” (Popper, 1972, p. 109), namely “Descartes, Locke, Berkeley, Hume, Kant, or Russell are interested in our subjective beliefs. in its basis of origin ”and thus placed it in its third world (beyond the physical and cognitive) as“ the world of objective content of thought, especially of scientific and poetic thinking and of works of art ”(Popper, 1972, p. 108). ), but his worldview is expressed in the extent of his work, and this is his beyond.
What involves beliefs is not only religious acts, but the fixation on dogmas, or rather the construction of “objective content of thought” that seems to give us certainty where it is only apparent, and thus we fall into the easy path of “induction”. as Hume wanted.
The falsifiability method is not just a way of staying in the critique of science, but it is first of all to point out that many beliefs are “beliefs,” and beliefs themselves can help the human worldview if they understand that they should not be limited. purely to dogmas, I make a single argument using Popper… without criticism there would be no human progress.
These are times of disbelief, and unfortunately it strikes even the most dear to us, human life, there is little appreciation and little discomfort for the vulnerability of life, and beyond human contempt for nature and the planet seems to be. common voice.
But everything is a mark of an end of the epoch, and thought can and should play a very important role in a turn of the epoch, and in the matter of science falsifiability, responsible criticism is clear, and transdisciplinarity can be an essential exercise, yet. little done.
Criticism can be misunderstood, I see many “inductive” thoughts that thinking is not good, if we don’t think and just let the waves go we will go to uncertain destinations.
However, to think is necessary method, and what should be obvious but is not, to be lover of the truth beyond our convictions, to respect and to hear the Other with openness, and to know to go beyond. One phrase said in the revolutionary walls of the Sorbonne of Paris: “our ears have walls, our walls have ears”, it is necessary to superior several types of authoritarianism, and the most serious of all, the non-acceptance of the Other, which is not what we idealized, beyond, simply Other.
Evangelist Luke is the one who essentially follows the “way” of Jesus, so I would say in scientific or hermeneutic terms, the one who gives us “the method of Jesus”, the way in which he narrates his end near his death on the cross is narrated in this perspective.
In Lc 23,40-43, Jesus conducts the dialogue with the two thieves, would say that it is his “falsifiability” to speak of life near his death and in dialogue with two thieves, one mocking and the other asking that he be in his kingdom.
To those who believe the only saint with confirmation of Jesus is a thief (Lk 23:43): “You will still be with me in paradise today,” ironically the only one confirmed by Jesus, there was no other.
This near-death thief could see further: “Remember me in your reign.”
POPPER, k. (1975) Conhecimento Objetivo (Objective Knowledge), Ed. University of São Paulo (Brazilian edition), 1975 (original 1972).

 

Being, Appearance, and Selfhood

15 Nov

In both philosophical and juridical representation, there are two subjects, one that is and one that represents it. In the presentation it means that the Being is in relation to the Entity.

It was only in belief. For example, the president of a country is his presentation, so if any attack or violence means that the country is under attack, of course made exceptions to dictators who are not worthy representatives of popular will, but in philosophy the Being of the Entity, it is veiled, who he is.

Dasein is the Heideggerian response to this Being and the modern confusion the question of Identity, Freud’s Ego, the Cartesian code, and other proposals, but let us read two current ones.

The concept of identity is used to describe something that is different from others, but identical to itself, most definitions fall between identity and difference as dualism and not as presence of the Other, it is from a deep reading of Husserl that this change.

We already warned in the previous post, that Being is being, for a more precise definition let us use Husserl who sees it from his experiences: “This act passes, but I am and remain from now on a self that decided this way or that. , […] while it [the decision] is valid for me, I can come back to it often ”(Husserl, 2000: 83).

Paul Ricoeur makes a breakthrough when he analyzes the duality he perceives and manifests himself as an equal identity (sameness, being identical with himself and unchanging in time) and ipse-identity (ipseity, personal and reflective identity, shaped by alterity), and this is the presentation of Being in the Being.

The alternation carried to the utmost is the ability to put oneself in the place of the other, evidences both the selfhood of oneself and another, and one does not allow oneself to think without the selfhood, does not nullify the Self.

It is only in this reflective ipse-identity that the possibilities for change fit, different from the iden-identity which is genetic, being a form of primary socialization unable to see the Other.

The need for a “social democracy” (portuguese term of priest Manuel Antunes) means a great cultural change where man will no longer see himself as a mirror, but in essence, in relation to the Other, and in society that will come in this reality.

It must be changing, as Jesus said when he saw men astonished with a temporal Temple. Luke 21: 6: “You admire these things, the days will come when there will be no stone unturned. Everything will be destroyed”, and did not speak of the end of the world, but great transformations that societies must go through.

HUSSERL Edmund, 2001. Cartesian Meditations: Introduction to Phenomenology. Sao Paulo: Ed. Madras, brazilian edition.

RICOEUR, Paul, 2000. Narrative identity and the problem of personal identity. Trad. Carlos João, Ed. Arquipélogo, Brazilian edition.

 

Being, the other and identity

14 Nov

Identity has been worked on by a number of authors, some in particular, the father of empiricism David Hume saw identity (the self) as his empirical argument starts from the idea that ideas are formed from previous impressions, so identity is a product. of various impressions, and as an empiricist he speculates on thought experiments.
Hume is important to the question of identity, although it fixes on his empiricism, because he is for modernity the complement of idealist logic, it can be said that it comes from Parmenides and Heraclitus reaching Aristotle, we know that Plato’s dialectic is different.
Hegel in his work Science of Logic will adopt logic, but with overcoming immediacy, ie the relationship with the other being has disappeared, there is only a relationship with himself, a relationship of negation, ie his being denies the relationship and from from denial he identifies himself, the act of looking in the mirror for example is a negation of oneself, an ‘image’, and that is identity.
The biblical text that says, “We still see ourselves as in a mirror in the Letter to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 13:12). Paul makes the reflection:“ Now, therefore, we see only a dark reflection, as in polished material; however, there will be a day when we will see face to face ”, I would say it is a historical prophecy, because much of philosophy, namely that which points to the ontological turn, says that this is the time of otherness, of seeing the Other beyond the self. .
But there may be some confusion because it is not a denial of identity, it is not a question of cultural, ethnic or religious identity, which are also dilemmas of our time, the fact that each has a personality, sees himself as a person, does not mean non-alterity.
It is just the opposite, it is easier and more possible to talk to people who see themselves beyond the mirror, it says in common language “they are resolved”, although we are always under construction, and it is precisely in this that the relationship with the Other helps, something like that. : “The more I know who I am, the more tolerant I am of the Other” and I want him to have his own personality and identity.
Also in the cultural and religious field this is so, if I have a clear conviction of my personality, my culture and my belief (not only about religious belief, science can involve “beliefs”), I can dialogue and be more tolerant of each other, and reciprocity.
Fundamentalism, dogmatism, and intolerance are the result of ignorance in general, and difficulty with one’s own identity in particular, if “I am” I am “in relation to the Other,” and there is no need for denial, but “epoché”, that is, put in parentheses. how does phenomenology think.

 

The originality of Being in Heidegger

13 Nov

The great question of Being in contemporary philosophy emerged from the thought of Martin Heidegger, a student of Husserl from which he inherited phenomenology as a method, essentially proposed to penetrate the question of being.
Although it has been studied by philosophy at all times, even Kantian idealism has an ontology that is displaced from Being to the subject, it already existed in Plato as an idea (Platonic eidos is not Kantian) and Aristotle as substance.
The being does not manifest directly, but always with the being of the being, you can play a joke with the contemporaneity that is the sick Being, because the Being of the Being is hidden in appearance.
One can seek pure Being in an ethereal existence of a God, but it is the existential door through man that one has access to Being, in this case Heidegger is applying the phenomenological method, he departs from man in fact (not idealized by example), let it manifest itself as it is and only then try to understand it in its manifestation after the presence.
Its first existence is being-in-the-world, one of the most widely accepted translations for Dasein, but as this being is also a Being-in-Situation, Heidegger’s careful reading can clarify this, I make a translation of being-being itself. – in the world, because Heidegger also uses the worldview (Weltanstchauung), which is open to the world and the cosmos, including the worldview.
This concept is important for Heidegger’s understanding of Being because it means this worldview as the circle of beliefs, affects, interests, and even philosophical concepts that Being has, even if it does not study philosophy, Being is “being-in-a-situation” that It does not mean just place or even context, but the very vision one sees in seeing the world, its “worldview”.
So many ideas and beliefs seem obvious to a person, but practically all of them are tied to temporal situations and thus limited by the “situation” that does not exclude thinking.

This vídeo sumarizes some ideas from Hiedegger:

 

Between the eternal and the temporal

08 Nov

There is no dualism between body and mind, as the idealists want, but there is that which is temporal and what is eternal, but in a strictu sense at least in the broad sense, it takes principles to determine the values and what drives humanity in critical times of society.
Byung Chul Han, in a January lecture at the Barcelona CCB where he showed the tearing of our time between narcissism, self-consumerism and an absence of relationship with the other, which must revolutionize time, or the way we manage it.
He said of the other and in reference to the universities: “In any case, we live in a time of radical conformism: the university has clients and only creates workers, it does not form spiritually; the world is at the limit of its capacity; maybe that will short circuit it and we get that original animal back. ”
He stated at the Barcelona CCB: “The current acceleration diminishes the ability to remain: we need a proper time that the productive system does not allow us to have; we need some free time, which means standing still with nothing productive to do, but not to be confused with recovery time to keep working; time worked is time lost, not time for us. ”
Modern humanism criticized by his master Peter Sloterdijk who asserts this sense back to the original animal, of course, is not in the sense of wild animality, but the idea that he must regain his relationship with nature will not be saved and will even condemn planet. Sloterdijk clearly outlines these ideas in the video below.
What the natural man means and his relations with the eternal, now not only nature, but in a worldview of paradise and eternal life, means that we must look at remaining values.
When questioned by the Sadducees, who were a more aristocratic class in Judaism, about who a woman who would marry several brothers after their deaths, would tell them that believing in eternal life means that the people will no longer die, Jesus response the question would not make sense and also that God is “God of the living” (Luke 20:38).
Looking only at temporal values and conjunctural situations prevents us from seeing the future and the eternal.
Follows Peter Sloterdijk’s interview on the braziliam program Fronteiras do Pensamento *“Borders of Thought”).

 

Truth, Certainty and the Self

07 Nov

We are full of certainties, which is different from reason although we often say that we are “right”, certainty is a cognitive aspect of the subject (idealism will be called subjective) that is lived by certain conviction, truth on the other hand is ontological , that is, it is of Being.
What did St. Augustine mean by saying that Truth dwells within every Being, being religious means the presence of God, but it can be thought of in a broader cosmological sense, we are all part of the same universe, and while Being though part, we belong to the whole, the cosmos and its complexity.
Thus ontological Truth are properties of statements as far as they can be proven, the Greeks use the expression Aletheia, in the a-lethe (not forgetting) sense which is still widely used in Western civilization, but there is another meaning which is “Language it is the house of being ”.
Latin carries a meaning of truth as a logical statement, in the opposite sense of Truth, although Latin has developed scholastic ontology, in fact, it is bound by the study of language, whose nominalist truth has created great controversies with realism.
A third meaning is the Jewish Emunach, from which comes the ethical-moral concept from which almost all Western ethics is descended, and not by chance is linked to “law”, but in Judaism it is within each person, and in this sense linked to the idea of “faithfulness” to rules and laws.
Modern society has built two new modalities of truth, philosophers prefer the word plurivocity, the utilitarian and pragmatic, what is useful is true, the rest is disposable and changeable. Just to explain plurivocity is not univocal.
It was through Husserl that ontology and general metaphysics gave way to new concepts, where the idea of Being can be seen within a formal and material science of essences.
The importance of cosmological discussion is that it being in the field of theology and psychology can and should be seen in contrast to dualistic ontology sees the world separated in body and spirit, curious because one of the most commonly used metaphors to define the set of souls is the body.
One of the best-known passages is the letter to Ephesians: “If the whole body were an eye, where would the hearing be? If the whole body were heard, where would the smell be? ”(1 Corinthians 12:17).
The basis of spiritualism and Pharisaism is ontological dualism, one sees the spirit and the other only the body, and this comes from idealism, where reality is all spiritual, matter is an illusory representation of truth.

Andy Postner is co-founder of Capital Good Fund (CGF), a nonprofit microcredit based in Providence Rhode, Island, and created ways outs of poverty, see he´s TEdX:

 

Euphoria and Serenity

04 Nov

The opposite of serenity is not irritation or anger, this is the opposite of calmness, that is euphory, we have already posted the relationship between serenity and Phronesis, a Greek word that could be translated as practical wisdom, central in Hans Georg Gadamer’s book, and which in our view is approaches serenity.

This is because we live in times of impulsive reactions to the questions posed, in which after euphoria comes depression and discouragement, which at heart are always lacking in phronesis, though many draw attention to action, to practice, but detached from wisdom.

In Truth and Method II (second volume), prevailing statements about the dialogical structure of language thought to guide the world (and our worldview) and the clearer relationship between thought and language.

His clarification of the historical question was Gadamer who overcame Dilthey’s and others’ discussion of romantic historicity, his philosophical hermeneutics deepening as a hermeneutic of listening, listening and listening, the true view of the Other.

Gadamer in the second volume gives structure to a phrase by the Russian writer Leon Tolstoy: “There is no greatness where there is no simplicity, goodness and truth,” if truth is hard to tell, when practiced in wisdom Phronesis it opens a “clearing”, the Listening to each other.

Does the universe “hear” us, do plants and animals “hear” us, we need to understand their language and in this sense language is not anything just talking, it is listening.

In the video below Gadamer portrays the history of philosophy, but with phronesis and truth:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KJNQoIXZ4k

 

 

Between affliction and peace, the infinite and the eternal

01 Nov

Many seek happiness at any price, so we reflect empathy early in the week, then reflect on the anguish and distress that are axes of growth and suffering, but it is they that understandably lead us to real happiness, built peace.
Kierkegaard’s “Concept of Anguish” (1884) shows multiple forms: the anguish of freedom or nothingness, there is a personal choice of this that the author calls the choice of oneself, the anguish of goodness and obstinacy, the anguish of sexuality, that of tomorrow and that of the finite, it is prior to faith.
At this point it is possible to link to a phenomenological view, and still to link it to the interpretation of the biblical passage of man’s fall into sin (Genesis 3), ignoring the Enlightenment / Idealist culture, which is the anguish of freedom or choice that occupies a essential role for the Self.
According to Kierkegaard man is called, as spirit (addition and mind), to place the relation between the elements that characterize him structurally, likewise those that can conflict with each other (body and soul, temporality and eternity), choosing a form of existence among the innumerable ones historically presented to him, here the phenomenology.
Although innumerable, Kierkegaard pedagogically lists some choices that are choices in three life styles (or “stages”): the aesthetic, the ethical, and the religious, is reductive but interesting.
The openness I see (in it is only existence but could be essence as Being) is that anguish is therefore “nothingness” that each person in his indeterminacy “is” at the moment of establishing synthesis to the point of being. give yourself an “identity”, a controversial theme in idealism, here that I think is possible to connect it to Heidegger’s “being in the world”, although different concepts.
Contrary to the fall the biblical passages of the New Testament could be placed on the beatitudes in Mt 5: 1-12, we highlight two that were dealt with in these days, verses 4 and 5: “Blessed are the afflicted, for they shall be comforted, blessed. the meek, for they shall possess the earth, ”and verse 9,” Blessed are they that bring peace, for they shall be called the children of God.”
But Kierkegaard’s fundamental help is on the question of identity, definitions as being-in-itself and being-in-the-world, and the concept of the eternal which is a launch into the “infinite.”

 

The desired and not built peace

31 Oct

We know that the “pax romana” was the surrender to the empire that dominated the good face of the civilized world at the time, it is true today that there were already people in various parts of the planet, but their paleontological records do not leave many marks of their cultures, and perhaps as Rousseau thought ‘the good savage’ lived in peace, but in the natural conflict with nature.
The “eternal peace” elaborated by the idealists and idolized by the worshipers of the “modern state” is not deepened, because in fact for many this will be the state, excuse the final irony of humanity and should only be perfected. Kant published in 1798, in a Berlin magazine, the essay “Announcement of the forthcoming signing of a treaty for perpetual peace in philosophy”, which was a resumption of his essay two years earlier: “For perpetual peace”, that was confined in its philosophy.
This is because the goal was to resolve peace within a single state, or in terms of relations between different states, which we can see even with the emergence of the UN and the rise of democratic nations, which in essence the idea of state remains enlightened. .
From this essay it can be assumed that what the philosopher understood by philosophy means that if systems of philosophy found a solution to their conflicts they could help political systems to resolve their conflicts, so it remains in the idealistic field.
The conflict between object and subject, which supposes that it is in the object that is the conflict and not in the subject is the hypothesis of the idealism/enlightenment system, but it is in the facticity of the historical subjects that the conflicts are, I do not understand as the historicity romantic because facticity is the Heideggerian concept of the subject thrown into the world with his facts.
Thus, what is meant by peace beyond idealism is that which can be built on the facticity of everyday life, in every conflict encountered in every fact, without being confined to theoretical or philosophical assumptions, but where the “being thrown” is. in the world”.
Peace, therefore, is built and not an agreement between states or within them, the peace treaty of the 1st. world war led to the second, some readers of world history say, the fact is that there were two wars and the “modern” states not only did not avoid, but are authors. “If you want peace, build peace,” said an Italian politician, very few understanding this.

 

Anguish and the philosophy

30 Oct

A characteristic feeling of a crisis, of a philosophy, science or culture in crisis is anguish, it is so influential in philosophy that it gives meaning even to thinking, one would say philosophical anguish is part of deep feeling. of thinking.
The artist also has this feeling, but the aesthetic directs him, the image of the “scream” is the feeling expressed in Edvard Munch’s painting (1863-1944) portrays the anguish. Anguish, distress, and anxiety are related, and we live in a time when they become increasingly part of the plane of human existence, of scientific and social reflection, and relating it only to poverty is even greater poverty, although there is affliction yes.
According to Adam it was the anguish that preceded Adam’s sin by eating the forbidden fruit of paradise, but before he even knew what sin was, and this caused him to sin, it may seem like a paradox, but it is not, although this is only a metaphor.
It is kierkegaard himself that explains this, the fact that we have possibilities of choice, if we are not fixed in the state of non-self-conscious immediacy, is what leads us to reflection and with it the same possibility that we have of a conscious act without reflection it is that we have an unconscious act and that does lead us to sin, I would say the “true sin”.
It is the possibilities of choice, of our self-knowledge and personal responsibility, leading us from a state of non-self-conscious immediacy to self-conscious reflection, so reflection / anguish is good and makes us conscious in deeds.
Anguish is not despair, although it may be on the brink of it; on the contrary, it is hope.

The reflection of Brazilian professor Dr. Oswaldo Giacóia Jr about Kierkegaard is interesting for the topic: