Arquivo para a ‘Noosfera’ Categoria
If that night comes
24
Sep
Europe lives on the fear of a new wave of the pandemic, and yet 
the solidarity with those who die is still small, there is even an expression of feelings or some commotion, but the fraternal humanitarian feeling is localized to people who always walk in humanist actions in moments of crisis.
What would happen if there were any natural catastrophe or something that would call humanity to consciousness in an even more serious way, of course it is not desirable and this panic should not be spread, but hypothetically if a deeper night befalls humanity, perhaps a new awareness of the grave situation of civilization was thought and achieved on a large scale.
It is also visible that those who are most supportive are the last ones in social valorization, already living in a serious situation, the pandemic makes them more supportive, there fraternity is a necessity for human survival itself.
The night and the blindness is not announced now by the pandemic, here in this blog in several posts we call attention to the cultural, social and even religious night of humanity, the path of the civilizing process seems to be collapsing, that is, whoever observes history while over the last few centuries it has been clearly visible, two wars, a process of social isolation of cultures, races and creeds, prejudice against migrants and mainly an increase in inequality.
If the night comes, unlike those who imagine that humble lives are “wasted lives”, it will be the arrogant and opulent lives that are less prepared for a “civilizing night” already underway.
It was not the pandemic that made this emerge, it just made evident and palpable what has been in process for some time, but what should be asked is if there was an extended, visible night that puts us in check.
It is not an apocalyptic or even a prophetic vision, while respecting them, a deep look at the inhuman, violent and antisocial processes that are being experienced, the decay and the worsening of the crisis is there.
If the night comes, few will be prepared, only those who are already in supportive environments and processes, those who during the lull period worked and experienced the fraternal, humanity and supportive side of everyday life.
Effective aid to poverty
15
Sep
If, on the one hand, emergency aid is necessary, mainly because the
pandemic prevents informal work and many families have saved with domestic workers, a medium and long-term recovery plan is needed to avoid even worse degradation and income distribution than the one that already exists.
Economist Muhammad Yunus is known throughout the world as “the banker of the poor”, but he is not really a banker in the conventional sense, as he assists people who have never had access to any banking system, what he fosters is an entrepreneurship, especially among women, and their results are surprising. It is true, however, that he founded a bank, the Grameen Bank in 1983 in Bangladesh, but today what he does most are lectures, he is one of the most requested speakers on the planet, and received among other awards, the Nobel Peace Prize in 2006.
In his lectures, he censors and criticizes bankers who aim only at easy profits, exorbitant interest and little or nothing look at the social reality in which they live, one of his well-known phrases says: “Dealing with economic theories in the face of people dying ], for me it was a joke ”, this is even more true in a pandemic.
Utilitarian productivism, production is necessary mainly in essential goods, is one that targets only the most attractive sectors where profit is high and the social impact is not always so high, with regard to the poor, and in the case of education and health, it is necessary even if profit is not considered, as it is an investment.
The idea that invaded several sectors, and unfortunately also in education and public health, that these sectors need to be productive is nothing but a reproduction of a savage capitalism incapable of managing the current crisis, and is only on the rise because of disinformation of the population, in dark times authoritarian theories gain a voice.
What Yunus says about jobs is very interesting: “An essential issue is the idea of employment. Who said we were born to look for a job? The school? The teachers? The books? Your religion? Your parents? Someone put this on people’s heads.
The educational system repeats: ‘You have to work hard’. Human beings were not born for this. The human being is full of creative power, but the system reduces him to a mere worker, capable of doing repetitive work. This is shameful, it is wrong ”, here we must also overcome left´s-wing economism.
The digital world in which anyone can have an online system and work in it, where “informal” jobs can make people from any location, including the periphery entrepreneurs, goes against Yunus’ proposal, to make “services” closer to the population periphery is made possible by the ubiquity of digital.
Entrepreneurs exist in all social strata, I even venture to say that they are concentrated in the periphery, the problem is who risks putting capital there, who could finance these “microentrepreneurs” from the periphery, there is a solution, the number of jobs can grow quickly and circulation of goods and income in fragile environments
Forgiveness, utopias and change
11
Sep
Not only personally, but mainly socially, forgiveness can move
history in the opposite direction of hatred, war and oppression, this is no different in many religions, after all the “golden rule”, does not make the other here who would not like it was done to you, it is present in the great contemporary religions and cultures.
There are several texts and speeches about forgiveness that are not connected with reality, for example, those who forgive do not always forget, forgiveness must repair the damage, but it does not mean that this is proportional, often it is not.
Each repeated offense should not be forgiven, let us remember Jesus’ teaching: “seventy times seven” (Mt 18, 21), just to say many times, and if we understand that the error is more common than we imagine (see several posts in this week) one can better understand the prayer given by Jesus himself: “forgive our offenses, just as we forgive those who have offended us”, this is the possible way of Love in many dimensions.
I remember that this passage comes right after the passage that Jesus asks for the unity of the people (they don’t need to be Christians, but be “in his name”), “where there are two or three in my name, there I am in their midst” (Mt 18 , 20), so there are no owners of this “presence”, even it may not be among people who are religious.
Karl Jaspers (1883, 1969), who influenced many of the modern thinkers like Hannah Arendt and Heidegger, in their book Introduction to Philosophical Thinking, asked about the path that we had trodden many years ago:
“We irritate each other. Deep psychology appears as an all-obscure refuge. Scientific superstition leads us to resort to pseudosciences for the search for salvation. And they tell us: when all fictions and ideologies have disappeared, man, until now sick and alienated (in etymological sense), will recover health. And health is happiness, the ultimate end ”(Jaspers, 1965, p. 30).
It is clear that there is true science that is not pseudoscience, and that happiness that has no bull or formula, can and should be desired, but the recovery of emotional health depends on reviewing history and then moving forward.
Where does anger lead and where does forgiveness lead
10
Sep
One can consider the first idea of Western political wrath, from
the 8th century BC, Homer’s Iliad the one that raises the first voice about wrath, already in the first sentence: “sing, O muse (Muse) the wrath (mènin) of Achilles”.
It seems that this is the current voice of the West from Zizek to Sloterdijk everyone seems to agree with this, except Edgar Morin and of course some pacifists, but who are embarrassed in the face of such contempt by conservative leaders.
But there are very few chronicles that speak of the success of these leaders, and it seems that the pandemic has helped them, fearing the idea of a strong government that takes care of the weak is stronger than the voice of insurrection and liquidity.
The idea of forgiveness is ironic and revenge and anger seem to be the potential for change, but the feeling of compassion and forgiveness is inherent in human ethics, however confused it may be with the ethics of the state, which often dispense with morals, it is the only hope that the cholera situation can be reversed, of course with regret from the oppressors, but the current discourse is that this is impossible and that people would never change, and with the pandemic!
It is clear that forgiveness without repentance and without reparation is not acceptable, and it is not true that it is enough to confess and show repentance that you are “saved”, there are social effects and punishments that can lead the oppressor to his reparation, even though this may be very less than the damage done, but there is no way to change the route, the course, without forgiveness.
What we need to understand is that offenses when they spring up around a polarization they can rarely favor those who dont have a defense, social, political or ideological, and this favors the strong, fear punishes the weak and never the cruel, accustomed to doing with him a game of risk and sadistic pleasure.
Edgar Morin clarifies that: “Understanding neither excuses nor accuses, asks that we avoid the peremptory condemnation, irremediable as if we ourselves had never known the weakness or made mistakes. If we know how to understand before condemning, we will be on the path of humanizing human relations ”, and it is the other way around at the moment, which favors authoritarian leaders and those who want hate to grow.
To be in solidarity with the Other, who is not our mirror, we have to “become aware of the uncertainty of the future and of its common destiny”, the pandemic can also make us aware that we must take care of the Other.
Forgiveness does not change events, but it can change the feeling towards them, it does not change the course of history, but the destiny of personal and / or collective stories when the problem is faced head on, overcoming anger and resentment.
If we are honest in the mirror, if we are capable of self-criticism, as we posted earlier, as stated by Popper: “Self-criticism is the best criticism”, it is from her that a criticism with positive consequences can be born.
Hatred, disdain and reflection
07
Sep
It is not by chance that the brain region of structures such as the
medial frontal cortex, whose capacity to argue and therefore to dialogue is there, has as its core the putamen, the pre-motor cortex and the insular cortex, whose structures also participate in the perception of disdain and disgust, that is, the activation of hatred is physically in the brain close to those associated with judgment and reasoning, so you can both activate one as the other, there are both options.
Those who want to justify hate are full of arguments, are capable of even deep reasoning to act against the hated, but if the premise is dialogue, the same reasoning can be used to understand, care for and divert the violence of the other, as some martial arts teach, bypassing the “body”.
Hate will not disappear in the hope that external circumstances change, in general it does not happen, it is not a magic, to cure it, it is necessary to recognize diversity, its problems, as Gadamer would have to be aware of preconceptions, that is, of the fundamentals that start a disagreement or a type of credit, to recognize the Other in its bubble and to recognize ours, both as having preconceptions.
If we actually activate the reasoning, thinking part and put the disagreements on this level, we mitigate the hate part a little, but it is essential to ask and a part of our hatred would come down to reflecting in this way: “Why do I hate? What do I intend to achieve with this? What do I gain and lose from my hatred? ”.
I do not know of a situation that has been resolved in this case, in general it has led to a greater conflict, to a greater mutual hatred, if the objective is war we will probably get there, but I believe that for most people it is not, so what remains is to reflect , analyze the origins of such “evil” in its deepest bases.
Hate must be combated with the understanding and mainly that it leads to a new type of action, which implies to recognize in the first place that it exists and it is fostering on two sides and not by only one, in the manifestations of people and in their advertisements, denunciations are recurrent to say the whole truth is on this side and on the other just a lie, it is necessary to explain the consequences and that in fact those who benefit are those whose reason for existing and thinking is really “hatred”.
Wise people of various shades such as Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela or Mother Teresa of Calcutta with wisdom and intelligence in the face of enormous and absurd conflicts have been able to show that kindness and generosity, creativity and respect for others can lead to seeking a larger collective good and although a little longer will have more lasting fruits, with less violence and deaths, but because even in serious groups hatred persists, the answer is very simple. Encouraged by leaders and groups that live in political, ideological or religious bubbles, the main resource is the demonization of the adversary, identified with some disgusting aspect of evil: death, corruption, sexual, racial or gender violence, weakening of values or something of the like.
And once united in a group the fear disappears and this reduces the inhibition of those who hate to act in other ways not that of argumentation and exposure of facts, but violence against violence.
The leaders who incite this hatred, say they can no longer control it, but deep down they wanted it, develop this part of the reasoning that we say at the beginning near the part of the brain of the putamen, and released the hatred will be executed by the people who use the other part with less reasoning and more visceral, so the hate “explodes”.
What we should think about in face of unworthy facts, and at this moment there should be none greater than the pandemic, is that the feeling of fear and exhaustion by confinement is exploited not in achieving ways of relaxation and anti-stress, but in releasing it in violent ways, what are the consequences? and who are they favoring?
I think of the hateful ones, and not the loving ones who in fact have love for humanity and the most fragile appreciation. It seems like a path of no return, in the midst of a pandemic and with two tense elections approaching, the United States national and municipal elections in Brazil, I see little or no discussion about the pandemic and about those who die every day, bereaved families and compassion for them, neither on one side nor on the other. Fortunately, mortality levels have decreased, but the long weekend promises crowds, the village of cars to the beach was huge, and the pandemic?
The unit and the included third
04
Sep
Polarization, dualism and binary ontology (being is and non-being is not)
are so present in the human relations of the present that it is difficult to think of a third hypothesis, but quantum physics has already described it and more than its effect ghostly (Einstein, Podolski and Rosen called it and this effect was then known as EPR), there is an effect in real life, quantum computers are coming, and it would be good for philosophy to wake up from its rational sleep (which has no liquid) or solid), and awakened to a new reality.
The classic Aristotelian logic justifies the exclusion of a third term and it prevailed until recently it is it that is at the base of fundamentalist, racist and scientist philosophies, which also underlie the principle of the excluded third that separates “good” from “evil” (the manichaeism) according to this logic:
- Axiom of Identity: “A is A”
- Axiom of Non-Contradiction: “A is not non-A”
- Axiom of the Excluded Third: “there is no third term T that is both A and non-A”.
The logic of physics and also of scientism (it is not true science) establishes this, however the contradiction between identity and non-identity is observed by quantum physics, being called the principle of quantum superposition, whose effect was studied within physics called “Tunneling” observing particles that transpose the classically prohibited state.
The logic of the excluded third was first enunciated by the philosopher Stéphane Lupascu (1900-1988), where there is a third term T that is both A and non-A, its axiomatic formalism predicts that it coexists with the dynamics of heterogeneity (to which it belongs living matter and the complex universe), with that of homogeneity (which governs macroscopic physical matter), and thus there are different “levels of reality”, of course all scientism is in check.
This new logic (level Q) does not abolish the Aristotelian logic of “yes” and “no” (level C), since only two terms are not considered, but in addition to these a third (T) (see figure). The first to establish the different levels of reality was Barsarab Nicolescu (1942-), he described a change from one level of reality to another with laws, new logics and concepts specific to each level, and thus established the concept of transdisciplinarity, which also encompasses complexity.
This logic admits three pillars for transdisciplinarity:
- Different Levels of Reality
- Third Term Logic Included 6.
- Complexity
So it must be admitted, for example, that between two people there is a third level of reality in which none of the personal logics are subjected and can and must have sufficient openness to a new reality, from which a new horizon and a new perception emerges. of the truth.
It is not a matter of relativism where the truth does not exist, but rather a state of rigorous equilibrium, accepting that between the poles of a contradiction, there is a semi-actualization and an equal semi-potentialization for both poles, this is state T.
Authors and dialogues
01
Sep
I read a 1968´s text by Roland Barthes “The death of the author” 
in which he problematizes the concept, proposing it as “the destruction of all voice, of all origin”, he would also say about man today in a troubled moment of concept and events truly and “strangers” who are building “barricades in the texts”, what he said of his contemporaries (Alain Badiou and Jacques Derridá stated that without this concept no object is critically thought), and what he would say today, certainly his thesis I was right, and more so today.
It is known that Foucault gave pins to Barthes, but in Sade, Fourier, Loyola they were returned by inserting the reader in the discursive game and reformulating the question of authorship in another dimension: the body, this object of consumption of so many theories today, only in Barthes it finds some solidity (not liquid).
For Barthes the text is a body, an object of pleasure endowed with the ability to penetrate the reader’s life in fragments, generating coexistences between reader and author, or verbatim: “The pleasure of the text also includes a friendly return from the author.
The returning author is certainly not the one identified by our institutions (history and teaching of literature, philosophy, Church discourse); not even the hero of a biography he is… it is a simple plural of ‘charms’, the place of some tenuous details, the source, however, of vivid romances, a discontinuous song of kindness, in which we read death with all much more certainty than in the epic of a destination; it is not a person (civil, moral), it is a body. ” (BARTHES, 2005).
Barthes proposed in 1977 (Leçon) a distinction of the terms: literature, writing and text, which is particularly interesting conceptually, writing has something that is the manuscript an inscription in which a support, an utensil is supposed, in second place (although it is only of a didactic character) the cognitive sense, by which the installation is designated and the third the “linguistic” forms endowed with meaning that take on an artistic sense.
To problematize the question of “pluridimensionality” proposed by Barthes for literature, he initiates the so-called “genetic criticism”, problematizing the enunciative aspect of the term, aims to reconstruct a history of the text in its nascent state, seeking to find in it the secrets of fabrication of work, and thus it is explained what a text is and its relation to literature.
It is here that dialogue is established through language, without understanding the genetics of a text, there may be solicitude or dialogue, but it would not leave superficiality nor reach that level desirable for many contemporary authors to assume the preconceptions and establish new horizons. .
Barthes makes a valuable reflection on listening, distinguishing it from the physiological act of the mechanic of “listening”, giving it a statute of psychological act that can only be defined by its object and intention, a category so dear to hermeneutics although it is not exactly the same, has similarities.
The author makes a valuable reflection about listening, distinguishing it from the physiological and mechanical act of “listening”, giving it a status of psychological act that is defined only by its object and intention.
Barthes’ phrase is famous: “Any refusal of a language is a death” and an interpreter of this author explains the difference between hearing and listening: “[…] a poetic listening (‘brute’, as Barthes wants) aims not to imprison sounds in a hierarchical way, as in an insipid object of cold analysis ”(El Haouli, 2002), it is this aspect of hierarchical dialogues that dominate many who think they do it but do not do it, just want the passive submission of the Other to the their categories.
BARTHES, R. Sade, Fourier, Loyola, Paris: Seuil, 1971. [tradução: Sade, Fourier, Loyola. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2005.
EL HAOULI, Janete. Demetrio Stratos: em busca da voz-música. Londrina: Gráfica e Editora Midiograf, 2002.
Viruses and aorgic mutations
31
Aug
Certainly or that we are a physical structure and DNA not always like
this, also our relationship with differentiated diseases and viruses, “childhood” diseases such as measles, mumps and rubella become common and a triple vaccine has become mandatory, fighting these are more common for years that in indigenous tribes and a few could still be deadly, because their physical structures are different.
Certainly something like the inorganic world that influences the physical happens, it seems scary, more trivial to say that the physical world preceded its organic year, because its origin occurred in an aortic mutation.
Man did not always exist, attested by scientific studies that homo sapiens appeared in East Africa about 300 thousand years ago (Hubrin, Ben-Ncer, 2017), was the first one back in the eastern Mediterranean 100 thousand years ago (Khan, 2015) and 60,000 years ago it was to the west, it can be passed to China about 80,000 years ago (Sherwell, 2015), therefore due to variations in fighting, physical structure and tolerance to certain events, certainly due to dietary changes , climatic and also variations in the physical structure according to the adaptation to the environment, is also logical, of the primordial structure of man formed from the physical world.
Much research on viruses affecting our previously studied foramen, such as Mollivirus sibericum, classified as a “giant virus” because it can be seen under a simple optical microscope, too, or Pithovirus Sibericum was studied by a French team from the National Center for Scientific Research French, assimilated by an “evolution” and transformation of two viruses and how they historically affect or are the home of nature, because now more and more viruses appear with different characteristics, also an aortic change, so it can also affect a nature, a physical part of the planet and also a history.
In the conflict between reason and understanding, several authors have dealt with the aortic issue from aesthetic to physical analysis, for example, used these themes Schiller and Hölderling and appropriation here, to make inferences about the inorganic (virus is not an organism) and demonstrate that the organic totality (organic holism) is not prevalent over the inorganic (aortic holism), which supposes a regime of ataxia and disorder, as well as systemic holism, the supposed single discourse that invaded sociology, Dilthey’s fashion history ( Gadamer contests it) and the current polarization is nothing but systemic holism, idealism and pre-quantum physics.
By this theory of aorgic holism it can be assumed that not only can the human physical organic structure be modified, but even the structure of the planet, the retraction of activities, among them the thousands of daily trips by airplanes, the non use of Fossil fuels are already changing (for the better) the structure of seas and land, so the very structure of the planet may change, and nature as a whole will react, it may be a surprise, but nature will help us.
References
HUBRIN, Jacques Hublin; Ben-Ncer, Abdelouahed «Scientists discover the oldest Homo sapiens fossils at Jebel Irhoud, Morocco». Nature. 2017, Access: august 20, 2020. Available in: https://phys.org/news/2017-06-scientists-oldest-homo-sapiens-fossils.html .
KHAN, Amina. Discovery of 47 teeth in Chinese cave changes picture of human migration out of Africa. Los Angeles Times, Science. 14 oct. 2015, Acesso em: 20 de Agosto de 2020, Disponível em: https://www.gazetadopovo.com.br/mundo/virus-gigante-pre-historico-da-siberia-sera-acordado-6d2dtw1rz8yudoz53visogbti/SHERWELL, Phillip. Ancient teeth found in China reveal early human migration out of Africa. The Telegraph, 2015. Available in: The telegraph (private access),
Fear, death and salvation
28
Aug
The society of tiredness, the search for productivity and fear is not
that of the pandemic, it already existed before this health event, what happened now is that, at least people who have not lost their senses, fear of death is present and hangs over the whole of society, and ignoring death is not a good psychological attitude.
This is how psychologists who dealt with this issue related to children say, it is also true that fear can lead to panic that is not healthy either, but explaining and helping society to understand the limitations, even the production of the economy helps everyone, and the questioning the hyperproductivity that led society and nature to the door of exhaustion is also healthy, but now comes the economic crisis and what to do with it, again be sensible.
The poet Hölderling wrote “where there is fear, there is salvation”, at the beginning of the pandemic we thought that it was possible to treat the disease evenly, to reduce a little the activity that would help society to rebalance itself, but after many months the confinement also revealed itself problematic, but the fear of death and a certain blindness of not wanting to see the consequences continues in society, death is just a fatality, and not a possibility that takes us to care, care for life in every way.
Salvation resides in this fear, the fearless child is reckless, and the adult too often, does not think and does not act in favor of life, the preservation of self and others, thinks selfishly and this does not lead to salvation, it takes when dying more tragic than the fatality of death, even dying of fear, so the healthy and balanced is to deal with death, and those who need to remain socially active take the necessary care, but salvation, the rebalancing of the human.
This is at stake, what was the theme before the pandemic, is now reappearing in a tragic way and it is necessary to think about nature, production and day-to-day life that led to diseases such as panic, Burnout syndrome and the society of tiredness, to produce happiness we must not go to extreme tiredness and the exhaustion of nature and productive forces.
The very death of God, which for many seems like a huge tragedy, fundamentalists say the opposite and the Pharisees that we should not “spread fear”, when Jesus warns the type of death that would die, Peter says that God never allows such a thing , and Jesus’ reaction is at least curious (Mt 16, 23): “Jesus, however, turned to Peter and said:“ Go far, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me, because you do not think the things of God, but the things of men! ”, And little reflection is made on this passage, at most saying that it is because I was going to die on the cross, but at that moment nothing it was still known.
The lesson of the pandemic, the fear of death and dying, which is the hardest, is that there is no salvation without suffering, sometimes even bloodshed, the post-pandemic must provoke a discussion and a much more serious thought than it has already done. it has happened so far, conservatives say life should return to normal and others say: “and the fight against the pandemic must be changed”, that there were many mistakes, but the essential problem is to change inhuman behavior and social structures.
Who is The truth for you?
21
Aug
What is certain is that the truth is who and not what because what
will only be an object and this truth could only be established by a dual relationship: from the subject to the object which he interprets, that is why we fall into relativism or into pure doxa, opinion, truth can only be established in the relationship with the Other, in Socratic philosophy, the truth is not with men, but is among them, in their relationality.
However, the establishment of this truth requires ontological unveiling, it is not simple because although it is intrinsic to being, what occurs from idealism is a great veiling of being, only from Heidegger will this unveiling be thought of, but we still remain at night of thought and culture.
Being in relation to objects, which is also intrinsic to being, it is a material substance, the Greek hylé, from which hilemorfismo (theory that adds hylé and morphé) arose according to which all corporeal beings are composed of matter and form , which from scholasticism is thought of as a substance.
The consequences of this ontological truth have an impact on philosophical anthropology, which studies how man can understand himself, so a metaphysical sense is recovered and man can also be discussed in an eschatological sense, from where he comes and where he will go, or teleological as conventional literature prefers.
Philosophers like Bernar Groethuysen affirmed that “the reflection on ourselves, always renewed reflection that the man does to come to understand himself”, already Landsberg will say otherwise: “conceptual explanation of the idea of the man from the conception that he has of yourself at a certain stage in your existence ”, but the question is up to you and everyone who or what (for the question not being directional) is the truth?
If the question is hilemorphic, man came from the dust and the dust will return, but there is an aortic response, especially for our day, its shape or structure may change and so there will be a change, what Fritjof Capra called the reinvention of man, and that I think as a Christian, a change in his soul.
After a long life with the disciples is the question that Jesus is also going to ask his disciples (Mt, 16: 13-14): “Who say that men are the Son of Man?” They answered: “some say that it is John the Baptist; others that is Elijah, still others that is Jeremiah or one of the prophets ”, but who today is for us, not for non-believers, even for Christians, he still seems to be an enigmatic, miraculous, historical, political character or was it even God.
The truth may seem too simple, not have a deep intricate logic, not be linked to any form of power or temporal politics, but what if He is the truth? how much would change in the life of the planet, how would our view of the pandemic, the distribution of goods and solidarity change?
To those who do not believe and if it is really true, it could be a great answer in times of pandemic and social difficulties, but his question is there.
