Arquivo para a ‘Método e Verdade Científica’ Categoria
The whole and the part
The part and whole is separated in ocidental culture.
“The world becomes more and more a whole. Each part of the world is, more and more, part of the world and the world, as a whole, is increasingly present in each of its parts. This is true not only for nations and peoples, but for individuals. Just as each point of the hologram contains the information of the whole of which it is a part, also, henceforth, each individual receives or consumes information and substances from the entire universe” (MORIN, 2006, p. 67).
This is to understand what in the complex thought of Edgar Morin calls the hologrammatic principle, this was also the starting point of the thought of Werner Heisenberg to start the quantum thinking and that has a book with this name backwards, “The part and the whole”.
Also Gregório de Matos Guerra (1639-1696), one of the representatives of the Brazilian Baroque, wrote a poem called “Eucharist”, in which he says: “God is all in every sacrament”, and how important it would be for those who believe to understand this, to understand what live the word.
Modern atomic physics has shed new light on problems ranging from ethical and political to philosophical and religious, in Heisenberg’s book in the preface which is almost a biography written in a sui generis way, he talks about dialogues with Einstein, Plank, Bohr, Dirac, Fermi , Pauli, Sommerfeld, Rutherford and several other colleagues.
The part and the whole are subtitled: “meetings and conversations about physics, philosophy, religion and politics”, which also makes him the initiator of a “complex and hologrammatic thought” as proposed many years later by Edgar Morin.
Understanding the complex civilizing situation we live in is not possible without this understanding.
MORIN, Edgar (2006)r. Introdução ao pensamento complexo. Brazil, Porto Alegre: Sulina.
The trinity in an anthropotechnical perspective
The whole philosophy of Sloterdijk must be preceded by a good reading of Heidegger, trying to simplify what is per se impossible, we explain the category “without-in” that will be used a lot in his speech on the Trinitarian relationship, from where the “imbricated cosubjectivity of the God-soul dyad” (Sloterdijk, p. 490), where“ theological surrealism hides, as we will show, the first realism of the spheres ”(idem).
Sloterdijk does not use epigraphs just to decorate the text, in chapter 8 “Closer to me than myself: theological propedeutics for the theory of the common interior”, in the epigraph he explains: “… it means ´be-em´ [In-sein] ?… Being-in … means an ontological constitution of existence (Dasein)” citing § 12 of Heidegger’s Being and Time.
It clarifies in the other quote in the epigraph that “perhaps Em is the envisioned kingdom of all life (of all morals) of God”, quoting Robert Musil in his book “The man without qualities”, which he is today.
Before going into the question of the trinity, he explains that human love “does not exist at all before it is produced” … “in the perspective of individualistic modernity – two loneliness that are uprooted by the encounter” (p. 491), and will return to incident of paradise lost asking if it was not “a painful gap of strangeness?” (idem).
It was Augustine, he explains in the “Confessions” that he took “the dialectic of recognition from ignorance” (p. 492), in his “cryptic masterpiece” De trinitate (in particular books VIII and XIV) “that deal with accessibility of God through the traces left inside the Soul ”(p. 493), and although it traces its contradictions with the theological discourse, he affirms“ it can be considered as the great logic of the intimacy of western theology ”(idem).
The long analysis that goes from page 494 to 524 in which he penetrates the contradictions of the religious discourse, passing through biblical citations, Nicolau de Cusa, Duke João da Baviera, a learned and unauthorized Cardinal in the literature of the Christian tradition, reaches a final verdict, this important yes, which is how Platonic dualism caused “side effects… in doctrines of this type [which] also break the sense of being-in” (p. 524).
Illustrated with the painting by Juan Carrero de Miranda “The foundation of the Order of the Trinity” (oil of 1666), the author proceeds to make the “topographic distribution of the Three in the One”, highlighting in the table the “classic quaternity covers the Trinity and the Universe ”(we highlight it with a small red circle), it would be good if you did it.
Within his spherology, Sloterdijk explains that “echoes characteristic of the philosophy of nature, even though it has been a long time, the cohabitation of spiritual entities”, so we are closer to other “animist” worldviews than we imagine, in a dualistic theology.
Analyzing the discourse of Pseudo-Dionísio Aeropagita, he clarifies that “the pathos of the difference of differences within the One was already known to Neoplatonism, and the“ mutual justification of the principles of the people of the Trinity ”(p. 130) will benefit from it.
He is well aware of the pericoresis of Cappadocian priests (St. Gregory of Nissa, St. Basil and St. Gergorius of Nazianzeno) (p. 540-541), in addition to Augustine used abundantly, he also cites João Damasceno (p. 538, 544-546) and quotes Tomás de Aquino.
SLOTERDIJK, P. (2016). Esferas I: Bolhas, trad. José Oscar de Almeida Marques, Brazil, São Paulo: Estação Liberdade.
Clearing and enlightenment
What actually happens if we find the clearing, if through a process of changing consciousness, self-enlightenment, we abandon old theories, machinations and “see each other” in his difference.
The answer is in Heidegger himself in his main work Being and Time: “As long as the being comes from the aletheia, the self-unveiling emerges. We call this the action of self-enlightenment and enlightenment, the clearing (cf. Being and time) “.
We have already posted about the difference between aletheia and truth, but now, from the text above, it is possible to unveil a little deeper, the path of enlightenment leads us to a possession that gives meaning to who we are and what we receive: to be. In enlightenment there is a sense of being and performs an ontological path and not merely temporal or spatial, this connection to the temporary hides the original meaning of all space and time, of all times and of all relationships with the world, this is the enlightenment.
It is not my definition, other readers of Heidegger make a very practical reasoning similar to what is done here, for example, the text by Manuel de Castro found on the Web, which states that “in the enlightenment the sense of being happens in us”, it is not a matter of chance and there are many other possibilities for this enlightenment, all religions, for example, seek this enlightenment, most philosophers believe they have found it, but what it really is.
I launch the appeal of religions, especially the Christian one that I profess, but I cannot help imagining that the same is possible in others, there is something that can be called “seeds of the verb” and that in some way are present in the great religions, in Christian is the action of the “Holy Spirit”.
This node that can unite us to an enlightenment, is the one that “unites us all”, is that thought that Edgar Morin said: “it is necessary to replace a thought that isolates and separates with a thought that unites and distinguishes”, therefore living in unity with the different others.
The word that speaks of this action through a special gift from the Holy Spirit that made everyone who heard it understand in their own language (one can think of a metaphor according to the possible understanding of each), says the passage (Acts 2,4-6 ):
Everyone was filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other languages, as the Spirit inspired them. Devout Jews lived in Jerusalem, from all the nations of the world. When they heard the noise, the crowd joined, and everyone was confused, because each one heard the disciples speak in their own language ”, at some point in our history this can happen.
What is expected is a more fraternal world where the different can live in their dignity and be understood in their own language.
CASTRO, Manuel Antônio de. “Ser e aparência”. (Being and appearance). Available in: http://www.travessiapoetica.blogspot.com
Dwelling and the clearing
Both dwelling and the clearing precede the idea of Being, since ancient philosophy, Being is also “home”, but modern philosophy has recovered language, an event called linguistic turnaround, and Heidegger’s phrase is worth: “Language is the house of being ”means an ontological identification between being and language.
What is this “home” means what is being while being, means removing from being its adjectives to be what is, for example, man as a man without his color, religion, sex, nationality, age, culture, nothing that particularizes it and separates them from each other, this is where we find being.
That is why Heidegger’s definition of language, but in a broad sense any form of communication from a simple look to a long speech, and even the use of some apparatus to enrich (or impoverish, of course) language.
To inhabit the clearing therefore requires first that we unveil what this Being is, and then the being that is what is worth to be, while the “being-there” (Dasein) is what is in the being.
This was veiled in history, and even more in modernity, which projected the whole being on the being, that is, under its characterization and determination, but what it is has been veiled.
Gorgias (485-380 BC) was the first in the history of philosophy to deny the existence of being, for this he also had to deny reason, and existence in absolute, “nothing exists absolutely”, so there is no truth, it is the principle that today we call relativism.
The existence and reality of Being, although veiled, is the possibility of a clearing, an opening for transformation will depend on it, for change both in the human relationship, since this is the fundamental language of being, as in the relationship with nature, which it also determines the being-there.
Everything can become unveiled if we remove the veil that covers being, and we also discover its interiority, which the philosopher Byung Chul Han calls negativity, which is his reflection under what he is, seeing himself as in a mirror, and so on. to be able to see oneself as Being.
An oriental philosopher reads the “clearing”
Byung Chul-Han is a Korean-German philosopher who migrated to the West and does an odd reading of Western literature, in particular the context of networks and new media, studied in his doctorate Heidegger and with this his “clearing”.
He explains what the clearing is in a simple way: “Heidegger’s ‘truth’ loves to hide. It is not simply available. It must first be ‘taken off’ from its ‘veiling’. The negativity of ´veiling´ actually inhabits as its ´heart´ ”(Han, 2018, p. 74) and in this excerpt he quotes Heidegger´s work:“ On the question of thinking ”.
It penetrates what information means, the great input of the current veiled Being, “the information is lacking, on the other hand, the interior space, the interiority that would allow to withdraw or to be veiled. It doesn’t beat, Heidegger would say, no heart ”(Han, 2018, p. 74).
This absence of counterpart, is what Chul Han calls negativity, it is good to explain it well, “a pure positivity, a pure exteriority characterizes the information”, so is the reflection.
As the information of negativity would then be, in the sense of reflection, it is the “selective and additive information, while the truth is exclusive and selective. Unlike information, it does not produce any pile [Haufen] ”(Han, 2018, p. 74).
Thus, there are no “masses of truth” but “masses of information”, it is the “massification of the positive” (Han, 2018, p. 75), so information is distinguished from knowledge, and this is not “simply available”, I would say neither simply because it is complex nor available because it is hidden.
However, the philosopher confuses it with life experience, when he affirms: “not infrequently, a long experience precedes it” (page 75), and affirms only one side of the information: “the information is explicit, while knowledge often takes a implicitly.”.
Clarifying these two confused points, first the question of experience, the philosopher Plato was the first to announce that wisdom, as knowledge of the truth is not the result of age, if it were only in old age people would deserve to be heard, the other question is about tacit information, it exists as tacit knowledge, Michael Polanyi (1958), was one of the first theory, and Collins in the seventies returned to the concept in the scope of scientific communication. For this tacit information, Chul Han also points this out, “silence” is needed.
The deepest clearing the philosopher describes quoting Michel Butor, who gave an interview to Die Ziet on 07/12/2012, which points to the real cause: “The cause [of this] is a communication crisis. The new means of communication are worthy of admiration, but they cause a hellish noise ”(Butor apud Han, 2018, p. 42).
References:
POLANYI, M. (1958) Personal knowledge – towards a post-critical Philosophy. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
COLLINS, H. M. (1974) The TEA set: tacit knowledge and scientific networks. Science Studies, v.4, p.165-186.
HAN, B. C. (2018) No enxame: perspectivas do digital. No Enxame: perspectivas do digital (in portuguese). Trad. Lucas Machado. São Paulo: Editora Vozes.
The relationship between friendship and love
Philia translated from greek, romanized becomes filia, in Portuguese son is “filho”, the same root of affiliation, where the a here is no longer a negation of inclusion, in the sense of belonging, affiliated with an institution, for example.
In this Greek root fit both love and friendship, philo-sophia, love or friendship to wisdom, however love can also be (we have already made a post) like the eros or agape friendship, which in this case surpasses friendship.
Friendship can grow and become an agapic love, that is, capable of creating trust and above any interest, in which case friendship and love complement and expand.
In human, cultural and spiritual terms it is what favors a person’s good performance and mental health, so the distrust and enmity that can lead to hatred is the cause of many wars, because the economic, political or social interest without real ties it is nothing else.
There is no way to break a spiral of hatred when it grows, many wars and totalitarian regimes are proof of this, and the root is in every social cell where friendship and love have ceased to exist.
On the other hand, when these bonds grow and spread in a network, everything becomes healthy and there is a virtuous cycle where the best human and social values appear: solidarity, fraternity and what we call agapic love, which goes beyond any interest, it is an “amisticia” in ancien roman.
The Roman thinker Cícero has a text with exactly this name (Amisticia) and says in the text: “This is the first precept of friendship: ask friends only what is honest, and do for them only what is honest”, so this is the origin of a society that aims to be happy and peaceful.
The issue of Identity and its topicality
The question is so fundamental that it runs through philosophy since Parmênides, where “the same, because it is both to learn (to think) and also to be” (apud Heidegger) and for him to think and be are thought as the same, that is, identity is part of being, but this has a lot to do with the current moment.
When appealing to questions of identity we separate ourselves from people of different races, creeds or genders, we are trying to strengthen what is a false concept of identity because it both denies Being itself, and attempts to strengthen a certain group under an alleged identity and deny those that have little to do with belonging to that group or race.
This look at “different things” and recognizing some co-pertinence in them (belonging is just another way of giving identity to an isolated group or race), we must manifest differently what should be pointed out as sameness, that is, co-permanence groups with a diverse culture.
The logical sense of thinking about this identity is strong and has a presence in different cultures, both because the groups want to be strengthened through this “identity”, as well as following a binary and dualistic logic where A cannot be B, or they are the same and are the same, or they are different and contradictory, we have already pointed out in other texts the third included by Nicolescu Barsarab, in logic.
But in onto-logic Being is and can be non-Being, where there is a third term T that is both A and non-A, which even in physical reality has already been proven by quantum physics, the problem for dualistic philosophy is that this involves complexity.
There is a second way of seeing the question within the thinking (noein) where it is presented as Being, as was said at the beginning, in it two supposedly different things, they see each other as co-pertinence, which made some possible problematic interpretations in modernity.
Heidegger points to it, first quoting Parmenides and then developing “something absolutely different from what we ordinarily know as the doctrine of metaphysics, in which identity is part of being” (HEIDEGGER, 1973).
What Heidegger does is invert Hegel’s phrase: “identity is part of Being”, for “(…) the unity of identity is a fundamental feature of the being of the being. Everywhere, wherever we have a relationship with any type of being, we are challenged by identity.” (HEIDEGGER, 1973).
What Heidegger does is invert Hegel’s phrase: “identity is part of Being”, for “(…) the unity of identity is a fundamental feature of the being of the being. Everywhere, wherever we have a relationship with any type of being, we are challenged by identity.”(HEIDEGGER, 1973).
Going to the bottom of modern philosophy, where Hegel is a worthy representative, it can be said that there is a shift from Being (sein) to Being-there (Dasein) and perhaps the complexity will find there a point of support for those who want simplistic explanations. , it can be said that there is no displacement
However, it is more complex, as it involves existential aspects such as “worldliness”, “facticity” and “language”, without them we fall into simplistic explanations that only strengthen identity as a factor of difference and exclusion from the Other.
Heidegger, M. (1973) The principle of identity. In.Thinkers Brazilian Collection. Abril ed. Brazil, Rio de Janeiro.
An incomplete epistemology and eschatology
What phenomenology and ontological philosophy seeks is at the center of the scientific crisis and of the thought that the West is experiencing, and whose epicenter is European, in Peter Sloterdijk’s enlightened saying that Europe is no longer the center as in the colonial period (empire of the Center) and looks for other forms of colonialism to take idealism forward, what in literature has been called epistemicide. In denying the cultures originating from other peoples, he thinks he is finding his own diffusion between barbarism and classical antiquity, he tries a new renaissance exploring the Greek culture in a diffuse way.
At the religious level the disaster is greater, Slavov Zizek recently wrote about the religious concept in Hegel, and the latter of the thinkers who tried to revive classical Marxism, reworked the Hegelian religion, but which was already present in Feuerbach and Marx himself criticized, in the bottom is an atheistic theology, a dead eschatology.
Dead because this is in fact the great mistake of idealistic eschatology, there is no transcendence for it without the separation of subject and object, it needs to deny the substantiality to affirm its “subjectivity” where the subject must always be dead, it denies being-for-dead Heidegger’s motto, but affirms death in life (it isnt epoché).
Every form of original culture, it is obvious that it includes those non-Christian cultures, has an origin (the name says it), the eschatological life and end, which is not where it is going, and at this point this incomplete theology diverges on the that in fact is death, in times of a pandemic one could say the disease that can kill.
For this reason, even if the appeal to phenomenology will be incomplete, it will lead those who incorporate it to exhaustion, to contempt for life, which even in the religious sense is something deeply sacred, its “biós”, its substantiality, to be clear to idealists, its objectivity, fall into theoretical abstractionism.
The only substantiality of this incomplete eschatology is to deny religion in order to make it idealistic and to ask for what is inhuman, what in biblical terms he calls “putting heavy burdens on the shoulders of others” and which they themselves refuse to carry in times of pandemic neither enter nor let others in.
The final exam will be substantial: “I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink…” and you will not be asked whether you have developed a good epistemology or theology, the one that made colonialism the terror of original cultures.
Civilization crisis and death
Returning to Pablo Picasso’s thought that the worst loss of life is not dying, but dying while we live is the one that best explains the civilizing state, even those who owe fraternity, dialogue, the planet as a common home seems hopeless and therefore tired , not that tiredness of the Society of Tiredness that is also a crisis, but that of those who have failed to find what unites, the positive and the true.
To speak of the post-truth, the sophistry is pre-Socratic, and the public lie has also been conveyed by newspapers and television channels, according to the political side they take, in the end everyone agrees that if you are not on the politically correct side, it is not true, so we remain in relativism and dualism, even those who preach against it, Edgar Morin is right is a crisis of thought, and Peter Sloterdijk is also “not a favorable time for thinking”, it is easier to take a side, although there are mistakes and successes on several sides, because there are only two.
I saw on Instagram that two very popular videos are of a young artist who makes puppets with skeletons, birds and funeral figures and another of a girl whose hair was decorated like a cemetery (figure above), it is a sad reality the post-Goths seem to dominate youthful fantasy.
In a BBC report on October 31, poor banker Muhammad Yunus stated: “We need to redesign the system by guaranteeing a new economy of three zeros: zero poverty, zero unemployment and zero net carbon emissions. And we know how to do it. The problem is that we are very lazy and we are very comfortable in the system we have, we don’t want to leave our comfort zone ”, is a new thinking may not work, but without a doubt people, the poor and the planet need answers, the old ones create more polarization and misunderstandings, in addition to post-truths, in this case with a new meaning, from an ideological point of view they were once true, today they are post-true.
There are situations and I think that the planet itself can react, an aortic reaction, the inorganic one over the organic one, after all we came from the dust, from some chemical reaction and certainly if we don’t change the route we will go back to the dust, not that life’s fatality physical personal death, but dying in life.
The question that remains is whether this reaction from the inorganic planet could change something in the human organic, your mind, your being, for something better.
Affliction and anguish
Those who have read The Being and Time attentively know that one of Heidegger’s important responses is what should be read in Kierkgaard were quick to witness the celebrated response of a thinker considered to be one of the most eminent philosophers of contemporary times.
It is, therefore, Heidegger himself who Kierkegaard separating him into so-called “edifying” teachings that would be more important than “theoretical” ones, except in one case that is anguish, in his treatise The concept of anguish, and that the “the forest philosopher” is keen to say that “from an ontological point of view” it remains “entirely tributary to Hegel and ancient philosophy seen through him”. (HEIDEGGER, 2012, p. 651, n. 6).
What Heidegger saw in this 1844 book, whose authorship is attributed to Vigilius Haufniensis, a Kierkegaardian pseudonym that translates as “Copenhagen Watcher”, since Kierkegaard was Danish and his first intention is to return Socratic wisdom, which for him contemplative knowledge (theory) with practical knowledge (phrónesis), the way of ancient Greek.
Although he called Socrates a “practical philosopher, he just wanted to focus the“ anguish ”dressing on the experience of what was reflected by the soul and this meant an approximation of psychology, it was“ the doctrine of the subjective spirit ”(KIERKEGAARD, 2010, p. 25), was one of the branches of Philosophy, and of a really dialectical philosophy in the Greek-Socratic sense since modern philosophy has fixed itself on the Kantian dualism thesis versus antithesis with an improbable synthesis.
The philosopher uses the expression “hereditary sin”, used by the author throughout the work, but as the one that corresponds to what theologians, called by him “dogmatic”, call the original sin, nomenclature apart, is the aspect that brings his theme closer to the anguish of that “soul” affliction, which can have a philosophical and psychological outline, but which is basically that affliction of those who feel outside a center, from a clear perspective of overcoming anguish.
What leads existence to a singular way, to a way of acting in such a way? This is where the notions of freedom and anguish emerge as “concepts” converge to this “anguish”, but without having a locus, neither in Aesthetics, in Metaphysics or even in Psychology, so the author does not say so, but there is something afflicted and tragic in this journey in this “anguish”.
Paul Ricoeur, reflecting on these expressions of Kierkegaard, establishes that evil is “what is the most opposite to the system”, precisely because it is absurd and scandalous, irrational and incomprehensible, situated on the margins of morality and reason, recalls Ricoeur (1996, p. 16), referring to the Kierkegaardian reflections, evil is “what is the most opposite to the system”, precisely because it is absurd and scandalous, irrational and incomprehensible, situated on the margins of morality and reason.
Ricoeur thus differentiates structural evil (we have already made a post), linked to anguish and sin and free will linked to personal decisions in the face of anguish.
The point that I consider essential in Kierkegaard’s thought on this existential aspect is that “only what has crossed the anguish of possibility, only this one is fully trained not to be distressed, not because it evades the horrors of life, but because they always become weak compared to those of possibility ”(KIERKEGAARD, 2010, p. 165-166), it is here that affliction can find its opposite and we can understand that there is a source of comfort in it.
Thus anguish and affliction are not exactly curses or sinful states or diseases of the “soul” or thoughts, they are phases of rupture or transition to other more mature phases when this stage involves reflection and overcoming.
HEIDEGGER, Martin (1957) Ser e tempo. Campinas: Editora da Unicamp, 2012. (Multilíngues de Filosofia Unicamp). JOLIVET, Régis. As doutrinas existencialistas: de Kierkegaard a Sartre. Portugal, Porto: Tavares Martins.
KIERKEGAARD, Sören (2010). O conceito de angústia: uma simples reflexão psicológico-demonstrativa direcionada ao problema dogmático do pecado hereditário de Vigilius Haufniensis. Tradução e notas Álvaro Luiz Montenegro Valls. 2. ed. Brazil, Petrópolis, RJ: Vozes.