Arquivo para a ‘Método e Verdade Científica’ Categoria
There is no healthy citizenship without areté
31
Jul
The construction of wisdom and virtue (the Greek arete) in the fight against doxa
(mere opinion of the relative truth) and the sophists, who despite being wise were corrupted by the taste of power, passions and instincts, made Socrates, who we know him from Plato’s dialogues, and Plato himself to build a new model of citizenship that needed to educate, to leave the Cave for the light and to organize knowledge for the true Good.
It is a fact that the sense of excellence was adopted by state authorities, but its etymological origin remains valid and to defend it is to defend the good, otherwise we fall into sophist relativism, any truth and any argument is valid, the Socratic maieutics is still valid and to ask is to dialogue.
Martha Nussbaum, one of the most renowned philosophers today in classical antiquity, pointed out in her book The Fragility of Goodness: “… indolence, error and ethical blindness cause countless tragedies”, are relevant aspects that Democrats must remember for the defense of democracy and the risk that modern sophists will seize power and manipulate opinions, these are not just fake news, mistaken and authoritarian positions, it is necessary to defend the values of true citizenship, areté (in picture sculpture in Ephesus).
We have already explained the biblical meaning of the net, the fishing and the casting of the nets, in another passage after returning from the Sea of Galilee Jesus and the disciples meet the crowd, and since the place is deserted, the apostles think of dismissing the crowd for lack of food, but Jesus says to see what was food and makes the well-known miracle of the multiplication of bread and fish, from 5 loaves and 2 fish.
It is clear that Christian virtue is beyond the proposal of the Greeks, it extends personal morality and the understanding of mercy, but it does not exclude the citizen arete and dominion of instincts and passions, nowadays so flourishing and reaching even the religious , poor reading of the multiplication of bread and fish that is more related to Christian arete than polis, as they were “in a deserted place” (Mt 14,15), that is, a kind of “retreat” of the polis.
The virtue of compassion is necessary for the distribution of goods, the process of concentration of wealth has accelerated with the pandemic, without collecting the few loaves and fish left of an economy in crisis to help thousands who are hungry, jobless and many without hope, this should be the real new normal if we want better days, only if there are better days for everyone without forgetting the millions who lost jobs, hope and family in this pandemic.
Modern sophistry and practical wisdom
29
Jul
Sophists accredit education and are not born, but because it is a relative age 
and a code of ethics that prevents or satisfies human instincts and passions, even though Socrates worked out happiness as a combination of virtues (in Greek it means time of moral and political excellence, today in opposite fields), and its method is irony and pharmaceutical.
We explicitly explain in the post that irony is not about proximity or skepticism, that there are exceptions to Greek origin, but that the Greek word has a definite meaning, but with successive verbs in a discussion that Socrates left against each other . part of his method is mayo-art, which is the art of parity, which is not the end or the social method, because irony takes or the opponent realizes that his preconcepters have the capacity to reflect and only conceive ideas that lead the truth.
We retaliate so much that the sophists assume that, as far as they are concerned, they do not formulate formulas, but that they satisfy their instincts in a way that satisfies the idea of virtuous politics and ethics or at a moderate pace by Socrates when the illusion is natural. because of its instinctive benefits.
Plato, as a disciple of Socrates, does not believe that Socrates himself is in Plato and refuses the Protagoras’ sophistry, or the dialogue that takes place in the virtuous vise, whether incisive or not, and this is the fundamental point for Plato’s birth. , second historians, approximately 384-383 BC, located in the gardens in the suburbs of Athens (pictured in the mosaic of Pompeii, now in the Archaeological Museum of Naples).
It is mandatory to educate or homosexuals for the sake of seriousness and assimilation to the decadence of Greek democracy brought about by the sophist school, so that you can have a relative opinion and verdict, but it is based on whether you are sensible or intelligent, dialectical or basic here, where it will be essential and overcoming doxa, an opinion and a construct of epistemia, knowledge organized in universal universes.
The evolution of dialogues, especially in Plato’s Republic, shows the dialectical evolution (it is not and could not be Hegelian for historical reasons) of the terms of the episteme until it constitutes an ethical structure that leads to the formulation of laws, but ethics as we know it today it comes from the school of one of Plato’s students, Aristotle, who elaborated “Ethics to Nicomachus”, a teleological and eudaimonist conception (Eudaimonia was happiness for the ancient Greeks), around a practical rationality, what the Greeks called phronesis, one of the elements of ethics, that it is logos plus ethos.
Aristotle created then wisdom as a virtue of practical thought, or just practical wisdom, the objective is to describe the phenomena of human action through the dialectical examination of opinions, the residue of the Socratic method, but to discover in them immutable principles, thus it is possible to overcome the doxa and reach episteme knowledge, one can describe this dialectic as knowing-understanding-knowing.
Later Aristotle. one of the students of his Platonic school, is going to do his Lyceum, which was essentially made by walking, therefore also called peripatetics, but the school has a gynasium for physical exercises, and also for socializing the acquired knowledge.
Gadamer’s philosophical hermeneutics will rework the Phrase by systematizing Heidegger’s hermeneutic circle, creating a hermeneutic philosophy.
Sophisms and fake news
28
Jul
Sophism is a wisdom used for convenience in some situation, it may be, for example,
politically correct, or it may be to favor interest groups that has the greatest correspondence with the historical origin of the word.
They were contemporaries of Socrates, who was opposed to this utilitarian knowledge, the sophists were thinkers who traveled from city to city giving speeches to attract students and charged fees to offer them education, any similarity with modern media is not a coincidence.
Fake News is false news, conspiracy theories and myths that, due to the ease of communication, spread much more quickly, but the half truths of sophisms that spread by sellers of wisdom and maxims without scientific proof and history also exist today, it is just check the price of some speakers who talk about everything, even what they have never studied.
What they sell, happiness with magic formulas, easy success, management models that do not consider the pandemic crisis, although it is true that many make money from it, the honest majority will have difficulties to put their services and products on the market, even with use of the virtual, because the reality is that the economy is in recession worldwide and many aid and solidarity will be needed.
What needs to be said is that easy news, easy success and shallow explanations are often not true, those who seek ease and simplism fall into this trap, but this has happened in all history, Karl Kraus complained in the 1920s that the press it was building a war and it happened, we may be building another, and the leaven of crisis and human difficulties will help this war happen.
Even if we want peace, spreading false news is creating radicalizations, sparking small wars that polarized into big wars, there are well-intentioned people who do this, baseless denunciations and half-truths are there, so at the origin of a fake news is a sophistry, often built by intelligent people who should not favor ignorance.
Dictators know that ignorance favors them, but also those who know the horror of dictatorships and wars can favor them with half truths, to facilitate the exposure of a social, cultural (including religious) and political position is more easy to throw a half-truth, everyone in this or that position is corrupt, fascist or communist, but this is the beginning of a small war.
The truth costs a personal price that is often expensive, but it favors that the war ahead is not waged for an unjust reason, for a stone or a shot fired at an innocent, our daily “wars” against diversity of opinion , they are not dialogues and do not favor peace, in the post-pandemic they need a lot of solidarity and the good will of everyone to overcome difficulties, there is neither happiness nor easy peace.
How to live a crisis and the stable plateau
27
Jul
Edgar Morin and Patrick Viveret wrote in 2010 “How to live in times of crisis” 
(Portuguese edition of 2013), and they certainly were not considered a pandemic, but they are already being seen as a potential horizon for humanity, and that horizon has certainly been aggravated .
Thus, philosophers and other types of visionaries who try to have a peaceful future have no foundation, or may even have, but based on philosophies and thoughts already overcome, a pandemic that demands even more from the great strategists and humanitarian thinkers.
On page 37 of the book it shows the symptoms of the crisis: “Wall Street knows only two feelings, euphoria and panic”, even without knowing it is what they think or promise “happiness”, but it is false and it follows depression, once analyzed more sensible can prepare for the next challenge.
The stable plateau has arrived, in terms of deaths, because the infection data are inaccurate, shows these peaks, now it is moving towards a stable plateau not only in Brazil, but in the world as a whole, it is because the infection cycle has reached the whole world, and in Brazil an entire country.
The cycle can be perceived as not as isolated poles of infection, even countries without new cycles that can be affected, but note that New Zealand and Taiwan are islands, so isolated by sea, they are more controllable, but trade can also reduce these countries.
Edgar Morin and his collaborator published in the book “Three mutations” important in the crisis and which are valid for a social situation of the pandemic, as they represent the ancient world, the world “nation states, industrial society, a segmented organization (see conflicts in the USA x China)… or the ecological challenge poses a question about what we are going to do with our planet ”(p. 57).
An industrial revolution put life in a frenetic way of life, “a classic industrial society that organizes itself in the classic sesame that you make of your life?”, And that remains a question that questions everyone, or recently launched in Portuguese “You have to change your life” by Peter Sloterdijk puts this around anthropotechnics, bringing to the debate a technical question.
MORIN, E.; VIVERET, P. Como viver em tempo de crise? (How to live in times of crisis?) Tradução: Clóvis Marques. Rio de Janeiro: Bertrand do Brasil, 2013.
Evil and humanism in crisis
22
Jul
Idealism continues to defend its ideology of State, of Ethics (morals and virtues
are other things, for example, ending corruption), now defending nations, a stronger State (left and right in the bottom want this) and for this reason one can speak of the zoon politikon, Aristotle’s political animal, then it is necessary to understand what the political animal is.
There are two conditions that may not become political: being degressed (we would say excluded today) or being superhuman (or divine, thus of a higher order than human laws and rules).
This is the first premise to understand “Rules for the Human Park – a response to Heidegger’s Letter on Humanism”, it is not, therefore, about seeing man as a “bug” in the zoo, but as a “natural” animal but that his humanism is in check.
The controversy that followed his speech at the castle of Elmau in Bavaria meant that the attempt (from the schools of Plato and Aristotle) to program history and humanism through social engineering failed, another important issue is the “domestication” issue.
Domestication is also not new, the philosopher received a direct influence from Nietzsche, and Foucault also addressed the topic, his proposal at the Conference that later became a book, was to reverse Heidegger’s priority of the ontological dimension over ontics (Sloterdijk, 1999,).
The controversial cause is because the philosopher wondered if we would not pass from the fatality “from birth to chosen birth and prenatal selection” (Sloterdijk, 2000) which was the main point of the controversy trying to show this the Nazi and fascist ideas of the war period .
The issues of genetic manipulation, which in Germany suffered strict restrictions until 2002 and the leadership of the Frankfurt School by Haberrmas were the background of this controversy, but what is fundamental is the humanism of Heidegger and Levinas, the theme of the Elmau conference is a main aspect, forgotten by many commentators, because humanism is really in crisis.
As for Sloterdijk’s response, he himself returns to the theme of in Spheres I differently when speaking of an aortic manifestation, the inorganic over the organic, after all, man came from Earth even by the biblical metaphor, so from the inorganic clay God “blew” the nostrils and introduced the spirit, like it or not, the theme is metaphysical and not religious, and if something aortic happens.
Time will not be the first time in history, man came after the heavens, the earth and the waters, again also in the various cosmogonies (even non-Christian) and the earth itself has already had other manifestations, such as the one that eliminated the dinosaurs, because a new one cannot occur, and it helps us to face the period (or civilization) crisis that we face.
The weather is different from ours; the comet returns after 6,800 years to visit us, we didn’t even have a record of it, and when it returns after another 6,800 years what it finds, only God knows, now is neowise (see the picture).
Has the pandemic changed humanitarian consciousness?
20
Jul
In his book Science with conscience, Edgar Morin asked the question:
“Does scientific adventure lead us to catastrophe or to a better world?”, We replaced spiritual and popular knowledge and, in the meantime, we were unable to avoid war, we fought a pandemic, but and will our humanitarian relationship improve? I wanted to believe so, but it seems not.
We arrived in Brazil for the extension of the Plateau, which we announced since the beginning of May (post), but only now the major media and world organizations recognize it, and it should not fall until the plateau extends throughout the national territory, which already is happening, it runs until the end of July.
Many reflections arose about improving family relationships, and many improved, slowing down the fast pace of modern life, even decreased, but few people seem willing to a new lifestyle, a “new normal”, most want to go back to life previous: parties, consumption and addictions.
Of course, the pandemic only accelerated what was already going on, families with difficulties, with forced daily coexistence worsened, but those who did not find time, now have time, help with daily tasks, change the logic of polarized relationships and find the Other .
We made several posts in the past week about the good, indicating that its fragility (the philosopher Martha Nussbaum wrote a book about it in thought in classical philosophy), but the fragility of the good is different from the frivolity, it is neither futile nor superficial.
It is still possible to change the tendency of the pandemic for greater awareness and care for the pandemic, as well as (before it’s too late) awareness of social problems that are fundamentally humanitarian, respect for rights, diversity of opinions, races and creeds, etc.
We imagine that the pandemic cycle could be shorter, and also that the virus would be mitigated or other false views about a pandemic, even before some believe that it does not exist, however the fundamental humanitarian problem is the most serious and for him conscience must pay attention.
The maxim of phenomenology is worthless, there is no awareness in an abstract sense, although “symbolic evil” can create bubbles in which some groups survive, this is the danger of a non-phenomenal abstract awareness, awareness of the pandemic can help us improve our perception and sensitivity of the humanitarian problem, which is already epochal (transition of times) and could become civilizing, as risks of an even more serious dehumanization.
A change is possible that starts from each attitude, from each personal action on the big problems and each one requires phenomenological awareness, that is, directing the interaction to that problem with its contours, limitations, and weaknesses.
We can reverse the humanitarian curve, but time is pressing and the pandemic has accelerated it.
Symbolic and structural evil
17
Jul
It being clear that it is not a question of the struggle between good and evil, but
the absence of good or the banality of evil, there is then a night in the West that cannot be unveiled if we remain superficial or “frivolous” as some authors point out, good is fragile, but not frivolous.
To understand the problem of “symbolic evil” addressed by Paul Ricoeur, one must look at its bases in Husserl’s eidetic phenomenology and in Gabriel Marcel’s existentialist philosophy, his search is what gives meaning to freedom (the modern view of free will ) and the reciprocal relationship between human voluntary and involuntary experience, this is essential to understand symbolic evil.
The original appearance of the question of consciousness (of something) comes from the connection that Franz Brentano makes when he returns to the subcategory intentionality, which broke the Cartesian identification between conscience and self-awareness, where intentionality reveals itself to be turned towards the outside and is thus projected outwardly with objective guidelines ranging from perception and imagination to will, affectivity and the apprehension of values (empathy stands out).
What is voluntary and involuntary depends on this “great thesis”, while Husserl operated in conscience to the analysis of perception and “representative” acts, Ricoeur extended to the spheres of affection and will .
So what is voluntary is the alternation between the vibrant impulse of emotion and the point of view of habit, while the involuntary “absolute” (symbolic or structural) is under what he called character (not in the moral sense, but in the sense of “ feature”).
The point of support that he has in Gabriel Marcel’s existentialist philosophy, without abandoning “eidetic analysis” is the problem of a subject capable of distancing himself from desires and powers, owner of his (and thus voluntary) actions and servant of the needs of the unconscious, character, an area not revealed in real consciousness and in life, although it seems to be outside the powers of the concrete, the historical, or what he calls the occasion, is the empirical realm of the will, seen in three moments.
The first is the human decision resulting from a project for the world (what Heidegger will change to a world view), the action includes both the dimension of a project with others in the world, as well as personal or subjective, however it does not separate and calls them -the body, and the body is seen as both voluntary and involuntary, but there is a “consent”.
Thus Ricoeur shows the exaggerations of idealism, and makes the “habit” in such a way as to inhabit it and make it habitable, and what the author points out that man can fail (his work O fallible man, from the 60s) , and the constituted guilt and the conscience of it are expressed in the symbols of culture.
Affirms the importance of mythical language to treat this symbolic, as well as the parable of the chaff and the wheat (Mt 13,24-29), which states that the “good” seed of the wheat blooms with the chaff (which must later be discarded), there are three situations: the seed that grows, the one that is suffocated by the chaff (symbolism of evil) and the one that falls between stones and has no roots (Ricoeur’s character would be this).
Paul Ricoeur (1967). The symbolic of evil. Beacon Press (Original published in 1960).
The reason and the evil
16
Jul
To demonstrate two truths, Agostinho de Hipona wrote a few pages in his book
“On Free Will”, practically the whole book II (from chapters 3 to 17), where we concluded all the goods processed by God, including the free- agency, and the question is welcome must be given to man.
Both Augustine (De Trinitate) and Boethius (Opuscula) defend the cooperation between faith and reason, but it will be in the High Middle Ages that Tomás de Aquino and also Duns Scotto, in different variations (realist and nominalist) defender that the use of reason is complementary of faith.
While Tomás de Aquino defends a distinction between Being and essence, Scotus will elaborate a law of analogy, which states that we cannot conceive or that it is something that does not exist, as a thing that exists (is) that it is (qui est).
What is important in both Thomas Aquinas and Duns Scotto is a complementarity between faith and reason, as an idea that Descartes, Kant, Leibniz and Hobbes are heirs of them being too simplistic, or that they will be replaced by cases of faith, by rational arguments , or fact that is important, must be studied from the ontological aspects.
Thus, the ontological argument was corrected by Franz Brentano, incorrectly called a neo-Thomist, as only one subcategory “went up” to “being” which is consciousness, a hermeneutics and the phenomenology that is taken up from it, and remains in Husserl, Heidegger and Gadamer is an ontological philosophy, having in common a metaphysical question of Being.
Hanna Arendt and Paul Ricoeur, who come from these changes, return to the question of “evil”, but as questions of reason and all modern literature is analyzed (Descartes, Kant and Hegel).
The Question of Evil in History
14
Jul
A hermeneutic philosopher Jan Patocka, is quoted by Ricoeur, although it is
not directly linked to evil, it can give a Socratic origin to the question of the question of evil: “The loss of ‘sense’ is not the fall in ‘nonsense’, but access to the quality of meaning implied in the search itself. Jan Patocka thus rediscovers the Socratic theme of ‘soul care’ and ‘examined life’ “(Ricoeur, 1999, p. 16), is in the preface to Jan Patocka’s book “ Heretical Essay on the History of Philosophy”
Plato elaborated the Sumo well, which in fact is the elaboration of an ethics, the Good and Beautiful must be sought by the moral subject to harmonize internally, and be aware of the Good, in that sense that the care of the soul can be thought of and Socrates’ examined life.
Aristotle elaborates his famous Nicomachean Ethics, where he explores the idea of the search for virtue, so the natural man is not good, it is through the practice of virtues that he becomes good, but both in Plato and in Aristotle this virtue has a social meaning , although it is confused with morals, it is not.
The sense of moral evil, in the sense of vices of the soul, is elaborated in Augustine of Hippo, in book VII entitled “The idea of God and the Origin of evil”, evil is disorderly agape (different from the philosophy of eros and filia), so it is in the absence of the choice of higher things to choose the lower ones (this is the deepest sense of agape), that we adhere to vices, and disharmonize.
Although the theme can be found in several medieval authors, such as Tomás de Aquino and Duns Scotto, the sense of evil is deepened in the theistic sense and the philosophical is linked to Plato’s Ethics, remaining the idea of virtue, worked around the Ethics of Aristotle, wrote Thomas Aquinas: “Virtue designates a certain perfection of potency”, (Summa Theológica, 1st section, 2nd part, q. 55 a.1).
In modern times, it is Paul Ricoeur who takes up the issue in his book “The symbolic of evil”, but it is in the delicate passage from the Renaissance to Modernity that the distance between moral and ethical evil is deepened and confused, as if they were the same, leaving the virtue of being thought out.
RICOEUR, P. Prefácio a PATOCKA, J. – Essais hérétiques sur la philosophie de l’histoire. Trad. Erika Abrams, Lagrasse: Verdier, 1999.
Looking without seeing, listening without understanding
10
Jul
The rush, the hectic life, the anxiety made us insensitive on a daily basis, on
the social plane the stubborn reigns, where the third party has no time, follows the logic of Truth and False, which is valid for the world of digital equipment, but it shouldn’t be in the logic of human thought.
The third included by Barsarab and Stefan Lupascu, is also in the quantum principles and is gradually reaching digital physical devices (now quantum), and some advanced teleportation experiments have been carried out (see the article), which expands the concept to space , one can go from A to B, without going through the third intermediary, which introduces the discontinuity.
But the social, human and political logic remains binary, Manichean and gradually leads to a confrontation at a time when social forces should unite for the common enemy that is the virus and the consequences that it will bring socially, we remember that the Spanish flu followed both wars, despite countless warnings from wise thinkers and philosophers, to mystics.
As Morin says (see the lecture) it seems that we are walking like somnambulists in the dark, the process that could correspond to global solidarity is going the other way around, we want to include but exclude, we love only equals, knowledge has become obscure.
The biblical words follow, as it is in Isaiah (6: 9): “You will hear, without understanding, you will look, without seeing … because the heart of this people has become desensitized”, and even in times of world difficulties it seems that folly endures.
Evangelist Matthew says of his time, but it also serves for the present moment (Mt 13: 16-17) “Happy are you, because your eyes see and your ears hear. Truly I tell you, many prophets and the righteous wished to see what you see, and did not see, wished to hear what you hear, and did not hear ”, but you can still open your ears and change the route.
It is a time of deeper awareness for those who want change, and to listen more attentively to the signs of the times for those who believe and know the kingdom of God on earth will come.
