RSS
 

Arquivo para a ‘Cognition’ Categoria

Spirit, World and unit

08 Jul

There is something in our consciousness that we can not define exactly what it is, a spirit, a mechanism of decision, a “vision of the world,” the certain thing is that what we call interiority has a deep layer that the philosophers of classical antiquity have called of “anima”, that which gives life, that animates and that is ultimately also a vision of the world.
Whether we like it or not, we have in the interior an “anima”, already the pre-Socratic philosopher Pythagoras (580-496 BC) believed in the metempsychosis that was the transmigration of the soul from one body to the other after death, and so in his worldview he believed in immortality of the soul.
Plutarch was also the author of “Consumption of the Flesh”, a theme that not only speaks of the soul, but initiates a separation between the body of the flesh and the immortal soul.
The theme is deepened by Plato in The Republic, his anima mundi (“soul of the world, from ancient Latin had another sense that was the” psyché tou pantós “), has the worldview of a shared soul or regent force of the universe by which the divine thought can manifest itself in laws that affect matter, so there is an immaterial force, which is at the same time inseparable from matter, which provides form and movement.
His doctrine was not endorsed by Aristotle, who in his work De anima, approaches more knowledge or active intellect, from which reflect from the Stoic and Neoplatonic schools, so the indirect link between Plotinus and Plato passes through Aristotle.
Plotinus will be a rare philosopher of antiquity attempting a non-dualistic concept of soul, the soul described in his work Eleades, part of the concept of the hypostasis that proceeds from the creative power, which is actually a third hypostase, a nous that generates the soul of the world.
Among the medieval thinkers who maintained the ideas of the anima mundi are Ficino, Pico dela Mirandola and Giordano Bruno with hermetic teachings, Cambridge pioneers, German vitalists Angelus Silesius, Goethe and Schelling, who had great influence on Bergson and through him Vladimir Vernadsky and Teilhard de Chardin.
Schelling wrote The Soul of the World (1798), although idealist influence guarded a worldview trying to unite organic and inorganic nature by connecting it to a continuum.

The noosphere here is the idea that a “soul-world” can cooperate with the contemporary world and a totalizing vision, the world view of the planet as a “common house” and that has a “soul-world” present and can not sustain a citizenship. Roger Scruton (75 years) is a contemporary author who tackles controversially the theme.

The noosphere here is the idea that a “soul-world” can cooperate with the contemporary world and a totalizing vision, the world view of the planet as a “common house” and that has a “soul-world” present and can not sustain a citizenship. Roger Scruton (75 years) is a contemporary author who tackles controversially the theme.

 

 

The crisis of religion and ignorance

26 Jun

In the foreword to the Brazilian edition of the book “The Essence of Christianity” (Feuerbach, 2007), the translator José da Silva Brandão presents a good synthesis of German thought and the root of the crisis of Western thought can be inserted in this context.
When Marx criticized religion, he did not criticize any religion, he criticized the synthesis of his time that hovered in the idealistic German thought, coming all practically from Kant, although later Schopenhauer and Nietzsche came to disrupt this, but also his thought can only be thought of From this crisis, Kierkegaard may perhaps be thought of, but his criticism is exactly the German philosophy of the time.
In the preface says the Brazilian translator: “after Kant, there were only two exits: either to legitimize human thought as something that only finds its element elaborable in the ideal and phenomenological field (Fichte, Shcelling and Hegel), or to recognize conscious knowledge is only an effect or superficial manifestation or even a representation of the most profound unconscious causes, such as instincts, desires, etc. (Schopenhauer, Eduard von Hartmann). “(Feuerbach, 2007, p.7), which is the presentation of the translator José da Silva Brandão.
It presents, in our view, Schleiermacher as a disciple of Hegel, he was a his reader, but his reintroduction of hermeneutics is fundamental to a critique of contemporary thought, by reducing God to what can be known by feeling.
For him as for many Hegelians “religion is anthropology” and not culture, this introduces religion into historical analysis and denies the existence of an essential and eternal Being. It is in this context that the so-called Hegelian Left appears, Marx calls them old Hegelians (Feuerbach, Strauss, Bruno Bauer, Max Stimer and Karl Marx who will break them), while the margin with two criticisms are Schopenhauer and Nietzsche.
Marx’s criticism of Feuerbach in the book Theses on Feuerbach is in fact theses against idealism and the old German idealism, in addition to the “idea” Feuerbach is an atheist theologian.
For Feuerbach, “man’s knowledge of God is only the self-knowledge of man and his own essence.”
He brings about a total reduction of theology and of all philosophy to anthropology since “the absolute being, the God of man, is his own essence” and it is in this anthropology that much of contemporary Christian thought is based, religious life continues.
This is religious alienation: to make as God something that, in fact, is unique and only the expression of man himself. Nietzsche will call this “death of God”, but its context will be different.
FEUERBACH, Ludwig. A essencia da cristandade (The essence of Christianity). Petrópolis, RJ: Vozes, 2007.
EdgarMorin says that the education system does not only produce knowledge, it produces ignorance and blindness, here is a video in the Roda Viva Program of the year 2000:.

 

Consciousness and Freedom in Morin

25 Jun

Freedom, liberalism, autonomy of reason, possibilities of countless experiences this was the fascination of the man of modernity, however he forgot his being. In his works almost always functional, Edgar Morin says in Freedom Anthropology: “Freedom is a possibility of choice”, therefore, between real and possible possibilities, without leaving aside, of course, the possibility of exploring and understanding what is imaginary.
Modern man with rationalism and the exploitation of knowledge: “Sapere aude,” cried Kant, he wanted to get rid of the constraints of the environment, and with the possibilities of ample use of intelligence and conscience he found himself subject to norms, taboos, myths, ideas, beliefs and ultimately to society, which imposes laws and prohibitions.
But Morin warns that we are also possessed by our ideas, and not only him but a whole group of thinkers affirm that we walk towards uniformity.
He described his method of the empire of environments, with this it is necessary to replace the concept of external environment that imposes fatalities on living beings by the “idea” of dependent antonomy [1], we are subject to the physicochemical environment, for example, but these are integrated into a living self-organization [2].
The third point is to understand what autonomy means, a more concrete form of freedom, it is dependent on the external environment from which it withdraws energy and organization, all living autonomy is dependent [3].
Before we are born, we have already posed with respect to the fetus inside the mother, we have inherited genes from the parents, then in the external environment the forms of accidents, losses, encounters intervene, and within each one there are several decisions that cannot be taken as the logic of decision of a machine, this involves aspects of changes of values and even of states of the soul, a conversion to a faith or a deconversion with new effects.
In a recent talk, Morin said that we walked like sleepwalkers to disaster, this is not the direction of an autonomy of freedom, but rather the idea of a greater restriction, what Martha Nussbaum called the “empire of fear.”
We return to becoming automata, and as we walk as somnambulists, possessed of a certain automatism, a certain possession, but even being machines, we are non-trivial machines, but the ideal is to overcome the machine state and acquire true consciousness: consciousness of Being.
In consciousness is the act of self-affirmation of the subject and in the act of self-affirmation of the subject is the act of self-affirmation of consciousness.
With all the criticism of the current conditions, Morin says that it is possible to live the poetry, see the video:

[1] E. MORIN, La Méthode 1. Paris, Seuil, 1977; idem, La Méthode 2, Paris, Seuil, 1980.
[2] Idem, La Méthode 2, págs. 108-110.
[3] Its dependence on the ecosystem is circular. The living portion of the ecosystem (biocenosis) consists of the interaction between living beings and depends on them, which in turn depend on it.

 

The supersapiens and the Artificial Intelligence

17 Jun

It is common from a simplistic analysis to demonize the use of new technologies and now with the emergence of Artificial Intelligence, the batteries are turned away, of course there are no ethical objections that are always recommended, but this is true for all areas, including science and religion.
The documentary Supersapiens by director and screenwriter Markus Mooslechner explores the most advanced potential of artificial intelligence, which would link one mind to another, showing that the world is moving towards a collective technological consciousness, the title is an allusion to homo sapiens evolution of the human mind.
In a different perspective Jean Gabriel Ganascia wrote about “The Myth of Singularity”, the idea that a machine can never surpass the human mind, but the film explores a totally new possibility a kind of “networked minds” that from the point of view of a metaphor (the film is not) n In the film, the experts interviewed say that the era we are entering is an era of experimenting with an artificial intelligence connecting minds and their consciousnesses.
In the past, human physical ability was to measure it’s productivity; even though it could be accumulated collectively, now in the information age, intellect and mind have come to fulfill this central role, and immersive technologies profoundly affect our experience.
Today, technologies are totally immersive, deeply affecting the way we experience life, begins with an account of human origin, 300 thousand years ago. The setting is Jebel Irhoud, a cluster of caves 100 kilometers from Marrakesh, Morocco, where some studies indicate that it is the beginning of human life on earth. It is late afternoon, 100,000 years before the emergence of the first modern humans, a group runs into a cave: dirty, shaggy yet human hair.
As this history was discovered, and in the 1960s, a mining group began operations in Jebel Irhoud.
An explosion revealed a cave filled with sediments from the Pleistocene epoch (period between 1.8 million and 126 thousand years ago), there and not now in 2019, our future begins to be drawn, technology is not a more anomaly the very relationship of man with nature and with its origin.
The video illustrates the documentary, not his trailer, but it’s interesting:

 

Lessons from Kant and his view of metaphysics

13 Jun

There is no doubt that everything referring to the spirit and subjectivity in Kant is intrinsically linked to the laws in the sense of modern laws, although they were only consolidated later, and this was his contribution, can read his book on logic , and what he thought as an idealistic philosophy for modernity.
Kant facilitates this view by expressing the scholastic meaning of the word, Philosophy would aim only at ability; on the contrary, his philosophy “within the limits of reason” would be true wisdom, not that which comes from above, but the rational-enlightenment: “In this scholastic meaning of the word, Philosophy aims only at ability; with respect to the concept of the world, on the contrary, it aims at utility.
From the first point of view it is, therefore, a doctrine of ability; of the latter, a doctrine of wisdom: – the lawmaker of reason, and to this extent the philosopher is not an artist of reason, but a legislator. “(Kant, 1992, p. 41).
What was constructed was to try to overcome a “philosophical dogma”, which aimed to elevate philosophy in a kind of “pure theory”, for him the dogmatic philosophies led to metaphysics, while knowledge in the “limits of reason” imposed cognitive borders. Kant contrasts his philosophy with scholasticism because of his clear separation between dogmatic philosophies descended from metaphysics of his own which has the main characteristic of knowing its limits and its cognitive frontiers.
Not by chance, near to this time did good philosophers also be scientists (in the modern sense), Hobbes, Kant himself, Descartes, Leibniz, and others, each with a specificity, but all with a view centered on reason and “laws” of State.
What happened was that the concept of dogma gradually gave way to the observation of empirical phenomena and a new way of dealing and a world view, the truth hitherto shrouded in metaphysics and philosophy as the first science gives way to scientism. This new mentality could already be noticed in Nicholas of Cusa, it cost the life of Giordano Bruno, that is, the change of the Greek conception of a world closed in a Being in the molds parmendians, thus the Being is, and the non-Being is not, without possibility of third hypothesis.
This new mentality could already be noticed in Nicholas of Cusa, it cost the life of Giordano Bruno, that is, the change of the Greek conception of a world closed in a Being in the molds parmendians, thus the Being is, and the non-Being is not, without possibility of third hypothesis.
The reason we attach this to the Christian idea of the Holy Spirit is exactly where the misunderstanding of Christian ideals for Enlightenment, the action of the spirit outside reason, was metaphysical, and the idea of transcendence was linked only to the objects of study, then came the empiricism.
Thus Kant’s general framework is to make epistemology, logic, and ethics central to philosophy, with Cosmology, Psychology, and Theology attached to a “special” metaphysics, and Ontology confined to a general, almost dead, ontology in your thinking.

KANT, I. Lógica (Tradução do texto original estabelecido por Gottlob Benjamin Jäsche de Guido Antônio de Almeida). Rio de Janeiro, Ed. Tempo Brasileiro: 1992. 

 

The Philosophy of Michel Serres

06 Jun

I have always been impressed by Serres’s philosophy, but I could not make a synthesis, at first it seemed physical, sometimes metaphysical, sometimes chaotic, sometimes logical-mathematical, sometimes organized and schematic, other times poetic and chaotic.

It was his death, and the impossibility of saying new things through his mouth that made a synthesis, perhaps because he will never write, because whenever he wrote there was something new, there was light to each new work he wrote. In his text body variations clarifies his choice of character Harlequin: “Why does Harlequin wear cloths mingled, inlaid, striped, stained?

Because he imitated everyone and his masters, he acquired form and color from them. The density and depth of his clothes and the surface mosaic of his cape provide a certain idea of ​​the immense body memory. (…) By stripping and re-establishing them, Harlequin remembers the gestures (of the people, in the sense of masks or disguises) that the body schema stores. “(Serres, 2004, 79).

Serres’s philosophy is light and at the same time new, for him learning is invention, as philosophy is (Serres, 1991: 27), thus creating the figure of the “learned third”, which for one who starts from the mathematical logic, is precisely a rupture because between the A and the non-A, there is a third possibility: the learned one.

It thus creates the pedagogical society, for which it predicts a revolution in education, with information in full circulation because of new technologies, wrote this in 1997. Michel Serres is a leading philosopher, there is still no pedagogy that has a direct influence on the new type of pedagogical practice that the new technologies provide, his concept and miscegenation, of continuous learning has much to add to anyone who seriously studies the new paths of education.

It is necessary that a southpaw leans to the right and that the right hand to the left in order to awaken a certain animal stillness, which seems more prone to the mortal, which he calls “mortal sleep” and to warm each one.

It is necessary that the southpaw leans to the right and the right hand to the left in order to awaken thus from their animal stillness or their mortal slumber, to warm their paralysis, from which may arise a “learned third.”

Thank you Serres, go in peace to your “Legend of the Angels”, they wait you. 

References:

Serres, Michel. Variações do Corpo (Variations on the Body). Rio de Janeiro: Bertrand Brasil, 2004.

________. O Contrato Natural (The natural contract). Translation by Beatriz Sioux. Rio de Janeiro: Nova Fronteira, 1991.

 

Order and chaos in Serres

05 Jun

Starting from Lucretius and Leibniz, the epistemology of Michel Serres is a strong opposition to positivism, which suppressed the question of Why? Putting in its place the how.
Lucretius was a visionary, while everyone was talking about the mechanics of solids, Lucretius promoted fluid mechanics, perhaps Bauman had cursed him.
]His theory of clinamen, that atoms, in their free fall into emptiness, deviate from their rectilinear trajectory as little as necessary to make it possible to say,
The work of Serres on Lucretius, De rerum natura (Of Nature), of the Latin poet, generally seen only as a poetic work, contains in its bulge the principle of turbulence, essential for the development of contemporary physics.
Moreover, the writings of Lucretius, dating from the first century BC, anticipated the theory of non-order, which today is called entropy in modern physics.
What happened in classical thought was that the deviation was absurd, because it was contrary to the principle of inertia, and that made experimentation difficult. Now deviation, strictly, is the principle of life, it is what determines the flows, to exist is rather if there is something that separates, that disjunct and that is the existent previous to stability and permanence.
In this sense it says that it is precisely from the noise, from the bifurcation, as a declination, a function of the rarity where we find something that if Batenson classified as “information is the difference that makes the difference”, distinct from the entropy, the diffuse disorder, is what he called neguentropia, the degree of order and predictability of a system.
Its declination, Serres joins the inclination of Leibniz, where nature is in an oblique figure that is constituted on a parallel background. It is the act of creating something, or recreating itself, birth that overcomes death, a deviation instead of nothingness, a bifurcation, reminds me of a figure of chaotic attractors and functions, to which Serres himself also sees relationships.
On top of it, one turns to something else, as in Heraclitus, there are retakes, re-beginnings, or just feedbacks and circles that form eddies that are undone again, “rolling on inclined planes.”
It is from these relations that the five senses of communication will be given and the third included, the main elements of the thought of Michel Serres.

Serres, M. The birth of Physics (in english), (in portugueses) O nascimento da física no texto de Lucrécio. Correntes e turbulências. Trad. Péricles Trevisan. São Carlos, Ed. Unesp e Edufscar, 2003

 

Ascesis and the community

31 May

Some assumptions of the community to become a co-immunity are related where the idea of judgment, understanding of the distinction (seen differently, see post), have to be some form of self-immunization like ascesis.
The lack of effectiveness of advanced forms of co-immunity is due to the fact that many communities are based on the principle of judgment, or even combating difference, do not clearly understand the distinction, be it cultural, religious, or otherwise.
Thus, we can look like a community, but we must understand that an important effect is the respect for the life-giving action and open to all who are “outside” to avoid dogmatism and exclusion.
The return to nationalist concepts and cultural prejudices are nothing more than a form of asceticism of a nation-community that does not understand open co-immunity and respects distinction.
The ascesis in various religions always depends on these two actions: one of self-immunity or individual ascesis, and another a co-immunity or social ascesis for which one can place the aptitudes and talents at the disposal of society in general and of others.
It is possible to verify these two vectors in diverse groups, religions and cultures, but it is necessary to verify that there are forms of control and “judgment” in group that end up to collide the individual ascesis with the collective, and the opposite is not always true, one can have an individual ascesis that even acting little in the collective sense serves as an orientation to the others of the group to avoid self-centered and non-dialogical communities.
Seeing if this is compatible with Christian religiosity and a correct view of the Holy Spirit, I have seen not only that it is correlate but that it can serve as inspiration for a true spiritual asceticism for those who are Christians.
Also at the ascension of Jesus, an eternal and visible ascension to the apostles, He makes an affirmation in this sense Lk 24,46: “I will send upon you the one my Father has promised. Therefore stay in the city until you are clothed with the power from on high, “that is, from the Spirit.

 

The approach of difference without distinction

28 May

Before addressing the necessary introduction of distinction rather than difference, let us examine two thinkers who have worked on the issue of difference in contemporaneity.
The first is Jacques Derridá he who comes to be considered a “difference” philosopher (the translation taken from several different translators and interpreters to neographism différrance), comes from the text of the book Margins of philosophy initially, to present a justification for a new spelling of the question.
The main elements draws from Sausurre’s linguistics and introduces the semantic approach and philosophy of the same, and the controversial point with the discourse of contemporaneity is the idea of making an ontological approach to difference in a path that does not restrict the necessary linkage of being . In the text Derridá points out the difference as: “It has already been necessary to emphasize that difference is not, does not exist, is not a present being (on), whatever it is, and we will be led to accentuate what it is not, everything, and therefore, it has no existence or essence. “(DERRIDÁ, 191, p.37).
One can clearly see the polemic by the above phrase, but it is more complex still, the aspect that concerns Derridá’s approach is that it introduces the idea of difference by constructing a semantic and philosophical approach to it, both essential in language studies.
Another equally important author is Giles Deleuze, whose question is whether we need to represent the difference? the point in question makes four essential points of representation: identity in form the determined concept, analogy in the relation between ultimate determinable concepts, and, the opposition in the relation of determinations within the concept, and the similarity in the determined object of the own concept. In his first book, Difference and Repetition, Deleuze begins his study of the concept of difference and addresses, as we pointed out in the previous post, indifference, namely, the undifferentiated abyss or “nothing black “And also the” nothing white “.
The French philosopher says that “difference is generally distinguished from diversity or otherness,” since, according to him, Two terms differ when they are others, not by themselves, but by something” and here, it addresses the question of contrariety and contradiction, making it clear that only “a contrariness in essence or in form gives us the concept of a difference that is itself essential, “although enlightening adds little to what is distinct and needs distinction as a being, again repeats in a certain way the ontological argument of Derridá.
References:
Deleuze, G. Diferença e Repetição. Rio de Janeiro: Graal, 2006.
Derrida, J. Margens da Filosofia. Trad. Joaquim Torres Costa, António M. Magalhães; revisão técnica Constança Marcondes Cesar. -Campinas, SP : Papirus, 1991.

 

Distinction and difference: the modern community

27 May

The modern community was built on the liberal concepts of state and individuals, is nothing more than the concept of homeland and nation, in the sense of love of national symbols.
The concept evolved, philosopher Zigmund Bauman states that “belonging to a community means denying part of our individuality in the name of a structure set up to satisfy our needs for intimacy and the construction of an” identity “, which goes against the very concept of liquid that he developed, would this be a liquidity?
The confusion established is the difference between culture and nation, many people have cultures that go beyond a limited territory, there are people that do not even have territory, and the internet itself is often called “deterritorized”, but remain the distinction and difference.
If instead of using the word difference, in philosophy seen as one that gives importance to the study of the singularity and particularity of each person, and make a small change to the distinction that is the encounter between knowledge and visions of different worlds, we approach more gently to the concept of community, than to ignore identity.
Although one can find difference as the “determination of otherness” (Abagnano’s philosophy dictionary, for example), there will still remain a certain shadow of difference such as inequality, inequity and not the right to distinguish between peoples and cultures.
The philosophers Gilles Deleuze and Jacques Derridá treated the difference also in the sense of deconstruction, albeit with different nuances, in Deleuze’s concept, addressing two aspects of indifference, namely the undifferentiated abyss or “nothing black” and “nothing white “.
And therefore levels of differences are addressed. In the light of Derrida’s philosophy, especially in his works Margins of Philosophy and Gramatology, différance is for this philosopher who, together with deconstruction, constitutes the background of all the his thinking.
Byung Chull-Han, on the contrary, approaches that the critique of modernity is precisely the fact that everything is very similar, states that the current society: “it is the lack of energy of dialogical link. When the dialog disappears from the scene, a theater of affections appears. These are dialogically structured. They imply a denial of the different.” (HAN, 2015: 80).
It is therefore important to affirm the different, and to understand the distinction as part of the culture and the Being itself, however, there is a dialogue, as a French saying goes: “vivre the différance“.

Bauman, Zygmunt, 1925-2017. Community: the search for security in the present world (in Portuguese) / Zygmunt Bauman; Pliny Dentzien translation. – Rio de Janeiro: Jorge Zahar Ed., 2003.

Han, Byung Chull. The salvation of Belo (in portuguese). Lisboa: Relógio d’Água, 2015.