Arquivo para a ‘Cognition’ Categoria
Post-truth time or hermeneutics
19
Jun
Hermeneutics is one that allows a worldview and an interpretation of different
facts, it does not mean manipulation of the truth, but exactly the unveiling of what ideologies and non-practical theories hide (there is no phronesis, practical wisdom).
What happens is that the search for the absolute spirit, the establishment of total truths was actually totalitarian, that is, they did not admit a different worldview, the dialog was simply linked to a pre-established truth, so there were truths a priori .
Knowledge for Immanuel Kant begins with experience, and reason would organize this matter according to its own forms, with the existing structures in knowledge, so information would be a way to organize the matter that comes from experience.
Although “a priori” is generally referred to as an adjective of knowledge, it is also used as an adjective to modify nouns, such as truth, so there would be truth a priori, and this is one of the tenets of idealism.
But the truth for centuries has remained veiled, it has always been established by certain forms of power, but this is the time when the truths begin to be revealed, not by journalists and controlled groups that are part of fans, but the armed crowd of photos and cell phones , cameras present in many surveillance places, but the big leap is awareness.
It is no coincidence that this is the great current topic, from philosophical hermeneutics, the question of historical consciousness that is no longer deterministic, romantic or dogmatic to the question of whether intelligent machines can be aware and ultimately “imitate” man .
For Christian culture this can go to another point, a time when the truth is revealed, according to the evangelist Matthew 10: 26-29:
“Do not be afraid of men, because there is nothing covered up that is not revealed, and there is nothing of hidden that is not known. What I say to you in the darkness, say it in the light of day; what you hear at the ear, proclaim it over the roofs! Do not be afraid of those who kill the body, but cannot kill the soul! On the contrary, fear the one who can destroy the soul and the body in hell! ”.
Philosopher Peter Sloterdijk, who is not a Christian, said that the pandemic put us “all on our knees”, I would say that not everyone still has those who do not admit the mystery beyond our ability to understand and among the religious those who are not yet knees, at least out of compassion for those who suffer.
Saint John Damascene and pericoresis
05
Jun
Even for those who do not believe in the
concept of pericoresis, it is important because it makes the idea of relationship something more substantial, although it is already admitted that man is a relational being, the relationship is full of dualisms and non-Trinitarian interpretations (in the case of Christians) and can lead to indifference.
After resolving the Trinitarian dogma by the Cappadocian priests, who explained that God is One and Triune, are people (hypostasis) and maintain unity (ousia), Damasceno will dwell on the relationship between the three people and create a term also used in philosophy: pericoresis, interpenetration in relationships, that is, the possibility of listening to the Other not just out of respect, which would already be a step, but trying to penetrate and understand the reasons for his thinking.
It was João Damasceno (675-749) who studied this relationship of pericoresis, the term emerges proposing the articulation between the unity and the communion of the Trinity, it seems simple to say this, but difficult to understand and practice, since most relationships exclude the Other which is different, be it of color, race, creed or culture, far ahead of his time João Damasceno was a friend of the Saracens.
In his historical theological journey, he sought to find something to explain the relationship, which was in accordance with what the scriptures said of God and his relevance in history: the articulation between the concept of God that is triune and one, but each one being a natural person (prosopon) and God, João structured the intra-Trinitarian way, based on the Greek concept of person: hypostasis.
In the Greek word it means hypo, which is sub, underneath, and stasis, which is sub-posited; as if it were a support, but in the divine relationship this concept should be expanded and explained.
The term pericoresis emerges in this Patristic Theology, as the articulation between unity and communion of the Trinity, but going further, so the Father is one in the Son and the Son one in the Father, and both are one in the Holy Spirit, so there is an interpretation, it is more what a pure relationship it is to be in the Other.
The problem with some religious interpretations is the static relationship of the three, which is the dualistic relationship that comes from idealistic philosophy, where subject and object are separated and are relational by a type of transcendence, which actually has nothing to do with the Divine mystery nor is it religious.
In a deeper spiritual asceticism is the effort to understand and love the Other who is different, who is not my mirror, does not have my concepts and judgments, does not classify the world as I do, the great tragedy of our days is the lack of pericoresis , and thus of Trinitarian relations.
I think that the pandemic shows us this, even though there is a great pain that kills everyone and that sensitizes many people, that opens the heart to look at the suffering of the other, there are those that close themselves in groups, ideas and schemes to not look at the pain , the hunger and despair that the pandemic has generated, or we wake up together or perish together, staying in our trench is non-relational
How to react to fear and the evolution of the pandemic
07
May
Pointing out our weaknesses and anxieties is a way of self-control, but I say what fear
is and how we can control it in a pandemic in which we all find ourselves fragile can be thought of in 7 essential aspects.
A reflection of what causes these feelings in us is important and the first attitude, a little meditation and silence and ask us what awareness we have of the dangers and the attitudes towards them is fundamental, so in addition to bodily health attitudes there are mental ones and / or spiritual, without which we are to blame outside ourselves.
The second already pointed out in the first is awareness, remembering that awareness is always, says phenomenology, awareness of something (or the thing) that means what causes us fear, what is its origin, the phobias of the past, lost ones, relationships social, etc.
The third is to understand that there is a “thing” in the relationship between you and the other that is on the frontier of your fear, attributing it to the other is escapism, I study what causes fear and do not anticipate perceptions, it is what is called in epoché´s phenomenology, in this case, put it in parentheses.
Fears and phobias lead to anxieties, and if it is already present as a result of fear, control of emotions and not making them chaotic and irrational is fundamental, take a step back, note if the relationship with others is not going this way.
Share the fear with the other, but with meekness and clarity, this does not give me security or it is not what I think (it is not your conscience about the thing), but respecting the Other’s vision.
Finally, of course, a specialist can help, I do not know how much they are inserted in the health system, but at the peak of the pandemic these sensations can surface and it may be the case to ask for help from specialists.
Fear between philosophy and reality
06
May
It is necessary to differentiate between fear, anguish and anxiety, those who
blamed the “virtual” world (the virtual comes from virtus which is the root of the virtuous) must realize in the pandemic that they were not correct.
Anguish, another typical feeling in this pandemic, is a feeling linked to not belonging or not understanding the reality we are experiencing, it can be said that it is almost the opposite of fear, since it generates impropriety, that is, we do not face the problem or we postpone it or leave it by positivity, that is, we speed up life, like running from “danger”, being optimistic.
We left anxiety for the end, it is the end of a cycle, we made a post a long time ago to explain that it was not correct to attribute technology to it, there is a book called Information Anxiety (Wurman, 1989) that deals with the topic, however, in psychology it is the end of this cycle: fear, anguish (links to a system of beliefs and systems) that reaches anxiety and can lead to panic and Burnout syndrome, which feeds the cycle with fear. http://marcosmucheroni.pro.br/blog/?p=6199#.XrF_E25FzIU
The first question, therefore, is to treat the fear that is impropriety with ownership, that is, to understand what causes it, to make it conscious and with this the next stage of anguish can be blocked, because we will not escape from reality, the idea of hiding or ignoring facts is what fuels this cycle.
We don’t need to be specialists or in the case of medical pandemics, to understand that some measures are necessary, that without them we get into anguish and this can lead to panic stress, aware that we even face the problem of hospitalization and the social difficulties caused by isolation .
This also explains why people who do only primary reasoning fall into finding fictitious enemies (inappropriate that leads them to the anguish of being unanswered) and in the last stage when the fatalities arrive they lead to panic or the Burnout syndrome, so it makes sense that some cheerleaders who go out on the streets asking for an end to “isolation”, is panic.
As it is the beliefs and systems that take the last step, I treat the religious problem, which has nothing to do with spiritualities that seek balance, and even in suggestions from psychologists you will find do self-analysis and have self-control, good spirituality helps, religious fanaticism harms and accelerates the process.
The eidetic variation, method and phonesis
30
Apr
The philosophy that tried to overcome Kant, but was still somehow linked to its
logical tradition, is called continental philosophy, Frege is a bit of a departure because it moves towards what was called analytical philosophy, with serious consequences even today, but the subject it’s deep. Thus, the hermeneutics from Scheiermacher to Dilthey is still the one that, due to a certain “logical construction”, we arrive at interpretations of the texts in a “correct” or “objective” way.
Paul Ricoeur and Hans Georg Gadamer will free us from this, outline an ontology where there is a recognition of the pre-concept (the way of writing is ours) and the final understanding can have openings and “merging horizons” where the temporal context affects the ontology of the interpreter.
This “opening” is coherent with the models of physics, where the observer is part of what is observed, and his worldview directly interferes with his interpretation, so it has a temporal aspect that is what Heidegger reveals in the “Being and time ”(1927), but the description of the hermeneutic circle in a systematic way only appears in Gadamer’s “Truth and Method ”(1960) and Ricoeur’s“ Time and Narrative ”(1983), a term that is widely used and little known.
Before understanding the fusion of horizons, using Kantian subjectivity, we can say that there is an intersubjectivity, after a text is published it ceases to have the authorial intention and is subject to interpretation and there is not a single “correct” reading, however it does not mean relativism.
An impactful text provokes the readers’ experiences, Gadamer’s method of finding the truth is one that everyone could join in the dialogue, accepting the real world experience, said by the author as follows:
“The understanding and interpretation of texts is not merely a concern of science, but it obviously belongs to the human experience of the world in general ” (True and Method, 1960).
This is what goes beyond the merely theoretical attitude (even from those who claim the practice and hide its methods) adhering to what the Greeks called phronesis (practical wisdom), and gives us the possibility to converge, and makes the dialogue useful and useful, the opposite is proselytism.
The process by which the coronavirus vaccine must pass, in addition to complying with a protocol, must through successive interactions with the real world, testing on animals, observing reactions until human use undergoes successive analyzes beyond experimentation, is a type of phonesis .
Beyond idealism, new logic and pandemic
29
Apr
Kant’s simplification led to abstract formulations so complicated that it would
be inappropriate to call them complex since he intended the opposite, but the attempt to reduce 12 categories and three central ideas: the psychological (soul), the cosmological (the world as a whole) ) and the theological (of God).
This will produce an ingenious, rational but very complicated construct, which are the three judgments that would link Subject (A) to predicates (B), the judgments: analytical, synthetic a priori and a posteriori, the idea of a priori judgments was the most controversial because it sees the mind as having a natural memory.
Edmund Husserl and Gottlob Frége, who had a strong arithmetical logic formation, looked at this Kantian theme, imagining that logic could not be reformulated based on action, that is, we do not change our mind because our way of acting changes, this is based on all who seeing the change in the logic of everyday life caused by the pandemic, they imagine that the mind does not change.
Husserl’s departure from mathematical logic to the world of experiences, under the strong influence of Franz Brentano who worked on intentionality (see the previous post, the other eidos), made him formulate a new world of experiences, from human emotions to total life of the world (Lebenswelt).
While the Logical Investigations date back to 1900 and 1901, their idea of intentionality formulated in their phenomenology as the return to things themselves, or how they appear to consciousness through phenomenological reduction, their epoché, which is to place our concepts and thoughts in parentheses, a clear disagreement with the Cartesian cogito.
On its return to the Greek eidos, it will promote eidetic variation, which can be explained as from the phenomenological epoché (putting concepts in parentheses) it produces an eidetic variation on the idea we had of the thing (concepts, thoughts or objects) and it can produce in the end new “horizons”, a fundamental category for the dialogue about the new.
Our pandemic phenomenon produced an “colletive” epoché, a new look at a deadly virus, we had to produce an eidetic variation, what we think of this “little flu”, and this should produce new “horizons” about the concepts of how to live the day to day: attitudes health, economic solidarity and total reformulation of family life: spaces, time, food and relationships and the use of technology.
Idealists continue to imagine that everything will be as it was before, they did not do the epoché pandemic.
The ascent to the Divine, how to live in crisis
23
Apr
It is in these moments of crisis that the human nature of God and the 
divine nature of man are discovered, hands that save, that help, that show solidarity and that point out unthinkable paths, but where is God, what does this pandemic say with so many people dying .
Edgar Morin and Patrick Viveret wrote “How to live in a time of crisis”, the Brazilian translation is from 2013 and the original French version of 2010, so they are not talking about this crisis, knowing Morin and reading the book we realize that it is that night of thought that we speak (see post).
Consistent with our thinking, he goes against ambiguities, and makes a comparison between Pascal and Descartes right from the start: “Pascal brings a sense of ambiguity to him, the human being brings the best and the worst in himself. Descartes not, we must be Pascalians” (pg. 10) and if we allow the religious sense also Easter beings, to pass from death to life, and to live in crisis.
There is a deep thought in Morin, which he has expressed in other ways, which in this book is more surprising: “I would like to propose, regarding the historical period that we have entered, a reading close to that of the Apocalypse, in the original sense of the expression (sic), not of catastrophe, but of revelation, of a critical time of humanity with itself, allowing it to work the essentials ”(pg. 34), to accuse him of being religious would be ignorance and hopeless, bad reading.
The model of the crisis we live in is called DCD, “deregulation, unrestrained competition, displacement*”, in a note explaining the latter, it is manufacturing production displaced from one country to another, concentrated in China, for example, the case of necessary equipment and masks to fight coronavirus.
This model with economic foundations, is called by Karl Polanyi “market society” and which is currently called by Joseph Stiglitz “merchant fundamentalism” (p. 36), the authors give the diagnosis of the crisis: “formed by this double excess/malaise ”(p. 40).
They also give two essential and surprising diagnoses, saying that bin Laden, who was a Muslim, cited the Satan of the Apocalypse to refer to Rome, and says “what is the great strength of the prophets? It is precisely to say that the question of inhumane is inward” (p 58), “The idea that others are evil prevents us from treating our own inner barbarism” (idem).
The entire chapter 3 of the evangelist John is marked by a revelation, which is made when walking with men, and shows how the divine reality of the Risen Jesus is contextual and adapted to the world, however “the one whom God sent speaks the language of God “(Jo 3, 34), and it is clear that a good part of the religious discourse does not express this, but only conflicts in the human nature.
MORIN, Edgar; Viveret, Patrick. 2013. Como viver em tempo de crise (How to live in times of crisis), Rio de Janeiro: Bertrand Brasil, Brazil.
The changing worldview
03
Apr
The Ptolemaic model changed the Aristotelian worldview by creating a model of
spiral movement for stars and planets known at the time, changing the worldview, but it was Copernicus who changed the view that took the Earth from the center of the universe and placed the Sun, this model helped the anthropocentric worldview by opposing the theocentric worldview.
Galileo’s great controversy with the theological view was not the cosmological view, but the question of interpretation and biblical reading by the “common”, not by chance the first popular version was called “vulgate” and when deepening the biblical reading some interpretations exegetical activities have been set aside.
However, Galileo before the Holy Office actually affirmed “E pur si muove” (translating Italian and then moves) that today he could look at the whole universe saying “E pur tutto si muove”, everything is in motion and the dynamics no longer resist the classic worldview Being and Not Being, there is an excluded third party that can be thought of as Not Being is still Being, quantum physics and the string model indicate a third state, which is already used in quantum applications.
So the theoretical models and the idealistic worldview together with their universe model collapsed for some time and even the Standard Physics Model that explained particle physics seems in check with the studies of dark matter and energy that are nothing more than 95% of the universe.
The vision of seeing the world through a shock of opposition is gradually crumbling, when admitting an excluded third party (as the Sourbone professor Florent Pasquier calls it) admitting not a synthesis (the result of idealistic opposition, thesis and antithesis), but a third possibility that conjugates with the other two. It must affect the religious world, it is a great support for a time to unite minds and hearts to fight the world pandemic, and it can be the germ of great changes.
A biblical reference to the subject is the moment on the cross that Jesus cries out to God, who no longer calls him Father, the tradition says in the Aramaic language of his mother Mary, and feels separated from the Father, prays in the Trinitarian vision in that Jesus is also God, it is a paradox to separate from the Father.
Jesus on the cross is repeating Psalm 21 “My God, my God, because you abandoned me”, and it seems to be the cry of all humanity in the face of the pandemic, and it is also possible to read the “excluded third” where we learn that the opposition has time and the answer must be everyone’s.
However, the mystical explanation is precisely the third excluded, the human nature of Jesus is reconnecting it to the Father, if we want Teilhard Chardin’s noospheric vision to the Universe, the reading says that it was a great night.
Not wanting to heal
26
Mar
A system in crisis, whether for social, economic or political reasons, it tends to become
more confusing and toxic until it finds a way to heal itself, when the reason is a natural catastrophe or a disease is not much different, but these affect life directly.
Not wanting to heal and defend life is an attitude of self-sabotage whether for conscious reasons or unconsciousness explains psychology, it is that attitude of creating obstacles and obstacles that hinder tasks to find ways, in this case healing and preserving lives, and so he thinks that there is no way to achieve the goals of cure or co-immunity, the immunity achieved by joint actions.
From a cultural point of view, it is both ignorance, and in this case the view of specialists and health agents must be the “technical” view that prevails, including the economic view, it is thus a blindness, saying it is just a flu or we are dead end (unconscious self-sabotage) is a phenomenon of directing the mind to mistaken thoughts, and this exists culturally.
The biblical narrative tells that a man spent 38 years in a bed and could not reach a natural pool called Siloam (in Hebrew means envoy) and I need Jesus’ intervention to tell him to take his bed and walk (John 5: 7- 9), a miracle but also a break with paralysis and in this sense it is also a metaphor.
But there are those who thought they saw and did not see, the blind man born who is healed in the Bible is someone who did not have a cognitive system prepared to see, and the fact that he comes to see is a miracle but also another metaphor, which due to cultural and contextual blindness it is not possible to see, when leaving this context it is possible to see.
Now wanting to heal or not is a psychic attitude, wanting to see and having the physiological system to see it takes effort and overcome the self-sabotage that makes blindness a comfort zone.
Between phenomenological reduction and eidetic variation
04
Mar
Asking about Husserl consciousness will propose a radical method to “search”
the phenomenon, recovering and modifying a Greek concept that is the phenomenological reduction (epoché).
Epoché is suspension means in ancient Greek, that we do not erase from our conscience the judgment we have about things, but the Husserlian perspective is “in brackets” which is more realistic, because we cannot erase, at least completely, the memory, however forget what we think about what we learn about the experiential world.
Thus Husserl manages not to do a high attitude, like the Cartesian cogito that does not erase the ego, but a “natural attitude” to review how we relate to the things of the world. So learning something means capturing them as they are, so phenomenology seeks to focus the phenomenon in the sense of how it appears to us, without using what we already knew before and its applications of how it has already been seen, with the aim of reaching its!
Originality !, its “purity” of phenomenon, It means leaving aside all prejudices, theories, definitions and trying to acquire a new concept about concepts, without prejudices about the “thing”.
Epoché does not intend to doubt the existence of the world, nor, even less, to suppress it. The world around presents itself only in consciousness.
For Husserl, the objects of the world are already placed for us in different perspectives and we almost immediately adopt a meaning for it, in general what we do not know we attribute an essence and it should remain unchanged because we gave this object its original meaning.
Husserl’s second fundamental concept is eidetic variation, precisely what differentiates his view of eidos from contemporary idealistic culture, where he calls noema what is of the object itself, what is the thing, which the ancients call quality, while it calls of Greek noesis νόησις, it means the immediate apprehension that may not have the necessary dianóia, that is to say, to think about the thing that links it to the noema.
So the fixation on objects and the misunderstanding of their meaning on the other hand, is part of the contemporary world, this desynchrony between noema and noese.
