Nonsense notion and half truths

28 Jan

The fact that everything can be mere “opinion” is that it creates and develops the no-notion (nonsense em portuguese), popular term to speak of the doxa, which was mere opinion without an organized knowledge that bases and makes serious opinion on subjects, what is called episteme in classical antiquity.
The fact that the truth almost always remains hidden is that we are in search of re-enlightenment, although we use it also, if we look at the term means to veil again, and not disguise, to take away the veil, classical antiquity also had a name for this: a-letheia (lethe, “oblivion”), a as denial means: do not forget.
Revelation is closer than Aristotle called the endoxa (ἔνδοξα), unlike Plato who considered the doxa mere opinion, Aristotle revalues it understanding that many of the beliefs and popular opinions can come from consensus of old wisdoms, as it says in the popular means, our parents “knew things”.
One can find in the Threads translated from the Greek by Jacques Brunschwig (1967), a direct definition of Aristotle: “Endoxa, on the other hand, are those [opinions] which are based on what everyone thinks, the majority or the wise, that is, the totality of the sages, or most of them, or the most renowned and illustrious among them.” (Aristotle, 1967, 100b20-22).
The fact that a set of opinions have seen the so-called “urban legends,” for which I am referring to the popular term “no-notion,” is that certain truths spoken in a very incisive and persuasive manner become public half-truths, and thus need an unveiling, but the root of it is in thought and not in the media, which serve only as propaganda vehicles, which newspapers, radios and TVs already do a long time.
In the 1920s Karl Kraus, a playwright who wrote against bad journalism, at the service of half-truths and in favor of well-defined interests, shows that the fact is ancient, but what is the origin? I see two very clear.
First an episteme, the knowledges constructed even in academies and books with very little historicity, are used aphorisms (Karl Kraus has a book with this name, but said that they were half-truths), the own organization of the knowledge with vices of logicism and unilateral view of issues, due to the low transdisciplinarity of discourses.
But there is a public reason, besides the epistemic that is deeper, we like to omit opinion about everything and think little, to delve into a certain theme has become “out of fashion”, that is, mental laziness leads us to this (new media are after the phenomenon of superficiality), there is no way to be profound without doubting one’s own thinking, to be listening to the other, without opening oneself to new knowledge that happens every day.
I already know what you are going to do, I already know what you think or do not worth studying, reading and deepening, led to a culture without notion, little depth, immediacy and this has nothing liquid, is a solid ignorance, sometimes militant and reluctant to open or dis-veal, is in the re-veal.

Aristóteles. (1967) Topiques. Tome I: Livres I-IV. Texte établiet traduit par Jacques Brunschwig. Paris, Les Belles Lettres.


Comentários estão fechados.