Arquivo para a ‘Método e Verdade Científica’ Categoria
Principles of the history of Being and eternity
22
Apr
In philosophy, there is no way of referring to Being without addressing
being and essence, which philosophers have said in different ways during the process of civilization and the construction of knowledge.
For the Greeks, starting with Socrates, being (seen as what constitutes being human) resides in the soul or reason, which is not separate, and conscience is the source of both intellect and morality, and man is capable of transcending the material world and seeking truth and virtue. For him, the soul is essence and is not separate from the body (being or form), it is an obstacle to virtue.
Plato elaborates that “being” is that which exists, while “essence” (form) is the fundamental and immutable nature that defines that being, while Aristotle’s essence of a being is its fundamental nature, what defines it and makes it what it is, it is the form that unites with matter to form a substance, which is the individual being.
So Socrates’ transcendence disappears, Plato then elaborates the High Good as the essence of what is good, just and true, while Aristotle defines it as the pursuit of happiness, the highest good that human beings seek, he also creates the idea of the immovable motor, the first cause of everything that exists and of the universe, Plato defends the immortality of the soul, while Aristotle is stuck with the idea of human finitude where everything is mortal.
The Neoplatonist Plotinus (204-270 AD), saw the soul as a bridge between the intelligible world (the One and the Intellect) and the sensible world, it is the image of the Intellect and of the vital force that drives life and motive, in his book Ennead VI:
“And what are we? Are we that, or are we that which is associated and exists in time? In fact, before birth, we were there [in the intelligible], being other men and, some, also gods: pure souls and intellects united to the totality of essence, parts of the intelligible, without separation, without division, but being of the whole (and even now we are not separate). But now, another man has approached that man, wanting to be. And finding us, since we were not separated from the whole, he clothed himself with us and added to himself that man, which each of us was then” (Plotinus, VI, 4, 14, 16-25).
Plotinus sees the Soul in various “stages”, it is what connects Spirit and Body, the higher nature and its materiality), it is a creature of God, created in his image and likeness, composed of body and immortal soul, Augustine of Hippo reworks this as the Being is a creature of God, created in his image and likeness, composed of body and immortal soul, thus seeing it outside its bodily finitude.
In Saint Augustine’s view, the body has a dual nature, the first physical and material, like his body in which he lived, and the second refers to the church as a metaphor for the body of Christ.
I think of this metaphor in the sense of a worldview, as the 20th century theologian Teilhard de Chardin also saw it this way: the whole universe is Christ’s body, that is, not the itinerant church, but the eternal and living one in the immensity of the universe, so his body is eternal, and this is the greatest meaning of the resurrection, Jesus had a temporal experience, an ex-sistence, but he is eternal.
In addition to being-in-the-world and its overcoming
16
Apr
Byung-Chul Han interprets that Heidegger will make his turning point in
the passage from “acting to being” and this is where his greatest work comes from: Being and Time (first published in 1927 in the Annals of Philosophy and Phenomenological Research edited by Edmund Husserl).
Han writes: “as opposed to fear, which merely relates to something in the world, the ‘whereof’ of anguish is the world as such: ‘what anguish is anguished about is being-in-the-world itself. The being-in-the-world […] sinks into anguish. The ‘world’ can no longer provide anything, nor can being-there-with-others” (Heidegger, 2005, p. 179).
And Han adds that this world that escapes anguish is not the general world, but “the familiar, everyday world in which we live without question” (Han, 2023, p. 76), and adds the “impersonal”.
The impersonal as “no one” removes “the burden of decision and responsibility from the being-there by freeing it from action in the narrow sense. The impersonal leaves the being-there at the disposal of a pre-prepared world in which everything has already been interpreted and decided“ (p. 77), I don’t know if in German it has this connotation, but in Portuguese this ”stop” (such as pre-pare, pare is stop, this pause in the life of action is what modernity seeks.
It is this impersonality, Han explains, that repels any autonomous perspective of the world, and which Heidegger considered “inauthenticity” or “decadence” and which prevents the realization of Being.
In contrast to the idealist view, Han describes that “boredom is not, for Heidegger, some dreamlike bird hatching the egg of experience. It is also interpreted as a call to action” (p. 78), the call that today is so disastrously driven by social media.
What Heidegger claims by refusing this call is “precisely the possibility of its [being-there’s] action and inaction” (Han, p. 78 quoting Heidegger).
Heidegger and Han even compare this to a “death” (of course not exactly in the physical sense, but of the affirmation of the self), and “this death frees me for the other. In view of death, it awakens a serenity, a friendliness with the world” (Han, 79 quoting his work Death and Otherness).
It is this openness that makes it possible to overcome fears, uncertainties, frustrations, insecurities and so many everyday anxieties, from which are reborn a new spirit, creativity and joy to move forward, to overcome barriers and understand the possibility of a new horizon.
Heidegger, M. (2005) Ser e tempo. Brazil, Petrópolis, Vozes, 2005.
Han, B.-C. (2023) Vita Contemplativa ou sobre a inatividade. Brazil, Petrópolis, Vozes.
Truth, method and freedom
09
Apr
Truth is not a logical rule or even a scientific
pursuit, science moves in steps towards the construction of knowledge, what is called epistemology, at its great root was the denial of the doxa, of mere opinion.
The truth, Socrates said (through Plato’s speeches) “is not with men, but among men”, so dialogues and opposing ideals are necessary to arrive at what Hans-Georg Gadamer formulates as the “hermeneutic circle” (we’ve already posted about it here).
Hermeneutics is the art of understanding what is written or spoken, so it is the search for what each author formulates, or their mental map, and this fidelity requires a study not to put ideas or words into the mouth of the author, but to discover their intentionality.
Contemporary narratives reflect this lack of hermeneutics, with each author having to give the other their own discourse. This is only possible by restricting freedom, or intimidating the Other, what in today’s culture is called hater, which is characteristic of dogmatic authoritarianism, of those who only know how to listen to their own discourse and refuse to understand what is different.
Freedom is essential for dialog, for an authentic construction of knowledge, and a sincere search for the truth. It is necessary to listen to the other (the spoken or written text) in order to produce a new fusion of horizons, the shared process between interlocutors.
The logic of the narrative is the imposition of a discourse that claims to be unique and true, so freedom is not allowed, interlocutors are interrupted or silenced in their discourse, so that only one narrative survives and its values and arguments are imposed.
The modern idolization of the state as the only source of power, even if it refers to itself as democratic, is the incapacity for a hermeneutic and a method where dialogue is open.
We need to suspend our concepts, put an epoché in parentheses.
The hermeneutic circle is not an end in itself. Hans-Georg Gadamer reflects at length on Dilthey’s thinking, which he considers to be romantic and partly one of the influences on Schleiermacher’s hermeneutics and the ways in which he was committed to Cartesian reason and its logic.
Trapped in this logic, the dualism of subject and object remains, and according to Gadamer (1998, p. 340) it goes back to Vico who had already affirmed the epistemological primacy of the world of history according to the human spirit, this type of knowledge makes subject and object interconnected.
Thus truth is ontological, proper to the human spirit, proper to its being, in it there is truth.
Gadamer, H-G. (1998) Verdade e método: traços fundamentais de uma hermenêutica filosófica. Brazil, Petrópolis, RJ: Vozes.
Evil and its ontology
08
Apr
Although evil can be entified, i.e. become an
entity, whether in the sense of systemic evil or an entity that personifies evil (Greek daemons or a demon in theology or an attitude), Husserl will realize, under the influence of his teacher Franz Brentano (father of social psychology), that it is “the complete objective unity that corresponds to the ideal system of all truths of fact, and is inseparable from it” (Husserl, 2005, p. 136). 136).
Of course, he is talking about truth, but he understands it as having an objective meaning, so its negation is nothing other than the negation of the Being of the entity, and that this correspondence negates its Noesis and does not allow the truth to be externalized, being an objective unity of Being, the noema requires a conscious vision of the object.
This is because each type of object has its own possible unfolding, so to speak, it has its own method prescribed a priori by laws of essence determined by the eidos* of the objectivity in question (Husserl, 2006, 309), which means that it is the essence of the objectivity that predetermines the type of concordant development one has of its experience, it is an experience, and so if it is not true it is its negation, it is evil.
There can be an experience of evidence in this experience of the object, and this contributes to its status as an entity as a “true being” (Husserl, 2006, p. 309), what Husserl called “Lebenswelt”, a logic of life, in this case of the experience with the object.
If we don’t understand that small faults, ignorance of the Other, of nature as a habitat, and everything that distances us from Being as a construction of truth, here it is ontological, we are denying and altering the meaning of what will be expressed in the object, of course it is always an influence of the world view, and in it may lie the essence of non-truth.
Augustine of Hippo had said it another way: evil is the absence of Love, and today we can update this by saying that it is the absence of empathy, solidarity and humanism in every person, those who are not “of my group”, “of my bubble” or even of the “good” in a logical rather than ontological sense.
These are attitudes that we must rethink, rash judgments, one-sided views of the world and of Being, every corruption of the soul begins with a corruption of the truth, it is a negation of the truth.
Husserl, E. (2006) Ideias para uma fenomenologia pura e para uma filosofia fenomenológica. Tradução de M. Suzuki. Brazil, Aparecida, SP: Ideias & Letras.
*according to phenomenology, relating to the essence of things.
Acting according to the Vita Activa
03
Apr
As explained above, the Vita Activa (Action´s life)
is not separate from the Vita Contemplativa, this was already elaborated in Hannah Arendt and will be dealt with at length in Byung Chul Han’s Vita Contemplativa (Contemplative´s life).
In order to establish parallels, it is necessary to understand that Arendt takes up Aristotle, who saw three dignified ways of life for man: people subjected to slavery by war remained tied to their masters only to meet the needs of staying alive, and the Greek philosopher saw the life of artisans and markets in a similar way.
For him, the “political” man was truly free and could devote himself to contemplation, so dignity was linked to contemplation, but seen as the life of fortune (the Eutychia) which personified destiny, good fortune, prosperity and abundance.
This is because although man aspired to immortality, it is life without death on this earth, it is an “immanent” life in this world, which Arendt differentiates from eternity, which aspires to a beyond the cosmos, or the cosmos itself thought of as the creation of transcendent eternity.
Immortality, on the other hand, is continuity in time, it is life without death on this earth, it is life “immanent” to this world, the life of the Olympian gods was like this in the way the Greeks understood nature and its “immortality” in the cosmos, with man’s mortality being what distinguished him in the cosmos.
Byung-Chul describes that “just before Arendt’s Vita activa or On Active Life, Heidegger gave a lecture entitled Science and Reflection [Besinnung]. As opposed to action, which propels us forward, reflection brings us back to where we have always been“ (Han, 2023, p. 62), thus ”a dimension of inactivity is inherent in reflection” (idem).
For Hannah Arendt, labor and work are two elements that make up human activity, along with action, while labor corresponds to the biological activity of human beings for their survival as a species, while work allows for the creation of objects and the transformation of nature.
The society of performance, of the media and of impulsivity shifts the being towards an action that is neither good nor bad, it is pure reactivity and thus incapable of conscious action, the action of Being.
It is still easy to see those who act wisely by the results of their actions, not a simple response to some speech or action, but reflection in action, even if it is silence.
Han, B.-C. (2023) Vita contemplativa: ou sobre a inatividade. Transl. Lucas Machado, Brazil, Petrópolis, RJ: Vozes.
Silence, an essential part of language
02
Apr
The question of silence is fundamental
in the appreciation of language, the spoken word presupposes that there is an interlocutor capable of silence, if it is profound, the epoché (emptiness) occurs, which all philosophers in a certain way impose so that the word can be articulated in thought, it is before and complementary to action, Foucault was one of the philosophers who realized this gap back in the 19th century.
In the hermeneutic circle, it precedes the process of interpretation and is necessary for dialog and the “fusion of horizons” that philosophical hermeneutics demands. This mere acting on the impulse of language omits an essential part, which is reflection, meditation or, for minds that really seek the truth, contemplation.
Hans-Georg Gadamer was the great philosopher of hermeneutics. He argues that there is not only meaningful knowledge in the humanities that can be reduced to that of the natural sciences, a logic and a language that is only grammatical; there is a deeper truth than the scientific method.
It is not a simple return to metaphysics, it is acting according to thinking, according to an articulation of human and collective consciousness, capable of seeing the other and their hermeneutics, capable of reviewing the humanism of every man, without a vertical reading, of the simple authority of power.
Agamben in “The Language of Silence” also speaks of this false articulation as a field that seeks to apprehend with reason alone, it is an “experience of language that goes towards thought without ever reaching it; it is the tension and infinite nostalgia that never understands what it wants to apprehend and never reaches where it wants to go” (Agamben, 2013, Brazil, São Paulo, Magazine Fronteira Z, p. 293).
The famous song of the sirens that lured the sailors to their deaths in Homer’s Odyssey (photo mosaic from the 3rd century, National Museum of the Bardo, Tunis) is also the lack of silence that Ulysses saw in his subordinates (Ulysses covers his ears and ties the sailors to the ship’s mast), which became a metaphor for the chatter that enchants his followers; the greatest dictators were always good orators.
So putting contemplation into action requires true contemplation, the word read is a guide whenever it is purified by an “art of loving”, of showing solidarity, of humanizing action.
Language, being and the infinite
26
Mar
Language and being are ontologically linked,
that is to say, language is a mode of being that Heidegger calls Dasein and presents itself in the fundamental constitution of being-in-the-world.
However, the limits of language are not limits for being, it is the expression of the communication of our connection with the other and with the world, the characteristic mark of language is the sign (or the sign as semiotics conceptualizes it) because it is what will identify knowledge, it shows it the object and grants it a “re-presentation” (here to recall the concept of “present).
On the other hand, the ethicality as objectivity (this is a Hegelian concept that Heidegger uses) of the representative (which is why he uses “re-”) gives it a present validity of the object, so it is the word that produces knowledge that grants a truth of correction of representation, so it has a logical truth and thus other corrections will be necessary, but all finite in time.
The limits of representation lie in listening attentively and silently to the other of the si-impersonal that we all bring into our relationships, and it is by listening appropriately to the coexistent other that the being-there comes to understand what really matters in the relationship with itself and with the other.
In his work “The Road to Language” (2003), written in the 1950s (Heidegger died in 1976), he states that speaking is not the same as saying, because you can speak a lot without saying anything; on the other hand, by keeping quiet and being silent, someone can say a lot, which means that speaking can be just showing, appearing, seeing and no longer listening.
There is nothing more important than in media periods when we want to listen to public parlors and we don’t listen to the other in our inner silence, the Greeks and phenomenology call it epoché, it is so important that no really true philosophy or religion can refrain from this resource, so we have an empty philosophy, thinkers with full bellies and vain.
The step to go beyond, to extend our knowledge beyond worldly representation is to unveil the world, since its re-revelation is only a new veiling, unveiling makes us go beyond to reach what for present objectivity seems impossible, it is neither about wealth, nor utilitarian goods, nor public visibility, but an encounter with Being.
In his Letter on Humanism (1949), in which he analyzes his turning point during the 1930s and early 1940s, he states that his thought was directed towards the relationship of being to the essence of man, but it is this Heidegger that Peter Sloterdijk questions because he only saw one side of the process, the forgetting of being, and left unthought its properly domesticating character, in his book: “Rules for the human park” in which he questions bioengineering, technology that puts the humanitarian question in crisis again.
Reaching beyond human limits has been a challenge for the process of civilization, its is divine.
Heidegger, Martin. (2003) A caminho da linguagem. Tradução de Marcia Sá Cavalcante Schuback. Brazil, Petrópolis, RJ: Vozes; Bragança Paulista, SP: Editora Universitária São Francisco.
Language and its fruits
21
Mar
Hermeneutics is the art or technique of interpreting and explaining texts. Originating in Greek, it also applies today to the ontology and philosophy of language, and is used to interpret not only traditional texts and philosophies, but also sacred texts and legal texts.
The serious problem with language today is its perspective of a fragmentary and distorted analysis of texts, while hermeneutics is used for true interpretation (etymological aspects, translation and meaning), the use of language to justify power was more typical of the sophists in ancient modernity.
So the fruits of true linguistic expression, and of philosophical hermeneutics, was to build a branch of philosophy that studies the theory of interpretation. There are several authors, but I would highlight Hans-Georg Gadamer, who is fundamental to a humanistic perspective.
Gadamer reconstructs the concept of preconception, removing the negative charge of pre-judgment that it had acquired in illustration, giving it an essential character within hermeneutics, since it allows the fusion of horizons, within the hermeneutic circle prior to dialogue.
He thus rejects the idea of a knowledge of the past through pure reason, without the mediation of the interpreter’s own tradition, since this prevents the fusion of horizons and dialog.
He thus rejects the idea of a knowledge of the past through pure reason, without the mediation of the interpreter’s own tradition, since this prevents the fusion of horizons and dialog.
The interpreter doesn’t just carry out a “reproductive” activity of the text, but updates it according to the circumstances of the moment, which is why they speak of their ‘productive’ labor (Gadamer, 1997), there is no direct reference to Hannah Arendt’s concept of “labor”, but it fits well with the text, a natural and non-durable activity that is exhausted when it is carried out.
So is the productive use of language, words that are actions that trigger attitudes of help, rescue, solidarity and dialogue, even if they have different interpretations, the important thing is that humanitarian language leads to actions in favor of society and fruitful principles.
You can’t pick figs from thorns, a good tree can’t bear bad fruit, language that is directed towards good humanitarian initiatives won’t have negative results, so it easily moves towards a dialogue if the “fusion of horizons” is the starting point for interpretation, the basis of a hermeneutic dialogue.
Gadamer, Hans-Georg. (1997) Verdade e Método: Traços fundamentais de uma hermenêutica filosófica. Brazil, Petrópolis, RJ: Vozes.
Language and modernity
20
Mar
The philosophical disagreements and struggles
at the end of the Middle Ages that marked the difference between realists and nominalists ended in a suppression of the importance of language, of the exercise of thought in a form of dualistic subjectivity, since it separates subjects from objects.
It was partly due to the crisis of Western thought and partly due to the lack of a correct understanding of the importance of language that a linguistic “turnaround” began in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
As is the case with all knowledge in modernity, this important turning point has also ended up being used as a metaphor in the philosophy of language, but its contribution both to contemporary thought and to understanding what kind of crisis we are experiencing is a broad and essential response: the word gives life to our actions and its meditation cannot be separated from its practice (see previous post).
There are those who prefer to date this turn to Ludwig Wittgenstein’s Logical-Philosophical Treatise (1889-1951) or, even later, The Linguistic Turn: Essays in Philosophical Method, which Richard Rorty published in 1967. He defended this creation to the thinker Gustav Bergmann, but also points to Heidegger as one of its founders.
The important thing is to verify both the dialogue between the turn and the new logical perspective of the Vienna Circle (with whom Wittgenstein maintained contacts) and the relationship with the philosophical hermeneutics born out of Schleiermacher (“on the different ways of thinking”), He was a contemporary of Schelling, Hegel and Fichte, and thus under some influence of German idealism.
Thus oral and textual language is translated into language and interpreted according to a hermeneutic (photo).
On the other hand, the philosophical hermeneutic approach that comes from Husserl, Heidegger and their successors (such as Hannah Arendt and Peter Sloterdijk) makes a deeper break and questions even the philosophy and thought of its time, with major gaps.
The living word is the one that leads us to concrete actions far from the individualism and lack of meditation (or contemplation) of modernity, it leads to concrete gestures of humanity.
make a deeper break and question even the philosophy and thought of their time, with major gaps.
The living word is the one that leads us to concrete actions – far from the individualism and lack of meditation (or contemplation) of modernity, it leads to concrete gestures of humanity.
A significant milestone for this blog
01
Mar
In February, we reached a milestone of 
almost two thousand hits a day on our content, 55,980 in total. If we had just 20 more hits, we would have reached exactly 56,000, which divided by the 28 days of February would give us 2,000 hits a day.
The main concern of this blog is to maintain a healthy culture of dialogue, respecting the different positions, trying to divert the current polarization without omitting the excesses and outbursts of hatred and bravery that characterize the contemporary world and without forgetting good culture.
We don’t omit our Christian vision, which in our view should be one of dialogue and respect for all other cultures, ecumenism with other religions and the defense of life, greater social justice and the reaffirmation of scientific culture, without forgetting that it depends on method and not opting for the current polarization that distorts true scientific knowledge, ignores original cultures and other peoples who have their own culture in their development.
I would also clarify that our vision of Christianity involves true spirituality and recognizes a culture confused about its true roots: solidarity, humanitarianism and empathy between peoples. Fundamentalism has nothing to do with orthodoxy, which recognizes as theological values: charity (infuse), true hope (Psalm 146:5, Jeremiah 17:7,8, Ephesians: 1, 18) and true faith that believes in the historical and divine truth of Jesus.
We will never deny science and good culture, remembering that they need method and good storytelling, a theme that is almost always present in our analysis of today’s society and culture.
But our central concern in the contemporary world is peace, empathy and justice.
Thank you to my readers, especially those who, while disagreeing, keep the dialog going!!!
