Out Of Office Reply Wedding

The birth of philosophy, according to Giorgio Colli



is commonplace in the tradition to present the origin of philosophy as a result of a change in human thought, which leaves the mythical view of the world to get into the power of reason. Often given to pre-Socratic philosophers need primacy in this revolutionary, but because they still exhibit slight remnants of mythology enshrined in its rational musings and reflections, were the figures of Plato, Aristotle and later his disciple, who have shaped the history final germination of thought based on reason, ie, philosophy. These are the faces true wisdom, we are told, not the Homeric comedians or poets. With the wisdom born of reason, philosophy, "love of wisdom," thus marks the beginning of human interest in knowledge, truth and goodness.

Giorgio Colli, one of the most prominent philosophers (so to speak) " freethinkers, would be (in part) according to this whenever who turns, and we understood, the same word which means" philosophy. " His book (just a hundred pages) " The birth of philosophy " could be included the agenda of all apprentice philosopher, or teacher of philosophy, maybe not so much by its content but because it calls to read backwards the history of ideas, and thus provides a new twist to the notion of philosophy . We are not able to confirm or refute Colli, but his proposal is so attractive that we are reluctant to collect and disseminate it. Here we make a simple review of some of its main theses.

Almost half of his work, Colli mentioned a few words of Heraclitus, a riddle whose meaning would be that while the senses, and what they convey, are condemnable, yes it would be our attempt to make this experience sense of something stable, something external to us, to try to fix it, the falsify, known is his expression " can not step twice into the same river ", which states as the only existing instant sensation, not there is nothing behind target. In parallel, another key issue in Heraclitus is the " pathos" of the occult, as noted Colli: designing the ultimate foundation of the world as something unfathomable. We refer to the gods of the way we want, as symbols, but always considering that this term is incorrect, precisely because the hidden nature of them ("the nature they like to hide primary, "says Heraclitus). All this leads to a conception of "soul , the occult, unity, wisdom, as we do not see or we take, but of us." Colli just holding all the wisdom of Heraclitus can be understood as a "tissue of enigmas that refer to a unfathomable divine nature," the sense of physicality in the world, its diversity, is an illusion, a web of riddles, a tapestry of opposites solution is reached only with the attainment of unity, the god, which covers " day night, war peace, winter summer ..."

But if the source of Greek wisdom of experience mystery, mysterious and mystical, how the substrate could go religious to rational thought and discourse? It's the same question we might ask in relation to the Middle Ages, when converged on the same main characters, the different perceptions of the one same reality: magical and rational, hidden and manifest, intangible and material. To Colli solution in antiquity came from the hand of the dialectic, understood in its primary sense, as the art of debate. The challenge for one man to another, requiring you rebut it in relation to knowledge, either that or affirmation. Following the discussion reaches a new knowledge, product good refutation of the thesis of the interrogator, but its confirmation to the adversary can not cope with arguments. Here are not required judges to decide who wins, is the very nature of the discussion that provides the verdict. As Aristotle taught us and mentioned Colli, " prove a particular proposition is to find a concept (universal ) such that, as applied to two sides of the same, so based on that connection can be derived (proved) proposing . " Any discussion would then be "universal search increasingly abstract. " Later

Colli says that the puzzle appears as " dark background, the matrix of dialectic." Enigma so designated because the sources as " problem, but in the dialectical language the term is present as a challenge, therefore, the enigma is the germ of the dialectic, enigma almost always presented in a contradictory (as the very essence of dialectics). Mysticism, agonism, dialectic, rationalism ... All these expressions were somewhat antithetical in ancient Greece, but would be subsequent phases of the same phenomenon. Also

Colli refers to the preparation, by generations of dialectic, "of a system of reason, of logos as living phenomenon, concrete, purely oral, and written the discussion (as with Plato's works) would only be a substitute for low value. Colli wondered whether the building contains logos of doctrinal content of the reason (beyond the conceptual training and regulatory standards of discourse), and the answer to it is negative, because the approach underlying interest "destructive." And this interest was already on the origin of the dialectic: if adopts a thesis questioning, the interrogator (if it is effective in its task) will destroy it, but if you choose the antithetical, it is equally, if victory falls on the side of the respondent is merely dialectical ineffectiveness of his opponent. The consequences are devastating, as Colli said: " any trial can be refuted." Therefore, any doctrine or " scientific proposition is equally exposed to destruction."

After Heraclitus, Parmenides figure, shrouded in the whirlwind and dialectic, is facing a new "problem" deciding between being and nonbeing. Parmenides send opt the first choice, because if we would choose the other drowned in the nihilism of the dialectic, the devastating trap of a " not" eternal, everything and everyone. The " is " safeguard, according to Colli, the metaphysical nature of the world. But Zeno of Elea, a pupil of Parmenides, is a dialectical shift. Although it is said that Zeno makes use of the dialectic is intended to defend his master pluralists who reject total monism of Parmenides, the truth is that this application is directed, however, to reject the path of " is "and passing through its opposite, the same his teacher forbade further. Zeno dialectic argument erupts in an orgy extreme, generalizing the dialectic devastating to every area, object or concept. The dialectic, says Colli, "ceased to be an agonistic theory into a general theory of ' logos'."



is reached, then, to the fact that everything that is expressed and which refers to objects sensitive or abstract, and there exists the same time, " and also demonstrates that it is possible while impossible. " In short, the dialectic involves the destruction the reality of any object. To Colli, " Zeno realized that he could not block the development of dialectic and reason, as descendants of the area of \u200b\u200b enigma" he tried, however, to enhance the dynamism of radical dialectic, to its absolute end, reaching a total nihilism. Wanted to see, in short, that the world around us is nothing more than mere appearance, a pale reflection of the divine world, and nothing else. Zeno later thinkers, and even Aristotle himself gave to overcome the paradoxes of Zeno (seen in a previous note), but none managed to prove it. If

still await the rebuttal (true, irrevocable, categorical) of zenonianas thesis, this may mean, Colli said that his would be the quintessential sound logos, " the endpoint Greek rationality." The reason of ancient Greece was seen as a "discourse" about something, a logos that speaks of something else; Colli says that "something" is " religious background, the experience of mystical exaltation, what ratio tends to express in some way, through the mediation of enigma. " Then lost that role logos allusion, and deemed autonomous discourse as itself a mirror of a separate object. But the reason originally began as a supplement, because it was rooted in something beyond it, something the same speech, the logos, he could not reveal, but just pointing that out. Instead of building a new formulation of the logos, who signed a " autonomy of reason, remained primitive rules of logos, which was only half ... and that it was genuine became ... a spurious logos. "

Gorgias, the radical skeptic (see corresponding note), with its three main theses ("nothing exists" "If there would be unknowable," and if not, shall not be communicated to others ") opened the final domination of nihilism, put everything into question, even to the divine nature. " Gorgias," says Collier, "is a wise states finished the era of wise." With Gorgias also occurs a change in the conditions in which they live discussion: until then had a private, for certain social class or specific group (purely esoteric, then, given their limited knowledge provided to a restricted circle); from V century BC, however, opened the field of dialectical isolation, and went to be performed in an environment reserved for a large, populous and less exclusive: the dialectical abandons the ' secret' and enters the public. Thus, the dialectic starts adulteration, since instead of minds at stake have a large group and inexperienced listener, without joining. The discussion ends, begins the sermon.

rhetoric and makes its appearance, after besmirching the dialectic. Despite its oral nature, the conflict disappears, no longer face, contradict and 'struggle' towards a dialectical victory, but that now prevails is a rhetorical in which he tries to convince, subjugating the populace that listens. Not only comes into play dialectical force, but also an emotional component, the seduction of the audience. "The dialectic fighting for wisdom in the struggle rhetoric wisdom led to power." The content of the dialectic individual returns to the world of humanity, their passions and interests.

A dessert item that sets the decline of the ancient wisdom it is the " gradual spread of writing in literary sense " dialectical discussion in abstractions and the words of the logos are apprehended, are captured by the same participation in the discussion, but on the sound fades the interior. Plato indicates Colli, created dialogue as literature, in which his narrative ran through the various content of the discussions, undifferentiated audiences: the same Plato who appoints the new genre as "philosophy", which then define the word written about abstract issues, rational, political and moral.

With Plato is possible today to appreciate the qualities of ancient Greek thought, and noted its importance far beyond that as a mere anticipation stammering "Consider what we should confine ourselves to ignore the wisdom of such thinking. In fact, "Plato its literature calls 'philosophy ' to contrast the ' sophia' previous ." Plato defined earlier eras (Heraclitus, Parmenides, etc.) As the era of the "wise " while humbly defines itself as a "philosopher ", that is, as the "lover of wisdom "(but still does not possess, unlike those mentioned). Plato says

that the wisdom passed on by writing will always be untrue, apparently, no art can convey a letter, or last to know. Although there will never describe thoughts as to clarify its meaning, since it will always say the same thing. Elsewhere, Colli said: "Plato broadly denies the possibility to express a feeling seriously," if this is true, all I know Plato (ie, their written texts), you might not be anything serious ... Moreover, if the script has the courage to Plato (" if someone puts in writing what is the product of his thoughts ... it is true that mortals have removed trial " Seventh Letter), then, as Colli question," Would it be too all subsequent philosophy ... something serious? "

Finally, Colli said" philosophy was born, a creature too complex and mediate to contain within itself up new possibilities for living. The faded writing ... what we wanted to suggest is that the above philosophy, the trunk to the tradition that uses the name " wisdom" and leaving that soon withered stem, is for us ... more vital than philosophy itself. "

wise or wrong, biased or weighted, creator of a philosophical nonsense or a new understanding of rationality, it is not appropriate to discuss Giorgio Colli is his bravery, a daring bordering on insolence, which allows you to examine common issues in the light of a new approach. The result is a different way of dealing with the philosophy, knowledge and values \u200b\u200bthat underlie this ancient discipline, which means Colli and controversially controversy has been portrayed. At thirty years after his death, we pay this small tribute to a thinker against the tide, he swam in troubled waters for the sake of philosophy, be it wisdom or a simple love for her like a distant promised land we can see, but which, despite all efforts we make, we can never arrive.

Can Boones Farm Give You Heart Burn

What surrounds us

" Circunvalante philosophize about what would be entering the same. This can only take place indirectly. Well, as we speak, we think of objects. We need to reach by means of objective thought the telltale signs that something is not objective is Circunvalante.

example of what I said is what we have to think together. The separation of subject and object, which always are, and we can not see from the outside, become our object to speak it, but inadequately. For separation is a relationship between things of the world I faced as objects. This relationship is an image to express what is not at all visible, which is never target itself.

This separation of subject and object when we make sure we continue to think in pictures, from what we are originally present, as something that is in turn a multiple sense. The separation is originally different when I go and intellect to objects, such as living in my world environment, such as "existence" to God.
intellects
As we deal with things understandable, of which we have, to the extent that occurs, a knowledge of universal validity and necessity, but is always object determined.

as living beings, situated in our world environment, we are made in it by that which we experience intuitively sensible, for what we really live like this, but does not capture any general knowledge.

as 'existence' we are in relationship with God, transcendence-through the language of the things that makes transcendence figures or symbols. The reality of this being figures do not capture nor our intellect and our sensibilities vital. God is the object a reality that we are only given as "existence" and is in a completely different dimension from that in which they are empirically real objects, which can thought to need, which affects our way.

This is how it is dismembered as Circunvalante want to make sure that, in various modes of being circunvalante, and that's how the collapse occurred at follow now the theme of the three modes of separation of subject and object: First, the general intellect and consciousness that we are all identical, and secondly, the living being within the meaning of which we each of us a unique individuality, third, the "existence" in the sense that we are properly that in our historical .

Karl Jaspers, " philosophy, Breviaries, FCE, 1973-1995.

Read Farm Lessons #11

Plato's aesthetic



We all know that Plato expelled from his ideal state to dramatists and epic poetry, in addition, it appears that the Athenian significantly appreciate the natural beauty around him, as attending the place where he was, the environment that served for discussion or merely physical rest, depending on their usefulness. Not looking at the world and admired its beauty, but was in the world and appreciated its functionality for certain times and circumstances. With this background, we could conceive of the personality of Plato as insensitive to beauty, but the reality is more complex, and not without contradictions, if it is fair to recognize his lack of interest in natural beauty, not so with human beauty, and with that created by our civilization.

The reason that Plato expelled almost all the poets from his Republic was due to moral and metaphysical reasons, but this did not imply that felt no appreciation for the compositions of Homer, for example, or you do not have a certain admiration: "We praise lot of Homer", " I speak, even though the fans and reverence for Homer, who in my youth I have mastered, I do so retract" and " are willing to acknowledge that Homer is the greatest of poets and first of the tragic " are textual samples Republic pointing the obvious that Plato professed respect for that.

art of appreciation for the beauty that produces art (or, rather, is the art itself.) Any theory of art must be based on the notion of beauty. For Plato, beauty really exist, and this in the world of the senses involved or derived from a universal beauty, of which sensible things were more or less successful approaches. There are varying degrees of beauty: a beautiful object is ugly when compared with a beautiful woman, a funny chimpanzee is never more beautiful than a handsome man, and he always will be ugly in front of a god. The universal beauty, for its part, does not comprise a part of beauty and ugliness another, nor beautiful in relation to certain things and ugly in relation to others, but like all ideas, is "eternally self-subsistent and uniqueness herself. "

It follows that the universal beauty is not something material, can not be translated into a thing of beauty, the beauty is universal, as any form, supersensible, so that works of art (painting, sculpture, architecture, poetry, dancing, singing, music, etc..) is inevitably fall into a lower dimension within the range of Beauty. Beautiful things are under our senses perceive it, while the Beauty archetypal, universal, it applies only to intelligence.

One difficulty in establishing a definition of beauty applicable to tangible manifestation occurs when beauty is equated to the utility, efficiency "useful everything is beautiful " said Socrates Hippias Major. So one school of diligent and obedient student, you get superb academic results, it is beautiful? A mechanic whose skill fix our car is beautiful? Even A gas cylinder is beautiful by the mere fact of competition heated with water from our shower? Way to leave this predicament follows Socrates drawing attention to determine whether this utility is used for a purpose good or a bad one, what works for one purpose can not be beautiful ruin, says Socrates, but just how good it is, if only what we consider good is beautiful, then, says Frederick Copleston, " the beauty and goodness can not be the same, since neither the cause and effect can be identified ." Socrates concludes by stating that perhaps the beauty is that which produces a pleasant feeling to the sights and sounds (music and beautiful voices, women and men handsome, well-made statues, etc..). But if this is the universal beauty, how to identify it with the intangible that is proper to it? How can the universal beauty, a transcendental form, according to Platonic metaphysics, be appreciated by our senses? If everything beautiful object creates pleasure and satisfaction, in full view either ear, then they must have some common character which gives them their beauty and is present in both. And what is it? Perhaps the pleasure to serve for any purpose that is useful, we produce an emotion, an impulse, an incentive aimed at rewarding action? But if this is so, as Socrates says we're back to square one, and we have not really solved anything, a mere circular reasoning. Neither beautiful nor useful. Any skill or ability
generates "real objects products (pencils, books, buildings, made by men, and rocks, plants and men, made by the gods), or" images, which mimic but not actually perform the functions of the original. The images are false imitations of reality, and even have part of it (if not, would not images, but another example of the same thing), so are in a second degree of detachment from reality of Forms: indeed, imitative art is " two degrees below reality, because it is simple like ," the artist does not copy objects with accuracy, but mimics the simple appearances. The painter, says Plato, is a pseudoartífice , not drugs, which have genuine ability, but as cosmetics, that give the appearance of health rather than health itself.

know something is to capture its eternal form, but the arts, imitations of imitations (imitation of specific forms of the sensible world, which in turn are true copies of the Forms) can not produce themselves be knowledge . However, a work beautiful art treasures possessing a relationship with the Form and, sometimes, the artist, unconscious of what he is doing, can have a moment of inspiration, or intuition, reaching true knowledge and directly, perhaps be possessed by a god.

For this reason, the arts can and should play a role in the social order of the State. To find out what we must first examine what effect in men. On the one hand, art gives pleasure, it has beauty, and it is a pure pleasure, in the sense that it is generated by other causes (eg, eating when hungry), but, however, Sometimes the art gives way characters (in dramatic poetry), which change their own reality, behaving undesirably and acting without honesty and dignity, its natural produce false pretense and vulgar pleasures in the auditorium, so they should, says Plato, be punished. However, given that the arts have the quality to influence attitudes and behaviors of the people, must be specified for the ideal state which can be appropriate behavior and what harmful, Plato is confident that the artistic imitation of a bad attitude or behavior is a call for individuals to do the same, imitating such behavior in their lives, and consequently all pages that distils improper or immoral behavior, whether heroes or gods should be removed from the education of the Republic. By contrast texts indicate appropriate virtues and powers must be read and distributed, and even created if there are, for the sake of the younger generation.

If properly used and properly channeled character education, dance, music and poetry are essential tools and very beneficial for the formation of citizens, says Plato. Despite its severity to the application of the arts in society, the Athenian recognizes its value and greatly respected, but always stresses that the artist should show irreproachable social responsibility, so that would guide their creations to the good of the community, transmit values \u200b\u200band human attributes that enable people to improve their condition to get closer to virtue.

Plato The restriction proposed for the creative dimension of the artist, therefore, is not due to a bias on the arts, to a certain fanaticism that despises those aesthetic manifestations that do not fit our tastes, but it fits in the mood Platonic ideal of a state where all its elements, including those that depend on both the sleep of reason, aim to provide stability and a spirit of righteous men.

art Should stick to a merely social, restricted to the collective good, rather than creative freedom of its practitioners that may cause deviation in the behavior and modes of behavior considered correct? In today's society we have an obvious answer to this question, would, however, wonder how far the role of "arts" (today we would speak more correctly means) in us, and how far it is beneficial to do so, and also could question why certain individuals, unable to distinguish between an attitude suggestive artistically or socially acceptable and desirable to adopt and discard a the other (known cases of violence or aggressive behavior after viewing a film, television, or after a few hours with some video games), without recognizing that the mere presentation and appearance in a television series or a computer game not is the necessity or expediency, to transfer it in any way real life life where there is no button to close the screen, or "opponents" virtual as flesh and blood, nor the ability to start, never a new game.

Licencias De Conducir Washinton, 2011

Al-Farabi (I) Diogenes of Sinope



Nicknamed "The Second Master " by Arab historians (the first was, of course, Aristotle) Al-Farabi, (born in Baghdad to 870 and died in 950, approx.) Renewed philosophy gained by the followers of Aristotle, neoplatonizada conveniently, through various comments to his works.

Among the many concerns of Al-Farabi emphasizes, first, his attempt to prove a certain correlation between the thought of Plato and Aristotle. Despite their obvious differences, the Iraqi philosopher conceded that it was merely accidental differences, and to prove he even compare text to text. The apparent contradiction is the product, he said, identifying two reasons: 1) personal conduct, since Plato shown as an ascetic concerns outside earth, while Aristotle is a man of street, however, both forms of life respond to their own characters, and aristotelian is only practical application, in partnership, signed by his teacher and 2) method, synthetic (and lighter) in the latter, and analytical (and darker, tinged with mythic) in that, while the Athenian myth uses the wisdom to hide the unworthy, while Aristotelian simplicity is lost as soon delve further into their meaning. That contradiction

also four basic philosophical issues, such as: 1) Logic , as both disagree on how to achieve a perfect definition, or what a syllogism and how to make appropriate conclusions, although Al-Farabi believed that both positions are reconciled in the end, 2) Epistemology , since Plato admits the existence of the World of Ideas, while Aristotle denies. This is a major difficulty, but the philosopher of Baghdad's resolve to modifying Plato to Neoplatonism, and closer to Aristotle to Plotinus, so that both views will converge, despite their undeniable differences. Another complication is how we hear of the ideas if you do not exist in this world; Al-Farabi does not clarify this point, since torn between whether to grant full immortality of the soul. Moreover, if knowledge is mere memory, what is the role of memory?, Al-Farabi concludes that Plato's doctrine is a theory that explains the role of memory in knowledge, while Aristotle accepted for entry to the genesis of knowledge feelings as both data memory, 3) Metaphysics first, the doctrine of vision, according to Plato we see from the emission of something that flows from the eye that is directed toward the object. To his pupil, however, is the eye that is influenced by the object. Although Al-Farabi seen in both positions a certain affinity, the difference is insurmountable. And second, Plato denied the eternity of the world, but Aristotle said, so the only way for the Iraqi philosopher overcome this contradiction is to deny the Aristotelian thesis and giving the world a creation out of nothing; and 4) Practical Philosophy, Plato the natural abilities are more important in shaping our personality which acquired habits, while Aristotle believes just the opposite, for Al-Farabi, however, Plato says only the difficulty of developing our natural abilities, and Aristotle also tends to say that education is not everything and should respect the way of being of each individual, our philosopher, in turn, ensure that the child has a receptive almost total power, and the role of their natural constitution very minor, this character would have a potential only, updatable only by the act of exercise habits. In the section

epistemological, Al-Farabi out as the highest degree of that is for the metaphysical science of being as such, the principles of science and being that is not present in body or any body . The concept of being listed as being quota caused, and must be itself. The latter is pure, the only necessary, no cause, no matter what form, or end, is very pure, pure thought and pure lover, so you can identify with God. Al-Farabi identifies the paths leading to the demonstration of God: 1) all being receives its existence from another, in a string that must be completed in the first, 2) contingent beings must have their existence only if necessary, 3 ) every possible potential to be updated by the pure act, and 4) any effect that there is by its very nature must come from an extrinsic cause (God). Being first is devoid of the imperfections of the contingent beings, so that it can not properly describírsele definírsele or because his greatness is beyond the genus or species, is at the same time, present and hidden, and their existence goes beyond our intellect, so we can only have a rough idea of \u200b\u200bHim. God is absolute life, and is pure contemplation, for it must be the happiest of beings, the same happiness is He, who loves himself, and love together, loving and beloved.

As God is One, Al-Farabi states that the multiplicity observed around us arises from successive generations. Of God comes only his intelligence, of which flows to generate power and secondary causes. So, all things follow a certain pattern, a certain hierarchy within creation: 1) Being Single, 2) secondary causes, 3) Understanding Agent, 4) Alma; 5) Shape and 6) Matter. The bodies, meanwhile, includes six genera: 1) Body of the celestial spheres, 2) Rational Animal, 3) Animal irrational 4) Plant, 5) Mineral, and 6) Four Elements. This order demonstrates the existence of a universal law that comes from God, everything flows from there only if necessary. The chain needs of all things is absolute, God needs only to know oneself to know all things, this is knowledge that sets off the cosmos, the eternal and unchanging mechanism of our Universe. God emerges only a single being, the first set, outside of him, he first created may be the seed for the multitude, which is why, says Al-Farabi, the first set is one of their number, but in terms of multiple nature. Al-Farabi

difference may nominally be necessary. In this inevitably accompanies existence to its essence, because both are mistaken, in the possible, however, there is added to the essence of the creative act of the first set. This, in turn, he received if there's to be first formed as a starting of the one, from which it will be possible multiplicity. It is diverse in essence, and therefore also in action.

physical Cosmos, to Al-Farabi, is a set of concentric spheres in whose center lies the Earth and revolve around him nine areas following a perfect, uniform circular motion, a move that party to all this intelligence in area immediately above, this movement is the desire of perfection so characteristic of being first, so that the whole cosmos moves in pursuit of absolute perfection, love this product perfection.

The combination of the four elements that come from raw materials generates, under the influence of celestial spheres (especially the sun) the constitution of the terrestrial world, because of the approach or departure from the star produces cold and heat generation and corruption. But the way in which these influences take place, and how bodies are prepared to receive the forms is not completely predictable, so that the phenomena are causal agents nor will the bodies, and we must resort the experience for physical knowledge.

The tenth intelligence that influences our world is the intellect, the operator of the Cosmos we perceive and because of the union, therefore, between matter and form through an intellectual operation (Think the separate essences of things). It is the intellect that moves the soul, the truly human understanding, to lead to knowledge, but humans do not have a whole infinite scope in which to work and learn from, in fact, each being created, Unlike the first set, is bound to a particular class or group that limits and understands. Therefore, the created beings can not escape their destiny marked.

created Things are good at what they own more than one (of being) and deficient in that they possess multiple, the higher the multiplicity, deficiency. Thus, al-Farabi affirm that evil is inevitable in the formation of things, it is necessary and even beneficial, since, without evil, there would be no good in created things, in the earthly world beneath our feet. The cause of evil lies in the one divine, but, as occurs in the natural multiplicity of the first created, its cause is reduced to this multiplicity, so that the cause of evil is not from God.