02 Ekim 2008 Perşembe
O belde....
yeni yerimize taşındık.Hacı hocayla(küfürsüz ve sinirleri alınmış bir biçimde) ateşli yorumların fitilini ateşliyoruz.
06 Haziran 2007 Çarşamba
objective knowledge
"It very necessary these day to apologize for being concerned with philosophy in any form whatever. Apart perhaps from Marxists, most Professional philosophers seem to have lost touch with reality. And as fort he Marxists- ‘The Marxists have merely interpreted Maxism in various ways; the point, however, is to change it’
In my opinion, the greatest scandal of philosophy is that, while all around us the world of nature perishes - and not the world of nature alone - philosophers continue to talk, sometimes cleverly and sometimes not, about the question of whether this world exists. They get involved in scholasticism, in linguistic puzzles such as, for example, whether or not there are differences between 'being' and 'existing'.(as in contemporary art,there are no standarts in these worlds of philosophy.)
It goes without saying that the widespread anti-intellectual attitude which was so strongamong the National Sociolists,and which is again becoming strong among disappointed young people,especially students, is just as bad as this kind of scholosticism,and if possible a little worse even than the pretentious and spurious,though sometimes quite brilliant,verbiage of philosophers an other intellectuals. But it is only a little worse, for the treaso of the intellectuals evokes anti-intellectualism as an almost inevitable reaction. If you feed them Stones instead of bread, the young people will revolt, even if in so doing they mistake a baker for a stone-thrower.
Under these circumstances there is a need to apologize for being a philosopher, and more particularly for restating(as I intend to do, if only in passing) what should be a triviality, such as realism, the thesis of the world. What is my excuse?
My excuse is this. We all have our philosophies,whether or not we are aware of this fact,and our philosophies are not worth very much. But the impact of our philosophies upon our actions and our lives is often devestating. This makes it necessary to try to improve our philosophies by critisism. This is the only apology fort the continued existence of philosophy which I am able to offer."
*i am using the term “scholasticism” to indicate an attitude of arguing without a serious problem- an attitude that was by no means universal among the schoolmen of the Middle ages.
In my opinion, the greatest scandal of philosophy is that, while all around us the world of nature perishes - and not the world of nature alone - philosophers continue to talk, sometimes cleverly and sometimes not, about the question of whether this world exists. They get involved in scholasticism, in linguistic puzzles such as, for example, whether or not there are differences between 'being' and 'existing'.(as in contemporary art,there are no standarts in these worlds of philosophy.)
It goes without saying that the widespread anti-intellectual attitude which was so strongamong the National Sociolists,and which is again becoming strong among disappointed young people,especially students, is just as bad as this kind of scholosticism,and if possible a little worse even than the pretentious and spurious,though sometimes quite brilliant,verbiage of philosophers an other intellectuals. But it is only a little worse, for the treaso of the intellectuals evokes anti-intellectualism as an almost inevitable reaction. If you feed them Stones instead of bread, the young people will revolt, even if in so doing they mistake a baker for a stone-thrower.
Under these circumstances there is a need to apologize for being a philosopher, and more particularly for restating(as I intend to do, if only in passing) what should be a triviality, such as realism, the thesis of the world. What is my excuse?
My excuse is this. We all have our philosophies,whether or not we are aware of this fact,and our philosophies are not worth very much. But the impact of our philosophies upon our actions and our lives is often devestating. This makes it necessary to try to improve our philosophies by critisism. This is the only apology fort the continued existence of philosophy which I am able to offer."
*i am using the term “scholasticism” to indicate an attitude of arguing without a serious problem- an attitude that was by no means universal among the schoolmen of the Middle ages.
04 Haziran 2007 Pazartesi
what is actual is religious,what is religious is actual
Varolan din anlayışı kodları doğru bie şekilde "çözümlenmeden"Türkiye özelinde çoğu müslüman toplumun politik,ekonomik vs. konulara yaklaşımlarını anlamanın güdük kalavağı ve geniş müslüman kesimin var olagelen davranış ve düşünce tarzının "din kaynaklı" değil, zaten var olagelen bir zihniyetin "din tandanslı meşrulaştırma" süreci olduğu inancındayım
?
what is rational is actual
what is actual is rational
?
?
what is rational is actual
what is actual is rational
?
hcm thlknn frknd msnz?
vt, frkndym. m nc bşk br mvzu vr hlltmmz grkn. Bhsttğn thlk dvd klk klr nn ynnda.
Kaydol:
Kayıtlar (Atom)
