• Gus Lamarch
    924
    The world is the reflection of Man's actions, and his perception of the world is constructed and established by the world itself.

    Like the ancient Greeks and Romans, who glimpsed a conception of values ​​and principles based on virtue, the classical geographical world was - and continues to be - an example of how a society based on republican morals and traditions, supported by a autocratic leadership, can prosper culturally, economically, and socially.

    We - contemporaries -, sane of our own insanity, look to the past, and like Cicero we exclaim:

    "O tempora, o mores!"

    While we abandon an entire civilization structured on creativity and passion for knowledge, in favor of decadence and contentment with the cheap and putrefied.

    And the reason for such a discrepancy lies in the collapse of what was once harmonious and unique - the human essence.

    We - humanity - are both sinful and sacred; gods and mere mortals; instinctive and rational, and the control of both parts was - and remains - the answer we have been looking for in these hundreds of years in which history - from its beginnings to the present day - could be deeply researched and studied.

    The conclusion taken by many for a long time was that "by harmonizing the duality of human substance, Man could fully assert himself", however, the historical cycle theorized by Hegel, in his work, "The Phenomenology of the Spirit", which states that "all society, at some point, was the synthesis of a previous civilization, and that in its future, it will become the thesis for a new antithesis", demonstrates that, in a dialectical analysis of Man himself, his dichotomous essence is founded on something other than itself.

    And what would be this nucleus that is found in human consciousness?

    I'll exclaim: - The search for the eternal future moment is what moves Man - the purpose!

    "Purpose" brings out the introspective need of every rational and conscious being, to be as Is.

    What is conceived without "Purpose" is unconscious and stable, precisely because it is incapable of doing, and of having perception of itself - the appropriation of one's owness -; That which essentially needs "Purpose" is conscious and unstable, as it finds itself in a scenario awash with potential and power sustained by the eternal ambition for "Being" in the future, while it already "Is".

    "Purpose is the only element unable, simultaneously with the success of any civilization, to not exist."

    "Eternal instants in an endless existence - the doom to the Own.

    Its bonds intertwine and let themselves be torn apart by the simple and humble need of the "Ideal". Idea that, metaphysically, is continuously present, internally and externally, to the Individual; and that "Being" who consciously approaches and lets himself be carried away by the bitter and putrefying "life", without losing loyalty to his principles and, in short, to whatever makes him who he is: - That is the egoist.

    For whoever is able to contradict in substance, what is real and physical, ends up deceiving existence. The irony against the irony of life, is the way of the accomplished..."
  • Jack Cummins
    5.3k

    I am glad to see you have written again on the forum and it is an interesting piece of writing from my point of view, especially because my own last thread was om metaphysics relating to the mind and body problem. This is probably a bit different from exactly what you are thinking about but I am interested in the whole question of duality.

    I am very interested in the philosophy of Hegel, but I think that he is rather rejected within many circles of philosophy. I have began reading his 'Phenomenology of Mind', which is, of course, so different from the ideas of phenomenology as understood by many thinkers.

    I have read some of his other writings and I think that his understanding of purpose is interesting because it is so different from many other viewpoints and, in some ways he could be seen as a bit 'esoteric', but I definitely think that he sees the human being striving forward to try and grasp a way forward meaningfully and this is interconnected with the whole question of where humanity is going, or even Gaughin' s concept,'Where Do We Come From? What Are We? Where Are We Going?'
  • Gus Lamarch
    924
    I am very interested in the philosophy of Hegel, but I think that he is rather rejected within many circles of philosophy. I have began reading his 'Phenomenology of Mind', which is, of course, so different from the ideas of phenomenology as understood by many thinkers.Jack Cummins

    The "inteligentia" is lost during the construction of Hegel's dialectical thought of perception of reality, and they end up giving up or even, in the most decadent of cases, categorizing him as a "metaphysical romantic".

    Hegel's idea is the structuring of a conception through dialectics, which comprises and sustains an answer to the "Reason" - or spirit, as Hegel would prefer - of existence, and as incredible as it may seem, most of his "scholars" - for over 200 years - still question whether "History" is the conclusion Hegel reaches at the end of his work...

    duality.Jack Cummins

    You might understand the concept of "duality" as completely mystical and even "theological" - and in short, with some reason, as the concept was developed in its long history, by Man's subconscious need to justify his momentary acts, and completely unjustifiable acts, of complete irrational insanity - however, my perception of such a concept is based on a dialectical metaphysical understanding of Egoism - therefore existentialist - perception of the individual as a Being, therefore, for me, Man is comprehended by reason and irrationality, and the harmonization of both parts, makes peaks of prosperity reach the species, however, only with individual purpose, such a dichotomy can be consciously controlled and manipulated.

    "A boat can only sink if the knowledge of its ideal past and its non-ideal present are projected to the future of existence through the purpose of preventing it from sinking, just as Man can only be rational/irrational if he is aware of his own past and present, and empower both as purpose for the future."
  • Jack Cummins
    5.3k

    I have been thinking about what you have written and it is interesting that you refer to the opposition between rationality and irrationality. That is not often made in philosophy within the thinking of the twentieth and twentieth first century as far as I am aware. The debate is often seen as one between reason and emotion, and this is usually interconnected to a more subjective conception of knowledge. When I was reading Hegel's writings recently I noticed that he does refer to the idea of a priori reasoning, which I think many do not believe in at all, especially after the deconstruction of the postmodern thinkers.

    I am not saying that I believe that we can simply go back to systems of metaphysics of thinkers like Kant. However, on the other hand, we may have moved into an age of post-truth and relativism. In such a metaphysics world view, some may see reason as arbitrary and this could even blur and distort thinking about reason within culture to the point where irrationality, including that on a political level, including the facts about ecology and the future become obscured.
  • Gus Lamarch
    924
    I am not saying that I believe that we can simply go back to systems of metaphysics of thinkers like Kant. However, on the other hand, we may have moved into an age of post-truth and relativism. In such a metaphysics world view, some may see reason as arbitrary and this could even blur and distort thinking about reason within culture to the point where irrationality, including that on a political level, including the facts about ecology and the future become obscured.Jack Cummins

    The fact is that currently, even being false, the "absolute truths" that built and founded a whole society of more than a 1,000 years of history, through its self-consciousness, ends up collapsing into the nihilism you describe.

    The subjectivity of reality has become so absolute that this metaphysical conflict ends up projecting itself in the world as social stress, the symptoms which can already be glimpsed - decadence, stagnation, extremism, etc... -.

    The freedom that was given to us through democracy, republicanism, etc..., without the dogmatic discipline of religion - or of some dictating power -, ends up falling into chaos.

    That is not often made in philosophy within the thinking of the twentieth and twentieth first century as far as I am aware. The debate is often seen as one between reason and emotion, and this is usually interconnected to a more subjective conception of knowledge.Jack Cummins

    Everything is subjective, except the perceptions we take to be true; the irony of all this is that what is "true" can only be "truthful" if it agrees with the conception of the mass.
  • Jack Cummins
    5.3k

    I think that the aspect which is also important beyond the subjective is the intersubjective. This may account for what you speak of as truth having having a connection with 'the conception of the masses'. I remember someone once saying to me that ideas don't exist unless they are communicated in some social way. I was not entirely convinced, but on the other hand, while we live in a world of many subjective perspectives, it is in social and cultural contexts. Of course, it is not as if there is general agreement in cultural life, which leads to stress, conflicts and opposition.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.