یادداشت‌های فلسفی

دین، زبان، فلسفه، انسان و درد

۲۸ مطلب با موضوع «Philosophy» ثبت شده است

Existentialism and Common senses

يكشنبه, ۵ مرداد ۱۳۹۳، ۰۷:۱۳ ب.ظ
Doubtless, we are living in the age of existentialism. But a relevant significant point to existentialism is: "since existentialism is depend on individuals, there could not be a common rule for all individuals to do and follow and so every individual has to follow h/is own way of thought. So nothing to share with others and nothing to ask of others, because of difference in very fundamental part of human existence.
I believe that, we need to revalue it, in order to make it more depend on society, more depend on human community; and more depend on common rules. 
But no doubt, existentialism is prior to common senses.

World from new angle

يكشنبه, ۵ مرداد ۱۳۹۳، ۰۷:۱۱ ب.ظ
We all are considering our life from our angle, but there could be an specific angle that everyone can dealing with. 
Imagine world is a space and has so many window One or more of those is belong to you. Yours is different from other's. But there is one specific window which is free for all to see through. Some people come there and see through that, some don't. 
Significant is that you must go through that. Can or not, is not the case. You, may or may not have a look through that, but at least you have done, what you should.

Faultlessness

يكشنبه, ۵ مرداد ۱۳۹۳، ۰۷:۰۹ ب.ظ
There is a state that I would like to call " state of belief " with presupposing that we can talk about every state where we are or not in. 
This state has no attributions. An extreme idea ought to be there, which is neither consequential, nor egoistic. That is faultless in own-self. 
These are the possible expressions, which we can say about that. 
Is not important, who said this.
Posted by

When a question arises from Belief's body !!

يكشنبه, ۵ مرداد ۱۳۹۳، ۰۷:۰۲ ب.ظ
There are so many questions that every time, arise from certain belief's body. 
One of those is; what to do if you are not a strong person to follow a belief all the time without any doubt? Our doubt with close relationship to our tiredness raise specific questions which recommend hopelessness of following the path to us.
Is the way which I believe, a true way?
If you are not a strong person in ideas and beliefs, there is nothing to do with this question by you, except changing yourself. As soon as, you  are in contact with questions, you will find that, if you still want to live, you have to change. 
Posted by

Still there!

يكشنبه, ۵ مرداد ۱۳۹۳، ۰۶:۵۷ ب.ظ
I am still hopeful to find a reason for coming to Costa Coffee, but everyday I find myself there without any reason.
What I have found during last ten years of my life, is this that, it is going in an strange an anonymous way, which I don't know more about that. This is my 30Th of February's notes, what is suppose to show that, how I will find new changes in my life. Day by day, I am facing with new messages, that are not really meaningful, but I can't also imagine that they have no meaning at all. At least, I could feel something with regard to them, that indicated a new situation in my life.
What I remember of past, during last ten years, periodically, I have gotten  messages which have been wanting to show me, I am missing some part of life. But unfortunately, I couldn't understand them properly. I still keep going on that to may or may not find the true position.
Posted by

Isolation

يكشنبه, ۵ مرداد ۱۳۹۳، ۰۶:۵۱ ب.ظ
Giving a promise to a person, or an idea, or a thing by isolating yourself from others. This could be a path of life, but there are requirements for that. One of those requirements which in my opinion is most important, is having belief. Belief in the way that you are going in. Belief in following your path forever. Belief in having no doubt about path. Belief in yourself and your choice.

  1. If you are the person, isolating is the absolute way for you. 
  2. But, if you are not the person, isolating is not the case. 
In the case of not being believer, you are in a very complicated situation. You know what to do, you know truth, you like to follow, you like to be active in the way, you like, but you can't. Finally you will find yourself in unsolvable situation. And for being alive as soon as you felt, you have to emigrate to isolating level. But there is fundamental difference between you and first type of person. Difference will not be solved at all, except by chance and this is because of the conditions which are necessary for converting level 1 to level 2. Those conditions are not similar and must not be, as they have difference in origin. 

Non-Monotonic Logic

چهارشنبه, ۲۱ تیر ۱۳۹۱، ۰۱:۱۹ ق.ظ
This is maybe the source of Logic, which we use in our day-to-day Life, and we are using of it, unconsciously; non-monotonic logic.
 
A non-monotonic logic is a formal logic whose consequence relation is not monotonic. Most studied formal logics have a monotonic consequence relation, meaning that adding a formula to a theory never produces a reduction of its set of consequences. Intuitively, monotonicity indicates that learning a new piece of knowledge cannot reduce the set of what is known. A monotonic logic cannot handle various reasoning tasks such as reasoning by default (consequences may be derived only because of lack of evidence of the contrary), abductive reasoning (consequences are only deduced as most likely explanations), some important approaches to reasoning about knowledge (the ignorance of a consequence must be retracted when the consequence becomes known), and similarly, belief revision (new knowledge may contradict old beliefs).

The term “non-monotonic logic” covers a family of formal frameworks devised to capture and represent defeasible inference, i.e., that kind of inference of everyday life in which reasoners draw conclusions tentatively, reserving the right to retract them in the light of further information. Such inferences are called “non-monotonic” because the set of conclusions warranted on the basis of a given knowledge base, given as a set of premises, does not increase (in fact, it can shrink) with the size of the knowledge base itself. This is in contrast to standard logical frameworks (e.g., classical first-order) logic, whose inferences, being deductively valid, can never be “undone” by new information.



Who gave strength to Abraham's arm..

يكشنبه, ۲۸ خرداد ۱۳۹۱، ۰۱:۲۵ ق.ظ
Who gave strength to Abraham's arm, who kept his right arm raised so that it did not fall helplessly down! Anyone who saw this would be paralyzed. 
Who gave strength to Abraham's soul, so that his eye did not become too clouded to see either Isaac or the ram! Anyone who saw this would become blind.  
And yet rare enough through they may be, those who are both paralyzed and blind, still more rare is he who can tell the story and give it its due. 
We know it, all of us - it was only trial.
 Soren Kierkegaard - Fear and Trembling

Problem of Suicide - Albert Camus

پنجشنبه, ۲۸ ارديبهشت ۱۳۹۱، ۱۲:۲۳ ب.ظ

The fundamental subject of “The Myth of Sisyphus” is this: it is legitimate and necessary to wonder whether life has a meaning; therefore it is legitimate to meet the problem of suicide face to face. The answer, underlying and appearing through the paradoxes which cover it, is this: even if one does not believe in God, suicide is not legitimate.

 The Myth Of Sisyphus And Other Essays
Albert Camus
Translated from the French by Justin O’Brien
1955
This question and answer try to criticise Kierkegaard's solution to problem of suicide. According to Camus; Recognition should deal with problem of suicide.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Being and Having - Gabriel Marcel

جمعه, ۲۲ ارديبهشت ۱۳۹۱، ۰۹:۵۱ ق.ظ

This I do sec: that the privilege or primacy which I ascribe to my mental equipment, and to what belongs to it, is conceived or imagined by analogy with the fundamental and unthinkable privilege which distinguishes my body in so far as it is mine. In this privilege my ideas, in so far as they are mine, have an indirect share.

Would it make sense to say that having and being are, as it were, essential concentrations of space and time? I am not sure.

April 7th

Being and Having 1949 - Gabriel Marcel

Chapter I [A Metaphysical Diary] - Page  86

A translation by: Katharine Farrer

 of Eire et Avoir



One of the most important points, for Gabriel Marcel - as an existentialist - is "being and having".

According to him, " when we hope, we do not have hope. We are hope. Similarly, we do not have a belief. We are belief."[1]

" My body insofar as it is my body, is both something that I have and something that I am, and can not be adequately accounted for using either of those descriptions alone."[2]

So consequently, an individual never can be completely connected to h/imself in one direction. 


[1], [2] With reference to: Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy 



- Relevant:
*h/imself = herself/himself 

*h/is = her/his

*s/he = she/he

Enhanced by Zemanta

یادداشت‌های فلسفی

[ پروردگارا برای آنچه اهمیتی ندارد، چشمانی ضعیف به من بخش؛
و برای حقیقتِ خود، چشمانی روشن ]
دعایی متعلق به اُسقف آلبرتینی، نک به:
Dr. D. L. B. Wolff, Leipzig, 1854, iste, D.p. 293
مترجم: رویا منجم
..
در اینجا با انسان به معنی خاص کلمه سر و کار داریم. ببینیم چه‌هایش را چگونه می‌چیند و با خودش چگونه کنار می‌آید!
آیا راهی هست؟!
بعد از پنج سال که کم و بیش به انتشار نوشته‌هایم پرداختم، حالا بیشتر به این فکر می‌کنم که خطوط کلی را شفافتر و پررنگ‌تر از گذشته رسم کنم. لذا در اولین قدم، اسم وبلاگ را که سابق بر این با "یادداشت‌های یک نویسنده" شناخته می‌شد به "یادداشت‌های فلسفی" تغییر دادم.

دنبال کنندگان ۲ نفر
این وبلاگ را دنبال کنید