Uniformity vs. Unity

2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (7) ◽  
pp. 54-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tatyana B. Lyubimova
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
Traditional Approach ◽  
Modern Science ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Greek Philosophy ◽  
Ancient Greek ◽  
Ancient Greek Philosophy ◽  
The World ◽  
Traditional Cultures ◽  
Collective Creation

The question of whether it is possible to philosophize outside the categories of rationalist philosophy is not limited to methodology. It has ideological overtones. Namely, the rationalism that has developed in philosophy in modern times, after Descartes, is inevitably supplemented by mechanics. The world is seen as a machine, the living is reduced to mechanisms. Rationalism becomes a machine of mentality. Taking it as a model of normal thinking, giving it a universal value, we thereby impose Western way of thinking on other cultures with a different mentality. The question, therefore, is not about the method of scientific knowledge but about the power realized through the transformation of mentality. Scientific knowledge conquers space. Philosophy produces a transformation of mentality. New rationalism, according to G. Bachelard, is in dialectical relation with the usual realism of the natural Sciences. In this process, there is the implementation of new schemes developed in the complex interaction of “ratio” and experiment. Modern science is the collective creation of a new reality. This is the reality of the “picture of the world.” There is another view of science, rationalism and modern philosophy. According to him, rationalism is dualism, atomism and social individualism. These features reveal the anti-traditional and anti-metaphysical spirit of modern Western civilization. The traditional approach is non-duality, unity provided by metaphysical principles. The new rationalism in science is characterized by the belief in the infinite progress of knowledge. But knowledge itself, from the point of view of tradition, is devoid of great value. Philosophy uses categories of ancient Greek philosophy or German classical philosophy, but they cannot be considered universal. They corresponded not only to the time and place, the conditions in which they arose, but also to the characteristic mentality of the peoples and individuals who created them. They are not suitable for understanding the metaphysical doctrines of traditional cultures. The language of traditional cultures is symbolic and synthetic in contrast to the analytical language of Western science and philosophy.

FORGOTTEN UNITY OF BODY AND SOUL AND THE NEED FOR A NEW PHILOSOPHY OF SPORT

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (7) ◽  
pp. 2523-2529
Author(s):  
Slobodan Marković ◽  
Zoran Momčilović ◽  
Vladimir Momčilović
Keyword(s):  
Ancient Greece ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Greek Philosophy ◽  
Ancient Greek ◽  
Constructive Dialogue ◽  
Ancient Greek Philosophy ◽  
Philosophy Of Sport ◽  
Body And Soul ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Present Text

This text is an attempt to see sport in different ways in the light of ancient philosophical themes. Philosophy of sports gets less attention than other areas of the discipline that examine the other major components of contemporary society: philosophy of religion, political philosophy, aesthetics, and philosophy of science. Talking about sports is often cheap, but it does not have to be that way. One of the reasons for this is insufficiently paid attention to the relation between sport and philosophy in Greek. That is it's important to talk about sports, just as important as we are talking about religion, politics, art and science. The argument of the present text is that we can try to get a handle philosophically on sports by examining it in light of several key idea from ancient Greek philosophy. The ancient Greeks, tended to be hylomorphists who gloried in both physical and mental achievement. Тhe key concepts from Greek philosophy that will provide the support to the present text are the following: arete, sophrosyne, dynamis and kalokagathia. These ideals never were parts of a realized utopia in the ancient world, but rather provided a horizon of meaning. We will claim that these ideals still provide worthy standards that can facilitate in us a better understanding of what sports is and what it could be. How can a constructive dialogue be developed which would discuss differences in understanding of sport in Ancient Greece and today? In this paper, the authors will try to answer this question from a historical and philosophical point of view. The paper is divided into three sections. The first section of the paper presents two principally different forms or models of focus in sport competitions – focus on physical excellence or focus on game. The dialectic discourse regarding these two approaches to physical activity is even more interesting due to the fact that these two models take precedence over one another depending on context. In the second section of the paper, the focus shifts to theendemic phenomenon of the Ancient Greek Olympic Games, where the topic is discussed from the perspective of philosophy with frequent historical reflections on the necessary specifics, which observeman as a physical-psychological-social-spiritual being. In the third section of this paper, the authors choose to use the thoughts and sayings of the great philosopher Plato to indicate how much this philosopher wasactually interested in the relationship between soul and body, mostly through physical exercise and sport, because it seems that philosophers who came after him have not seriously dealt with this topic in Plato’s way, although they could.

Sustainable Hedonism

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Orsolya Lelkes
Keyword(s):  
Good Life ◽  
Modern Science ◽  
Greek Philosophy ◽  
Ancient Greek ◽  
Ancient Greek Philosophy

Drawing on modern science and ancient Greek philosophy, this book calls to explore our collective and personal convictions about success and good life. It challenges the mainstream worldview, rooted in economics, that equates happiness with pleasure, and encourages greed, materialism, egoism and disconnection.

Robert Boyle and Subversive Religion in the Early Restoration

1974 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 275-293 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. R. Jacob
Keyword(s):  
Natural Philosophy ◽  
Greek Philosophy ◽  
Ancient Greek ◽  
Proper Understanding ◽  
Robert Boyle ◽  
Free Inquiry ◽  
Ancient Greek Philosophy ◽  
The World ◽  
Competing Ideas ◽  
Early Restoration

Boyle's natural philosophy as it evolved in the 1660s was the product in part of some competing philosophies and theologies. Since he defined his own thought in terms of these others, one of the best ways of understanding it and its origins would seem to be to study it in relation to this context of competing ideas—especially as this has never before been done for Boyle. This was no mere battle over philosophical and religious ideas; beneath the surface lay extreme ideological differences; the nature of society and government was at stake just as it was in Boyle's dialogue with the sects in the late 1640s and the 1650s. Indeed some of his opponents in the 1660s still represent positions against which he argued before the Restoration, and these are the ones I wish to consider here.In 1665 or 1666 Boyle wroteA Free Inquiry into the Vulgarly Received Notion of Nature. By “the vulgarly received notion of nature” he means the conception deriving from ancient Greek philosophy, both Platonic and Aristotelian, that there is a governing agency in nature apart from God which cannot be reduced to the mechanical principles of matter and motion. This agency is called variously plastic nature, the astral spirits or the soul of the world, and as Boyle says is conceived by “the schools” as “a being that…does always that which is best.” Boyle's intention is to show that his own idea of nature is preferable to this Peripatetic and Platonic one because his goes further than its rival towards a proper understanding of the relations between Creator and creation.

scholarly journals Formation and development of the concept of "emotional intelligence": a historically conditioned philosophical analysis

2018 ◽  
pp. 36-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lyudmyla Rakityanska
Keyword(s):  
Emotional Intelligence ◽  
Greek Philosophy ◽  
Ancient Greek ◽  
World Outlook ◽  
Primitive Society ◽  
Primitive People ◽  
Ancient Greek Philosophy ◽  
The World ◽  
First Time

The article deals with the historically conditioned philosophical aspect of the formation and the development of the concept of «emotional intelligence» from the pre-Christian times to the Antiquity. This concept, as a complex of mental properties of an individual, was first formulated and introduced into the psychological theory by the US scholars P. Salovey and J. Mayer in 1990. However, the origins of ideas on the problem of the unity of the emotional and the rational can be found in religious and philosophical teachings. The Bible contains examples that testify to the role of intelligence in emotional self-regulation of a human being and confirm the existential, «emotional wisdom of mankind». Our research has proven that the idea of the relationship between emotions and the reason as the essential manifestations of an individual is recurrent at all stages of the history of mankind, its roots date back to the time of the primitive society. In various periods of history, that problem was interpreted differently depending on cultural-historical, religious and philosophical traditions, world outlook views regarding the role of human emotions and human reason in the cognizance of the surrounding world, the nature of their interconnection, and attributing parity or priority features to them. The mythical and pagan views of primitive people, their animistic beliefs testified to the undivided nature of their thinking, and were embodied in various visual-sensory forms of collective creativity that combined intellectual, emotional and volitional attitude to the world. As the human civilization developed and the social relationships changed, also changed mythological and philosophical views of primitive people that were opposed by the naive-spontaneous philosophical world outlook of ancient thinkers. The image and the symbol of the primitive society were supplanted by the Logos, i. e. the reason, by means of which the naive-spontaneous philosophy tried to solve world outlook problems. Still, the representatives of the Pythagorean philosophical school can claim the credit for using, for the first time, emotions as the basis for the comprehension of aesthetic phenomena. During that period, for the first time within the ancient Greek philosophy, aesthetic knowledge was formed, to which the notion of «sensuality» was central. The classical period of the ancient Greek philosophy testifies to the priority of the «rationalized world outlook» of the ancient philosophers, who approached the solution of the world outlook issues from the standpoint of reason.

FORGOTTEN UNITY OF BODY AND SOUL AND THE NEED FOR A NEW PHILOSOPHY OF SPORT

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (7) ◽  
pp. 2523-2529
Author(s):  
Slobodan Marković ◽  
Zoran Momčilović ◽  
Vladimir Momčilović
Keyword(s):  
Ancient Greece ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Greek Philosophy ◽  
Ancient Greek ◽  
Constructive Dialogue ◽  
Ancient Greek Philosophy ◽  
Philosophy Of Sport ◽  
Body And Soul ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Present Text

This text is an attempt to see sport in different ways in the light of ancient philosophical themes. Philosophy of sports gets less attention than other areas of the discipline that examine the other major components of contemporary society: philosophy of religion, political philosophy, aesthetics, and philosophy of science. Talking about sports is often cheap, but it does not have to be that way. One of the reasons for this is insufficiently paid attention to the relation between sport and philosophy in Greek. That is it's important to talk about sports, just as important as we are talking about religion, politics, art and science. The argument of the present text is that we can try to get a handle philosophically on sports by examining it in light of several key idea from ancient Greek philosophy. The ancient Greeks, tended to be hylomorphists who gloried in both physical and mental achievement. Тhe key concepts from Greek philosophy that will provide the support to the present text are the following: arete, sophrosyne, dynamis and kalokagathia. These ideals never were parts of a realized utopia in the ancient world, but rather provided a horizon of meaning. We will claim that these ideals still provide worthy standards that can facilitate in us a better understanding of what sports is and what it could be. How can a constructive dialogue be developed which would discuss differences in understanding of sport in Ancient Greece and today? In this paper, the authors will try to answer this question from a historical and philosophical point of view. The paper is divided into three sections. The first section of the paper presents two principally different forms or models of focus in sport competitions – focus on physical excellence or focus on game. The dialectic discourse regarding these two approaches to physical activity is even more interesting due to the fact that these two models take precedence over one another depending on context. In the second section of the paper, the focus shifts to theendemic phenomenon of the Ancient Greek Olympic Games, where the topic is discussed from the perspective of philosophy with frequent historical reflections on the necessary specifics, which observeman as a physical-psychological-social-spiritual being. In the third section of this paper, the authors choose to use the thoughts and sayings of the great philosopher Plato to indicate how much this philosopher wasactually interested in the relationship between soul and body, mostly through physical exercise and sport, because it seems that philosophers who came after him have not seriously dealt with this topic in Plato’s way, although they could.

scholarly journals REPRESENTATION OF AUTHOR's SCIENTIFIC MODEL OF WORLD THROUGH THE TEXT

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 495-500
Author(s):  
N.V. Efremova ◽  
E.N. Belova
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
Modern Science ◽  
Medical Discourse ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Scientific Model ◽  
Medical Texts ◽  
Discursive Space ◽  
Communicative Strategies ◽  
The World ◽  
The One

The article is dedicated to the one of the key problems in modern science - the problem of translation of scientific knowledge - and takes medical texts as an example. Due to analysis of the medical texts from the same author we can see a realization of the scientific model of the world by choice of an actual discursive space. As his/her aim is to translate his/her point of view to the readers, author can do it directly, in an accessible and easy way, for non-specialists, or indirectly, sharing his/her knowledge, experience and ideas with colleagues. According to the need for analysis of communicative strategies and tactics of the contemporary medical discourse, an actuality of the article is associated with an analysis of linguistic and stylistic methods of creating both types of texts.

scholarly journals Comparison of Husserl and Bergson ontologies in realty-appearance: Being-appearance dichotomyHusserl ve Bergson ontolojilerinin gerçek-görünüş ikiliğinde karşılaştırılması: Varlık-görünüş ikiliği

2017 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 3708
Author(s):  
Hüseyin Aydoğdu
Keyword(s):  
20Th Century ◽  
Phenomenological Method ◽  
Greek Philosophy ◽  
Ancient Greek ◽  
Pure Consciousness ◽  
Life World ◽  
Creative Evolution ◽  
Ancient Greek Philosophy ◽  
The World ◽  
Real Entity

In this work, we aimed to examine the realty-appearance duality solutions and the results they have discussed in the Husserl and Bergson ontologies on the axis of being appearance dichotomy. One of the fundamental problems of the ontology is the reality-appearance duality, which has been discussed in the context of the being-appearance dichotomy from the Ancient Greek philosophy. The reality-appearance duality is one of the basic problems of ontology in the 20th century as it was in the previous periods. Husserl and Bergson wanted to analyze and solve the problem of reality-appearance duality in their ontologies, as a reaction, on the axis of Plato, Aristoteles, Descartes, Kant and Hegel discussions. Husserl has developed a phenomenological method to solve the problem of reality-appearance duality. Husserl discusses the reality-appearance duality primarily through essence. According to him, the things we understand are not the looks, but the essences, as Kant said. The truth is only the essences. What we perceive as our appearance is the images given of the essences. He discusses the reality-appearance duality through being / experience. In Husserl's ontology, being and experience are in fact identical. When it is called being, it understands experience, and when it is called experience, it understands being. He, divides into two parts the entity, a phenomenological entity and a real entity. Phenomenological entity is real entity and corresponds to truth. Real entity is relative asset and corresponds to appearance. Bergson has developed an irrational method of intuitionism, which is to solve the reality-appearance duality. At the beginning of his ontology has a reality-appearance duality as it is in Husserl. It is the crude and lifeless matter that emerges at the places where evolution pauses and is about the physics in the creative evolution process that Bergson refers to as appearance. The truth is that life is the world of life, in which creative evolution continues and can only be perceived and perceived through time. There is an ontological and epistemological difference between the material world and the life world. Thus, Husserl and Bergson aim to reach knowledge about the essence of reality, namely the nature of existence, by discussing the reality-appearance duality in their ontologies. While Husserl is reached knowledge of the essence of existence with pure consciousness, Bergson reached with intuition and time.Extended English abstract is in the end of PDF (TURKISH) file. ÖzetBu çalışmamızda Husserl ile Bergson ontolojilerinde varlık-görünüş dikotomisi ekseninde tartışılan gerçek-görünüş ikiliği çözümlemelerini ve vardıkları sonuçları incelemeyi amaçladık. Ontolojinin temel problemlerinden biri olan gerçek-görünüş ikiliği Antik Çağ Yunan felsefesinden itibaren varlık-görünüş dikotomisi bağlamında tartışılmıştır. Gerçek-görünüş ikiliği önceki dönemlerde olduğu gibi 20. yüzyılda da ontolojinin temel problemlerinden biridir. Husserl ve Bergson, ontolojilerinde gerçek-görünüş ikiliği problemini Platon, Aristoteles, Descartes, Kant ve Hegel tartışmaları ekseninde onlara bir tepki olarak ele alıp çözümlemek istemişlerdir. Husserl gerçek-görünüş ikiliği problemini çözmek için fenomenolojik yöntemi geliştirmiştir. Husserl gerçek-görünüş ikiliğini öncelikle özler üzerinden tartışır. Ona göre kavradığımız şeyler Kant’ın da dediği gibi görünüşler değil, özlerdir. Gerçek olan yalnızca özlerdir. Bizim görünüş olarak algıladığımız ise özlerin verilmişliğindeki görüntülerdir. O, gerçek-görünüş ikiliğini ikinci olarak varlık/yaşantı üzerinden tartışır. Husserl’in ontolojisinde varlık ile yaşantı adeta özdeşleşmiştir. Varlık denildiğide yaşantı, yaşantı denildiğide varlık anlaşılır. Varlığı, fenomenolojik varlık ve reel varlık olmak üzere ikiye ayırır. Fenomenolojik varlık gerçek varlık olup hakikate karşılık gelmektedir. Reel varlık ise göreceli varlık olup görünüşe karşılık gelmektedir. Bergson ise gerçek-görünüş ikiliğini çözmek için irrasyonel bir yöntem olan sezgiciliği geliştirmiştir. Onun ontolojisinin başlangıcında da Husserl’de olduğu gibi gerçek-görünüş ikiliği vardır. Bergson’un görünüş olarak kastettiği yaratıcı evrim sürecinde evrimin duraksadığı yerlerde ortaya çıkan ve fiziğin konusu olan kaba ve cansız maddedir. Gerçek ise yaratıcı evrimin devam ettiği ve ancak süre ile fark edilip sezgi ile kavranılabilen varlıktır, yani yaşam dünyasıdır. Madde dünyası ile yaşam dünyası arasında ontolojik ve epistemolojik bir fark vardır. Böylelikle Husserl ile Bergson ontolojilerinde gerçek-görünüş ikiliği tartışmalarıyla gerçekliğin özüne yani varlığın özüne ilişkin bilgiye ulaşmayı amaçlamaktadırlar. Husserl varlığın özüne ilişkin bilgiye saf bilinç ile ulaşırken Bergson ise sezgi ve süre ile ulaşmaktadır.

The Philonic God of Revelation and His Latter-Day Deniers

1960 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 101-124 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. A. Wolfson
Keyword(s):  
Greek Philosophy ◽  
Ancient Greek ◽  
Ancient Greek Philosophy ◽  
As If

Philo, professionally, was not a teacher of philosophy. He was a preacher, a preacher on biblical topics, who dispensed his philosophic thoughts in the form of sermons. And because he was not professionally a teacher of philosophy, some modern students of his works say that he was not a philosopher. For nowadays, as we all know, to be called philosopher one must be ordained and one must be hired to teach philosophy and one must also learn to discuss certain hoary problems as if they were plucked yesterday out of the air. Some say that Philo was an eclectic. But there is one eminent authority who would begrudge him even the title of eclectic without further qualification, for, after all, eclecticism is the name of a reputable system in ancient Greek philosophy. The eclecticism of Philo, our eminent authority says, “is that of the jackdaw rather than the philosopher.” But, while we may deny Philo the honorific title of philosopher, with the privilege of wearing ostentatiously a special garb like that affected by ancient Greek philosophers, we cannot deny him the humbler and more modest title of religious philosopher. As such, Philo was the first who tried to reduce the narratives and laws and exhortations of Scripture to a coherent and closely knit system of thought and thereby produced what may be called scriptural philosophy in contradistinction to pagan Greek philosophy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document