'Er is niets buiten atomen en ledige ruimte' beweerde Democritus van Abdera: filosoof uit de Oudheid (460 – 380~370 V. Chr). Ook vandaag de dag lijkt de fysica nog steeds deze mening te zijn toegedaan (met uitzondering van de ledige ruimte), evenals de biologie, die zich vasthoudt aan de beweringen van de celtheorie. Een menselijk wezen schijnt hier niets meer te zijn dan mechanistische voorwendselen die de ware aard van de levende wezens verdoezeld. Ik beweer niet dat een mens meer is dan de natuurlijke processen die eraan ten grondslag liggen maar enkel dat de scheidingslijn tussen biologie, fysica en bewustzijn verder gaat dan wat zich in de mathematica en de 'analyse van leven' durft te tonen. De overtuigingen van het vitalisme, waarbinnen men het concept ‘leven’ karakteriseerde als een essentiële maar ongekende (zelfs mystieke) kracht, werden reeds eeuwen terug steeds verder teruggedrongen naar het domein van de pseudo-wetenschappen. Dit was echter niet omwille van de onwetenschappelijkheid maar eerder dankzij de opkomende wetenschappelijke revolutie: de standaarden van wetenschappelijke verklaring werden steeds verder verfijnd totdat het vitalisme nog nauwelijks plaats kreeg binnen dit kader. In deze zin is de erosie van het vitalisme niet zozeer primair bepaald door de onjuistheid ervan maar door de vooruitgang en wijziging in het denken over natuur en impliciet hierin eveneens het denken over wetenschap (conceptueel en feitelijk). De ontdekkingen binnen de chemie en de biologie (instrumenten, theoretische analyse, ...) fungeren hier als autoriteit en de reflectie hierover geldt als het meta-niveau zonder dewelke het eerste slechts éénzijdig blijft. Dit is een opmerkelijk gegeven dat zich steeds weer herhaalt in de geschiedenis: de vergankelijkheid van pre-wetenschappelijke beweringen, door de tijd achterhaald; variaties aan tal van instrumenten, wetenschappelijke theorieën, experimenten en feiten. Slechts elementaire vraagstukken blijven bestaan, gehuld in een gewaad van verschijningsvormen. Het vitalisme is er één van. Niet de vraag van verklaring naar het waarom van het verschil tussen stenen en vlinders maar het concept van ‘leven’ en voornamelijk de benadering en de verklaringswijze hiervan zijn verantwoordelijk voor de terugval ervan (van het vitalisme). De hoofdvraag werd echter onaangeroerd: waarvan stamt het leven? Mechanische processen en fysicalistische descripties beantwoorden slechts de afgeleide vraag: hoe is het leven? Wat het leven is en waarom het gedijt, blijft een mysterie, een schijnbaar mogelijke richtlijn. Neem je aan dat God bestaat, dan weze de zaken simpel, hoewel. Reken je daarentegen op logische deducties en realisme, veel succes! Niets is onbevraagbaar, onvatbaar voor kritiek, waar!
Behoedt u voor diegenen die menen 'de waarheid' te verkondigen. Als je de fysica bekijkt, merk je een grote diversiteit op, verspreid over tijd en ruimte. Neem je de godsdienst als uitgangspunt, evenzeer. Ja zelfs in de filosofie stikt het ervan. Behoedt u voor DE waarheid van buitenaf. Binnenin schijnt ze harder en meer nog, levendiger. Behoedt u! Slechts perspectieven kleuren de waarheid, maar niet binnen de lijnen. De lijnen werden voorheen reeds uitgetekend: het kleuren is aan u!
Requiem for Herman Note
Moge goden je respecteren.
Invloed
- Willem Van Ockham
- Westerse filosofie
- Werner Heisenberg
- Visions of the future
- Stef De Pooter/ Maarten Vergauwen/ Jelle De Saegher/ Anouchka Springael/ Kobe Verheyen/ Nico Raps/ Baltorius BAL/ Wang Fong Li
- Sophocles
- Richard Feynman
- Michio Kaku
- Mezelf
- Marcus Tulius Cicero
- Koenraad Verycken
- Klassieke en Moderne fysica
- Isaac Newton
- Immanuel Kant
- Gottfried Leibniz
- Friedrich Nietzsche
- Francis Muskala/ Bart Muskala/ Koen Muskala/ Gerda Schelkens
- Family Guy
- Euripides
- Erik Myin
- Emile Cioran
- Diogenes Van Sinope
- De Presocraten
- Brian Greene
- Blaise Pascal
- Bertrand Russell
- Baruch de Spinoza
- Aristoteles
- Albert Camus
- Aischylos
- ..........................................
Over mij
- Stijn Muskala
- Puurs, Antwerpen, Belgium
- Geboren en getogen te Jette. Als kind reeds een denker. Vandaag nog steeds. Gedoemd door denken, gedoemd tot denken. De studies hebben deze tendens in een mooie, doch wankele lijn voortgezet. Filosofie studeer je niet, dat ben je. Er bestaat zoiets als Wijsbegeerte, wat je kan volgen aan vrijwel iedere universiteit. Maar dit is slechts een historische en analytische studie die je evenwel niet tot filosoof maakt maar een expert in het voorgenoemde domein. Wie aan alles twijfelt is niet noodzakelijk een denker, hooguit een vragend wezen... of een kwast. Wie daarentegen oud wordt maar de kinderlijke verwondering t.a.v alles blijft behouden met een vragende, zelfs vorsende intellectuele oprechtheid, benadert de houding van een filosoof.
Plato en Aristoteles
Metafysica en Biologie
Favoriete Auteurs
- Zwagerman
- Wolkers
- Voltaire
- Tuchman
- Tolstoi
- Stiller
- spinoza
- Shakespeare
- Sagan
- Russell
- Rousseau
- Poe
- Plato
- Pascal
- Orwell
- Orson
- Morris
- Many many many others
- Locke
- Kant
- Kaku
- Kafka
- Jung
- Houellebecq
- Horowitz
- Hinton
- Grisham
- greene
- Graham
- Goethe
- Fleming
- Erasmus
- Dostejewski
- Clark
- Cioran
- Caroll
- Camus
- Boëthius
- Berkeley
- Berckmans
- Augustinus
- Asimov
- Arendt
- Aquino
Mensheid volgens de filosofische Antropologie
Mensheid volgens de filosofische interpretatie van religieuze Godsdiensten
Philosophical loneliness
‘‘If I could solely be contained
in a canvas which beyond human interest and above all,
prosperity, raises the question of a life in perfect solitude,
as it not should be but in essence is the only remaining perspective,
then, would it not be an abdominal question whether or not to choose this state of mind?’’
Perhaps so,
but consider with what intention, and even more so, with what regard are you doing so?
Should it not best be foregone by the following task: from which point of view are you glancing at the so called ‘state of mind’; and moreover, should you not try to apprehense the whole situation, which is not just you but the entire history of mankind and your neighbour?
One does try to flee from the outerworld for a whole lot of reasons. But I’m not directing to the loneliness out of poverty, drug and alcohol abuse, illness or inability. Examples of such types are numerous and, but not always, easily understood.
Now consider the above mentioned question of willingly embracing the solitude: the removing of every other standard out of your own with the consolation that you don’t have any sort of need pointed towards this too human-alike desire to consolidation in general. That is why at first leaving the unity of consol(id)ation, that is, humanity.
In a less misanthropic way you can still recognize the peculiar fact of the long, the ache for solitude and let it be emphasized that it does not need to be against the human condition ‘per se’ because even without this nuance it shows very clear our directing point:
the breaking from all moral, sensitive and simple madness all together created by human effort, the so called ‘human endouver’.
Why would any kind of being support this sort of atypical and, when considered in relation amongst anthropic situations, asocial behaviour; moreover, how can it be philosophically understood?
Why philosophically? Because the aim is not the degenerative symptom of loneliness: not in a biological or psychological way, nor sociological or criminological. It also does not make much sense (however) to describe this peculiarity in mathematical or chemical way.
There is however another, less trivial, matter why the connection with philosophy is valuable within this context. A glance at the history of philosophy in general, or in a very concrete way, the life of most philosophers ever known, gives us a sample of what is the matter.
‘‘What is our main objective, that is, what do I understand under the concept of ‘solitude’ perceived from the philosophical point of view?’’
Could it be solitude out of ressentiment towards humankind... morals... ‘condition humain’?
Nothing of this seems to be coherent with the attitude; this does not mean that it cannot be a mixture of these things with some other things, but it is never as easy as saying that one or two of the above mentioned reasons are the whole explanation for the ‘syndrome’; we’re dealing with a philosopher here, things are not that easy. And if they are, than he would surely not approve the simpleness, as if his own mind seeks the heavy side of life. And who else will share the same destiny, the same course of events (which is the same as ‘destiny’ but then quoted for the non-believers), raised and brewed out of discontent with the irrationality of everything, tremendously shocked by the way things evolve, as described by every social science within the academic world as well as in concrete, individual life? A refugee, deeply sad and unhappily satisfied by alcohol and tranquillizers… behold, the beginning of solitude.
Let us get into detail, within the marvellous thoughts, feelings and experiences of the so called being and his condemned essence:
the philosopher’s solitude
______________________________________
The philosopher
As I walk through the forest, alone and wandering in my mind about the very nature of trees, a breathtaking thought runs through my veins and mind: ‘why do so little people understand me and how come I always end up tired?’ I’ve last occupied this thought several years ago but I hoped I would be freed of this feeling again. Did I not better my existence back than? ‘Could it be that I loose myself in depressing, mind-disturbing habits for the seventieth time or so…?’
Most likely.
But when I walk down the path between a lake and a house, someone calls a sound addressed to my direction, I guess: ‘haaaii stranger, how commin’ to you, e’rithing a’right?’. At first I was afraid of the tone he used. Loud and profound he stated his entrance, but catching and overwhelming he pointed out his existence, his neighbouring around me. Not disturbing, as I experienced. ‘You from aroun’?’ he shouted. I felt no obligation answering him. We were in the wilderness of nature, several kilometres away from civilisation. ‘No mister, just wandering around. Got no job and no place… just wandering around, no obligations, just rental places. No wife, no children… just me and the world. Left home when I was 22, studied philosophies and never came above it. What an ambiguous choice of being, not?’ You know you totally wreck things and still you persist in doing so. You love it, cannot leave this thing called deepness, interpretation, manic sincereness: all together, love towards sincere truth and sacrifice for…
behold, the philosophers solitude.
Can this be one of the reasons for our main question? I think it is, partly.
He began to speak about the search for truth and consolidation and how these two concepts are intertwined. He explained me how people do not want truth rather than certainty, opportunity above honesty; live your own life with regard to, that means, with respect to, every natural being without lowering your nature. Cows are eaten, dogs are fed but human kind will never cease to give up life as long as survival is possible. This is a natural fact: survival of the species runs evolution, in every bio-system known today: the utmost conditions, best and most pleasurable situations are preferred.
In the quest for truth only one thing remains solid and profound, the careless truth and rightful attitude towards it. Without, it cannot be equal to the concept of truth. Why would anyone try to risk his own life instead of treason to a simple fact which no one recalls? This is THE criterion that subdivides the true from the untrue, the pure from the soiled; the utmost condition for truth, ladies and gentlemen. If one seeks and desires safety and warmth, good. But only when sincereness and vivid motivation can create effort and appropriate to the rightfulness of truth, the concept of truth and its carriers, there and only there lies the nature of truth and with it, the source of wisdom. Wisdom is like the water, carried out trough a fountain, steered by the initial boost that is provided by the shape of the fountain and the strength with which it boils out the substance, the incarnation of the truth, namely the water, our wisdom; but the truth itself is the fountain, the source of wisdom and, when led into the right composition, it tunes out, as if the water is in some sort of balance, the most beautiful harmonies ever heard. Wisdom as truth and truth within wisdom, the cosmic (as seen from anthropic perspective) symphony on which the whole search of the old Greek philosophers was based. The fountain is the way within many forms of truth can resemble, but without the water and the definite shape within which it is forced, truth holds nothing. That’s why truth needs carriers, relyable and convinced. Not fanatic but rightful and inspired by goodwill.
‘Never forget that you are only human, and so entitled to only a fraction of what you seek. Perhaps one day, when science reaches what is beyond limit today, we can get a lot of answers to this mind boggling conundrums, but the fact of the matter is that in reality we are only placing more question marks into this picture we call life (so why bother with human interest and not live free, as nature intended to?)’.
Is it then not worthy searching for it? I began to ask myself. But this leaves us with only two options: either you leave this struggle or you don’t. ‘So you tell me that I have only two choices in this all, whereas the choosing of one disperses the other. Could it be that one is actually doing both at the same time: living with the knowledge that there is something we call truth or God or… and that it is fascinating in all ways, but at the same time not always recognizing the existence of it and sort of like treat it as opportunity, but not as a valuable thing in itself. That’s an intellectual perversity, I think’. Were these the only possible attitudes towards a living in truth? He astounds me with his reply: ‘Are there any options at all? Why do you state the possibility of a choice here; because u feel trapped and overwhelmed by the responsibility of truth, does it weighs too much (upon your all too humanly shoulders) or feeds the need to get out of this situation? Frightened by it. Maybe mankind around you doesn’t respond to this and that could also be interpreted as a flee, but not necessarily. Still you keep in mind that you are human and so gifted with the capacity of adaptation and therefore able to plan and foresee things, not only towards the future but even so with the past; this is what enables within us the learning-out-of-experience capacity and creates the picture of choice, on which we hold on with strong belief. (this is called a non-deterministic point of view) But how can one be sure that ‘potentiality’, ‘possibility’ and even ‘choice’ forms the playground for the human theatre, the satire within which whole mankind is rooted, written? Does it not feels like biological determinism, as if you do not even have the opportunity to overweigh the procedure, to balance the accessible from the inaccessible, the normal from the atypical? Many times it does feel like that. ‘Get near and I will explain further’, he proposed, knowing that I would regret the sincere honesty of the person in front of me, the stranger who settled me with more wisdom in 2 hours than a schoolteacher could reach in 2 years (,of course I was younger back then). “One, two, three”… how good is your math? “Exuberant”…spell it, how good is your grammar? “Explain Kant” how good is your philosophies? I, myself, do not care about what you know because what you know is only practicable within the realm of, and always related to, human traffic but I would like to transcendent this ‘gratuit’ state and enter the foggy forest of meta-physics (for the philosophers amongst, I do not mean ‘metaphysics’ in a denigrating sense).
De verschillende wetenschappelijke domeinen en de onderzoeksobjecten
School van Athene
Rafael en de filosofie
Vijfde Solvay conferentie
1911 Brussel en de fysica
- http://images.google.be/imgres?imgurl=http://srikant.org/core/img1530.png&imgrefurl=http://srikant.org/core/node12.html&h=650&w=566&sz=53&hl=nl&start=33&tbnid=--Pfv_27jD5W2M:&tbnh=137&tbnw=119&prev=/images%3Fq%3Duncertainty%2Bprinciple%26start%3D18%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26svnum%3D100%26hl%3Dnl%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26channel%3Ds%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26sa%3DN
- http://www.tenthdimension.com/medialinks.php
