Natrag   Forum.hr > Društvo > Filozofija

Filozofija Misaone teme lišene dogme

Odgovor
 
Tematski alati Opcije prikaza
Old 17.07.2018., 11:59   #521
https://www.3ammagazine.com/3am/empt...lLJ69.facebook

Intervjujic koji fino adresira neka temeljna Madjamicka pitanja.
__________________
SMISAO ZIVOTA !!!
Beljki is offline  
Odgovori s citatom
Old 17.07.2018., 14:01   #522
Quote:
Beljki kaže: Pogledaj post
https://www.3ammagazine.com/3am/empt...lLJ69.facebook

Intervjujic koji fino adresira neka temeljna Madjamicka pitanja.
Dobar intervju. Nekoliko naglasaka koji su me se dojmili:

Quote:
...does saying that everything is empty entail a form of nihilism? This is a complex question.
Quote:
At the most basic level, saying that everything is empty does not say nothing exists, simply because saying that x is empty does not say that x does not exist, but that x is insubstantial, does not exist with intrinsic nature, and could not exist in a lonely state, without other entities around.
Quote:
So as you go on analyzing, saying that medium-sized dry goods do not exist, throwing them out of your ontology because they are simply imputations made on the basis of molecules, and then saying that molecules do not exist, because they are simply imputations made on the basis of atoms, and then saying that atoms do not exist, because they are simply imputations made on the basis of sub-atomic particles, in the end everything gets thrown out of your ontology, and you end up with nothing. So this looks like nihilism after all. I do think the Mādhyamikas have a way to respond to this, by saying that at every level of analysis something appears (the appearances of medium-sized dry goods, if we analyze the world of our immediate acquaintance, the appearance of molecules is we analyze in a more fine-grained manners and so on) but that appearances do not exist. We can never find an appearance, only the ground of the appearance, and Madhyamaka says that there are no grounds.
Napomenuo bih ipak da se ne slažem s tumačenjem da madhyamika odbacuje strukturalni izomorfizam između svijeta i jezika (word-world relation) jer bi to nužno vodilo u ontološki iracionalizam koji je pak logički inkonzistentan.
Istini za volju, Westerhoff ostavlja otvorenim pitanje da li madhyamika nužno implicira odbacivanje metafizike kao takve:

Quote:
On the one hand the Madhyamaka arguments about dependence, insubstantiality and emptiness appear to be clearly metaphysical. On the other hand we might be unsure about what metaphysics is all about if it is not about finding out the most fundamental truths concerning all that exists. But the Madhyamaka’s thoroughgoing foundationalism undermines the existence of such most fundamental truths as well. So we can either regard the Madhyamaka project as inconsistent...or...attempting to show via metaphysical arguments that the metaphysical project is fundamentally flawed.
Naposlijetku, ukazao bih na poklapanje Nagarjuninog koncepta "praznine" (sunyata) svih stvari i Hegelovog koncepta "negativnog jedinstva" o kojem sam baš jučer i prekjučer nešto drvio:

https://www.forum.hr/showpost.php?p=7...&postcount=700
https://www.forum.hr/showpost.php?p=7...&postcount=701
__________________
"Tko izgubi dobitak, dobije gubitak."
Sigmund is offline  
Odgovori s citatom
Odgovor


Tematski alati
Opcije prikaza

Kreni na podforum




Sva vremena su GMT +2. Trenutno vrijeme je: 10:05.