2013 Sayı 20

Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://hdl.handle.net/11452/12938

Browse

Browsing by Language "en"

Filter results by typing the first few letters
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Hegel’s ınterpretation of Kant's epistemology
    (Uludağ Üniversitesi, 2013) Çüçen, A. Kadir; Uludağ Üniversitesi.
    Kant and previous philosophers in the modern philosophy have inquired into the limit of human knowledge, so the limitation of knowledge is the result of a basic view of the Critical philosophy. According to most of the modern philosophers, before one wants to attempt to know God, the essence of being, etc., he or she must first investigate the capacity of knowledge itself in order to see whether it is able to accomplish such an attempt. Hegel criticizes this view in the Encyclopedia, section 10. He claims that the task to examine knowledge before using it is based on a false analogy with tools. If one does not want to fool oneself with words, it is easy to see that other instruments can be investigated and criticized without using them in the particular work for which they were designed. But the investigation of knowledge can only be performed by an act of knowledge.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Transcendence and life: Nietzsche on the “death of God”
    (Uludağ Üniversitesi, 2013) Roney, Patrick
    The aim of this essay is to reflect on the implications of the thought of the death of God with a view to two related themes. The first has to do with the a-teleological interpretation of Being and the world as a result of the collapse of the transcendent realm which heretofore had given a meaning to life. The death of God implies that no finality can be ascribed to either the world or human action. The investigation of this theme necessitates examining one of Nietzsche’s central doctrines, the Eternal Recurrence of the Same. It has long been considered to be the most puzzling idea in Nietzsche’s corpus, to which he himself offered no thorough explanation but simply referred to it obliquely as his “most abysmal thought.” The second theme to be discussed is the nature and the task of thinking after the death of God and its relation to suffering. The a-teoleological interpretation of life implies that reason and the good no longer guarantee one another, and that thinking cannot justify suffering in the name of the greater good. The relationship between life and suffering must be re-evaluated and so too must the value of suffering. The point that Nietzsche makes is double; the transformation that he calls for is not only to affirm suffering rather than eliminate it, but to affirm that thinking is suffering.