Andrea Pasotti
THE INDIVIDUAL AND HIS SOUND VISION OF THE WORLD
We are interested to consider what can be measured as the correct way of seeing things from a human being.
To do this, we need, therefore, the figure of a "subject-standard", an "individual-type", to take place in a general way, that is not tied to specific historical situation of each individual, identified with her in uncovering features common to all, provided they have a conscience cosiddicibile "ordinary" normocoscienza.
We, therefore, go to this "individual-type", a journey of understanding about the reality within which he lives, as if he, turning over its history since its birth, had to take the key to his way of knowing immedesimantesi it in the way of anyone knowing.
His knowledge, he will have to be aware as such, will be started when he like any human being in general, you will realize exist, and that there was also everything around him.
This human faculty, our subject Investiganti calls it, precisely, consciousness, thanks to which the individual "realizes" that communicates to itself, of things and can therefore say that it is thanks this, if, in fact, realize exist.
If consciousness allows the individual to understand in general that he exists, which means that our subject Investiganti, can be considered the first key aspect of that person in general. He
individual usually is, therefore, first, conscious.
This figure is even more the foundation, in a sense (ie not as fact or value, but, but, as a series of sensitive elements to provide knowledge that come to his knowledge explicit in today if it makes Investiganti, ie in a path that leads to knowledge of himself and of his powers), not the fact that he exists: just because, of course, without conscience, would not know to exist, although it is also true, of course, on the other hand, that, without there would not have consciousness, but this, precisely, do you know later, thanks only consciousness, that is why, for him, the act of re-knowing, consciousness comes first, though, of course, the fact is that comes before the fact of being human and alive.
That is, to put it another way: if he said "the first thing I'm aware of is that I exist", implicitly saying that it would be "the first thing I'm aware of is that they are conscious, and then something that is for precisely that exist ".
say, then, that the human being and alive, that exist, in other words being existent, as even the existence of individuality within other "things" that surround it, our subject Investiganti considers the second key aspect themselves: in appearance, in fact, are known by consciousness.
This apparent reversal of the facts of essence and consciousness should not disturb, if one realizes that his self-observation of the human adventure, in its relationship with the world he sees around him, allowing the individual to decide the "dominance" in terms of food for the journey, the essence of self-consciousness that he observes, it is clear that in-mediately, that is without thinking, he is first conceived as existent, but when he returns upon himself, here, the observation of its opportunities for mediated knowledge, provides, however, inevitably , another hypothesis.
This, without any value-judgments that claims to put first the essence of consciousness, just as a technical dell'autoosservazione. But
arises, then, now, to our subject Investiganti, another problem: how it works, this consciousness of the individual in general?
With this awareness, the individual tends to give a way of things (objects of reference of conscious) that sees.
He must, therefore, now, imagine how their presence.
And what does it do? Before
receives them, so pure and simple.
then interprets them, that it is her idea.
When he became an idea, gave them a way of being, who can call their identity means, therefore, has been identified.
Now, this identity, in the end, he gives it to him as he wishes, no one forces him to give him one and not another.
Thus, there is one that is not necessarily true, if it can change based on your tastes.
That is, it can also be a way to be true, this "thing" that he sees, whatever it may be, but he has no way of knowing, and, therefore, needs to adjust as he can, trying to go as close as possible.
now, because if you look well, you know that is what he wants to try to go as close as possible?!
Why, then, an idea on what he observes, where does it anyway, if only implicitly and automatically, and then, if you actively try to better understand how this "thing", maybe he's wrong less, when it has to do with it, and, therefore, consequently, there is the possibility that his life better. Our subject
Investiganti can be assumed that the individual agrees in general, then, establish general rules, to refer to when they need to understand in an active, explicit, deliberate, as a "thing" that, in order to arrange his judgments, and do not start from scratch every time, or go random .
Even this, can serve to facilitate the task of judging, and therefore be easier, so maybe better life.
So, what are these rules, he can be posed on the basis of which it can know things?
First, a good rule of thumb is that his conscience to work well, that is usually how it works, and how they like to see it in other works usually eating, drinking, call sky the sky, to understand verbal messages that he exchanged with his fellows, etc. what, exactly, we have defined "normocoscienza.
Another good rule is that he puts the facts, real things, first of all, seeing that his life is made up primarily of facts, concrete things.
This means, for example, that a stomachache comes before the idea of \u200b\u200bGod (which is, however, also a "thing", a reference object to his conscious activity, although in this as merely an ideal, not physical, that is not experienced through the senses). More
one thing (and here is the case that the individual generic it relates in particular to something concrete, like a stone, then an object to be observed, even before that to interpret) gradually he sees in the same way, and it seems that others see it as him, maybe more likely to be, for trial of man himself, the proper way, that is more convenient to see it. A
hardest thing is when you must set rules and not on the mere finding of a thing (which, in this case, it will be basically practical: as, for example, the aforementioned stone), but, rather, for ' precisely, on its way to judge, to interpret it.
In this regard, would be the case that in a "thing" he sought and preference items that do not change, so be ready to find them, as constants of the identity of that "thing" (object reference of conscious activity), but the next time, and always find them: so that also his opinion, does not change, does not need to change: in this way, he gets the confirmation that give coherence to his opinion, and the sense of having hit the precise identity of that "thing".
In addition, another criterion for interpretation is that "something" that always happens, he can convince more about the idea that you do it, one that happens only once. Then
is good, for example, that he takes account of what he has learned so far, to go on trying to err less (which means, however, also review any knowledge that today, he considers wrong).
that he tries to find a road that does not come back on itself several times.
he seeks, for a problem, the solution the most radical, if not all, possible, in deference to the 'go as deep as possible in the way of recognition as right. "
That he uses his intelligence as much as possible, yes, but without neglecting the emotions and instincts in order to decide with all his conscience, which contains all of this, everything himself. What he
to as much as possible with himself and with others, albeit in the manner most convenient to him, to give themselves more opportunities to better understand and correct the error in the event of fire: this, at least until you are Consider the fact that an idea sufficiently accomplished.
These are the basic rules that we can consider that, according to our subject Investiganti, an individual may give up trying to give the best way to be the "thing", ie the reference of conscience, for the note, which takes into consideration.
Through these rules, his quest for knowledge, then his "philosophy", it is rigorous, although not in the way of objective science but retaining them on the advantage of being able to play, exercise is essential to guide man in the world, and that, in fact, would be implemented automatically when not in use. It
strict identity search, configure it, then, as un'identitologìa.
Now, to prioritize and economized this research, the person must ask: is there a "thing", that is actually an object reference of conscious activity, that should be considered before all others, for try to understand how we can be of this "thing"?
Well, the priority is, evidently, the "what-all": that is, the real general.
The ultimate goal of knowledge is, therefore, to give a way of being in the general reality, at least as a rough guide themselves towards this real-General so that they can possibly gain some advantage from this form of knowledge.
But, as usual, as the real essence, is determined by consciousness.
This means that the conscious self, which depends on the mode of general essence of reality as the subject sees it (although this does not mean they can see it in any way, but should, instead, take note that it shows him in some way, at least in terms of constatatività data).
So, to interpret reality, the individual must, first, to interpret the self conscious: because it is, the lens optical modalization reality.
So, the question that the individual must do, is "what is my identity" to get to say "what is the real identity of all."
In short, the "thing" to which the guidance, "primarily", the task of investigation, is himself: why, precisely, by his way of being, depends on the way to be the rest, since it is he who sees and judges, and eventually gives him an identity.
The good thing is, then, put this in itself as a primary element of analysis, which, he individual should have the opportunity to know each other better than I know what it is not him, that is to say what he perceives as more from him.
And then, when it comes to putting into practice the ideas of age, who, himself, can do much more than they can act on many external things to himself.
Now, however, an acquisition is crucial for our subject Investiganti: he must try to judge him on what which unites him to the others, because, well, so be, of itself, an idea that suffers from constraints due to its one and only person epperciò distorted.
Indeed, suits him just try to find what is common to all, beyond the apparent differences.
The search for roots of a constant and invariable thing, it can lead to an unambiguous assessment of that thing.
And because it is himself, he must know all!
Its aim will be, therefore, to develop a general perspective on the human being, then according to him, that is what Investiganti for our subject is now a special representative humanity must logically become the way in which humans typically arises in respect of the whole of reality that produces it, and, therefore, its own point of view on it.
As for saying that, for the individual, ie it bends to the terms under which you might be interested to know, cosmology can and should be thought of as induction of anthropology.
So here it is our Investiganti subject (and we understand now how much has been corrected, for its part, standardized from the beginning, that is, out of each specificity) struggling with his judge his way of being, that is, in same time, the way of being all.
But it is now clear that his manner of being, as well as those of others like, they seem to many.
There is, therefore, one that is earlier than the others, and from which others, in one way or another, depend, in short, a fundamental and basically all have in common?
The subject is "okay.
But, what, is, first of all?!
First of all, is a living being, ie a mobile body, to put genericissimamente.
The force, it can be observed and noted, creates movement and variety of configurations in the real cosmic general, it conveys in his physical body and his mind (which I am aware that unconscious), moving one to another.
But his body as strength goes, I respect him, individually, and for his mind-power he feels at least partially active.
The conscious ego, which is basically what the individual feels himself to be, records the activities of this force-mind: this activity, as he comes (and to which, then, is a passive agent) or how he feels able to process it (and to which, then, is an active agent) may be defined will or motivation.
This desire or motivation, then, is the essence of how basic, our subject Investiganti, recognizes the individual in general (and, therefore, even to himself, of course), in the sense specificizzazione of a force that, in general, resulting dall'omniverso, as the body moves. This
its strength, which, precisely, we show how, actuality, conscious or unconscious desire to self conscious, not the effect of nothing, does not depend on anything, except, of course, the fact that he identifies, exists, that is "(but since he himself, in the shape of our research, is looking for a way of life because of his own being, it means, then, that the fact that it exists, has already acquired: and is, precisely, by evaluating features).
His will, for precisely the expression of the ego conscious organic force, it appears, however, the source of all his other ways of being, we mean, then, those that he can control, although not to manage power, consciously: that is, his other ways of being are the result of his own, whether he is acting, is that he can not do more than take note.
This, then, is for the person Investiganti, the third fundamental aspect of the individual in general, after those to be conscious of existing. He
individual usually wants, aims: It is, therefore, strong-willed (or motivated) as it is, overall, animated.
But as it appears, then, I understood as a conscious individual, this manifestation of his own volition or motivation?
That is, what he suggests, by this expression?
clear that he will strive toward something, even if only in terms of request for continuation of a state already present (and, then, of course, in itself, experienced as fundamentally Faust), which is the basis of anything an individual do or think, or anything else: namely, the propellant itself typical of his existence experienced as such.
And these propellants or voltage acting on the basis of being present, by the subject, namely for its existence here, in the present.
His life has always proved to be, by its own consciousness, a progression of the present, his past is gone, and its future, we will not know if it is clearly only one of its idea, he really is, then, only in the present.
This, then, is a fourth fundamental aspect of the individual in general, of which our subject now takes Investiganti-type (due at the end of the propellant prospettatogli diveniente will report on, and then consciously decentralizing than an implicit order possession of a certain hour what what) made aware. He
individual usually lives and exists only in the present: it is, today.
But if, then, as it appears, he subject of "conscious volitional existent and present" at both activities and decide what level that can only be held, for the note tends to something, it means that basically takes the form his eccentric nature, which reveals a difettualità than one instance of perfection that he detects in the background to the active part of the will, and that, therefore, can not inductively not to transfer, as a claim of self, on the strength and total motility contraddistinguentelo, which in general and in principle can not more than take note.
Then, if the intention behind the specific active, precisely, a constant voluntary basis, unlike the first of these has its resolution of peace only possible in the virtual, ie can not fully satisfied and exhausted within that life, as far as it could be considered, and offers grants, and if this basis of voluntariness of the ego's active witness to the induction of the individual as I Urga for motility in general that he does not govern, it follows that the individual is in possession of nuclear identity that requires something that the state of existent, it is not able to give him.
For this to happen, that is why, from the overall natural constitution, create a core and opposed to it even capable of realizing it, when clearly autoleggentesi, remains mysterious, but should take note.
Then, at its core, the individual is antagonistic.
He has some stability, and, not having some stability, incongruizza compared to what he had basically sought-after, and then that of the present, this constant by which he is not, however, the artifact well I really would like.
To keep up very well what he is now in its constant, should not be able to stretch towards something else, or at least should not be able to strive with experience of unpleasantness, that of "contradiction voluntas" flagrant: beyond the latent always precisely in place, compared with the implicit request for completion of all the tensions .
Instead, he, in fact, at least implicitly, always tends (also in the permanence of the "status quo" auspicious, if any), and, moreover, may tend dissatisfaction with the act and in doing so, the 'optimistic "that his foundation calls (precisely desiderialità implies, or both, by implication, that the purpose extinct), undergoes a double check, a failure on two levels. The existing individual
not "get": if he had "arrived", it should not then seek more, should not, that is, most will be in some way, something else than it is (or is that ).
all its tensions, its willingness, motivation, groundwater or obvious, they want to get to their end, that he, in the case of a clear intention, can have their head in a more or less immediate (eg, its willingness or motivation manifest specifies how to turn the car to leave, could cover the more general to make a pleasant evening meeting): this, it means that they, want to run out on their own, wanting to take him to a state in which, by themselves, there are more and this is what he likes it can be inferred from the tension end.
Or at least, he would not be able to live them in conscience as were causing discomfort, compared to what, then, should not be seen as a lack, when, that same tension, he is given.
In general, then, the individual wants to satisfy his own will or motivation, which is voluntary or motivational base, but he is shown to be able to really get, or arriving in a state where it no longer wants, that is to say he no longer needs to want, or, at least, coming in a state where it has the certainty that his will, is never capable of causing illness.
But, what you may know, this dual status, there is in life (at least in normovita): there is neither the first nor the second!
This, however, it should be noted, has nothing to do with the denial of the possibility that a specific individual, give it to absurd and pure hypothesis, an existence entirely auspicious, but the fact is that, nuclear self, even auspicious Of this subject, not content with mere possibility, that this happens: the ultimate goal, however misapplied, is a certainty, avoidance Fault!
E 'obvious, in fact, that some tensions, or even a lot of tension, or even almost all the tensions, or, ironically, even all the tensions can be resolved well, as it is clear that in some cases, or even in many cases, or in almost all cases, or even, ironically, in all cases, the individual can live his "stress" with consciousness unabashedly happy, but if he is happy with this pure possibilities, "he would leave his life at the mercy of the possible and contradictory with what, then, betraying himself to the end, since, however, the decentralizing mechanism, incongruizzante not reassuring and that is precisely upstream momentary mood is that the outcome of tension involving specific purpose, is constant, and is fundamental mood is temporary, the same possible outcome, that auspicious or inauspicious they are!
This, then, is an unequivocal test of its own rules for the essence of this mechanism, therefore, our subject Investiganti may be that the identity of the individual in general, continues with a new modalization: the autoantagonismo, the autocriticità, or autoproblematizzazione, which then, inductively, it becomes critical and problematization and antagonism towards Because of this general reality of individual condition.
is beginning to take shape, then the possibility of giving identity to the general reality, the ultimate goal of their research identitologica, that starting from the identity attributed to himself, by the subject Investiganti, in what, precisely to all his fellow men, basically, it binds and unites; results, ie, antagonize, as inappropriate, since the real general, it edifying as a human being antagonized as inappropriate.
So, in general of this individual, who appears as himself antagonist, compared to what he himself asks if they say that is to say absent, the general reality, the subject Investiganti can claim to have identified a fifth aspect: he is (though not if autoesplicita almost never, probably, to a narcotic effect of his their biological make-up) antagonist.
We will see how that is in that sense, he can affirm having antagonist, without contradiction.
For now, we note that, quest'autoantagonismo, comes essentially from the fact that, what sets it apart more than anything else (apart because every thing), namely the propellant incongruizzante, apparent in his conscience, the result of the will or motivation palesantesi as such, he is "not well", can not stars well, since it is as if he precorresse in terms of implied claims, ultimately, a goal impossible. In his
be in this, in fact, he should have to attain it, in order ultimately to his every desire, and therefore of the will, or voluntary, or motivation, in general.
His "I" would require that he become an institution raggiungentesi, that is never in deficit, at least in substance if not in consciousness.
All his volitional or motivational specific purposes, including those of stay "status quo" which have this basic purposes: and then, inductively, that purpose, he may, for the note, also screened on motility, the propellant contraddistinguente his body.
But then, I qualify with these implied claims as "absurd," disavows himself, or rejects, rather, what this does not give him?!
is that, in response to this question, is the solution of the apparent discrepancy between self-assertion and autoantagonismo.
In reality, in fact, then, I affermantesi always fatally, it turns out not antagonistic to himself as I, which would in any If not (which implies that he can not be "absurd" his claims, though, they, in fact, impossible), but, but, to his creation of individual and human being, with whom he overlapping but also feels partially related; constitution, within the constitutional-environmental world that he experienced (with which it is totally related), and then all of reality within which, this environment-the world is configured, is the triptych antagonist (and, therefore, the I, in turn antagonizes) deprivantelo, in fact, his background urgenzialità he saw as self-recognition may (and against this triptych, though, that the ego is a fundamental antagonism, not absolute, because, said triptych, also allows possessions, meaning auspicious volitional).
Compared to this, in fact, as I said, I am he as the foundation of individual self can not relinquish himself to choose stars of fundamentally good in its own constitution and in doing so, in fact, he would betray you, because it would at least ' self-recognition as a precondition of being able to give the best, he recognizes that the primary thrust in all its modes of essence, and the same avviantelo on the road to search for a deliberate and explicit knowledge, and it would, therefore, for its part, an orientation masochistic and foolish. The subject here
Investiganti acquires, then, that his own existence in the world, like that of his fellow men, is fundamentally unsuited to an urgent ego nuclear background: both his own, than that of its like, the fundamental desire on the part of the individual in general, what ultimately is a condition of not wanting, not to tend to something else, or at least do it without him discomfort may arise, for precisely, our subject Investiganti knows, based on observation, direct and indirect, of the lives of his fellows, who the human being will not ever, in life.
E 'right to assume, therefore, deliberately explicitly, their opposition to this state of affairs: that is, note that its fundamental nature of identity, it demands it. We can not
refuge behind a claim, and ultimately counterproductive, neutrality is not aware of the issue in acquisition, then, somehow, take it anyway, even if you do not think.
If you want to do as if nothing had happened, or if, in fact, no one ever thinks, will mean that we passively accept this state of existence that, however, can be recognized as inadequate, if, instead, account is taken of this fact that, ultimately, its very essence, or if you prefer to say, the deepest part of his ego, he wants something that will never (ie, or a state of perfection of the will that is not a want, or are not willing to imply that it can not ever miss the sense of this than his own will), and that as a result of this way of being, to their essential core, or if you prefer to say, the deepest part of myself, basically can not feel good with the constitution which itself is found to exist in the world, then gives you the opportunity to decide how to respond actively to change this situation, of course whenever possible. Our subject
Investiganti will then certainly reason to believe that the individual in general, would prefer the second way of attention to the problem: the idea, expressed by him at the beginning and the source of undertaking this research, which try to be more aware of what happens in his life, may serve the individual, to improve it.
act actively to change this state of inadequacy antagonized whenever possible, they said, therefore, first, however, groped you want to draw conclusions before the acquisition of theoretical principles, and then practice, our subject Investiganti, in accordance the criterion of appropriateness of the dialectic, considers it its duty to check what, in the history of human thought, it is thought, and therefore what you might think, compared to guidance from him so far gained.
He must, in particular, whether, quest'inadeguatezza harbinger of life of antagonism, it may be, to some extent, offset: and, therefore, refuted.
He can start with the most classic of countervailing arguments: the array transcendent.
In fact, it is clear that the transcendent, theistic or not, had a large part in human thought.
The ideological cornerstone of this approach is that, the task that the essence individual tries, it will have you in a life after this: and therefore it is just to wait, then you will be satisfied, which, in the opinion of the supporters of this approach, it involves being able to assent to his own existence, despite the apparent, according to one based human basic incongruity of it compared to his own ends.
In fact, our subject Investiganti certainly has a way to point out that, first, that fulfillment in life after death is only a hypothesis, as well as obviously the same life after death is only a hypothesis, which therefore, it should be done precedes the certainty of inadequate basic Notes about this life that, with the consequent antagonism and remedies that can help keep it alive, and then, however, even if there were, this task after death, it is said that, this effect should necessarily involve Maybe, or the existence of the cause of life on earth!
Investiganti Our subject, before this setting will, therefore, reason to reject the claims of those who want, in favor of a chance, the human being does not take better account of what now is certainly that happens.
The two things, the incompleteness of the here and after the completion of here with, can not bind, because if you are with the possibility, from which follow an assent to being-there, the individual ends up able to take certain decisions, while, if you are with certainty, from which follow antagonism being-there that has so far seemed the proper perspective in terms of respecting its deepest identity, ends up being able to take the other.
Then, it should be free to decide the direction of the authenticity, because if they can get one that is equally true best convenience for themselves.
How, then, to the fact that it may be considered as more correct perspective for our subject Investiganti, which is more appropriate and fair to be with the certainty that we have of what we live, we see that he can confirm it also turning to the arguments of compensatory nature immanent, without pushing the ideas of progress, which finally "put things right" up in heaven, In fact, the argument of the certainty of current privilege also applies to ideas of progress of soil type: social, political or scientific it is.
objection, even in this case is simple: you can not build a future made, however hypothetical, on the shoulders of those who, with respect to this task, there is now incompletely, and this, for sure.
So, the idea of \u200b\u200ba perfect society (socio-political) or brain purged by the possibility of discomfort (science) does not apply to offset the debt antagonism observed compared to the human condition for what it actually is and will be up to hypothetical revolutions it.
Going even further, and continuing to explore the possibility of compensation by the antagonism he unveiled during his research, our subject Investiganti will face the arguments of their own psychic sciences, according to these arguments, an attitude fundamentally antagonistic to just be there and, by implication, being generally that produces it, can only result from any particular flaw in the equally deep-seated individual who has primarily focused on the mechanism of instability expressing itself in a way that implies a request for stability impossible, as modalizzante peculiarities of human beings.
According to the proponents of these arguments psychological evaluation that is inherent in the mind of the self, have to be something happened in the life of mature specific approach of this kind: something that has clearly influenced and distorted His vision, turn up to give it a "pathological", ie abnormal (identifying, in this case, usually with true respect.)
Given this, it will be difficult for our subject Investiganti, argued that those who support such a thesis, should be able to prove that an individual for whom you could talk about roots "sound" could not arrive at this type of acquisition identifier, that it could not reach a mature vision of the world , as well as, the same contributor, would be able to rebut the finding that, in contrast, retained roots as "sick" does not necessarily lead to this kind of comments about obiettivizzanti a mechanism that applies indiscriminately to all men, without any details, and that, therefore, should bring together both those who stresses that anyone who rejects it: positing, then, that the possible independence, these observations, which should then be assessed in its own self-respect, beyond any "conspiracy".
should therefore be provable, that a world view of antagonistic necessarily imply a causal condition in its upstream and spoiling the observation, and that, however, a causal conditioning and spoiling the observation, can not produce a vision of predominant world objectively on the basis of substantive arguments to be proposed with respect to alternative views, even those with roots produced by so-called "healthy" and, frankly, does not look like it may be provable, such a thing.
In fact, whether this antagonistic way of seeing things that our subject Investiganti notes that the most appropriate to characterize the identity of human beings in general, until proven otherwise is of intrinsic merit, as is the case, for our subject Investiganti, how much, if not more, than those who speak of a poorly designed constituent antagonistic way of seeing this (which, in its antagonism, among other things, includes the possibility of quest'inadeguata structure, unwanted ego the same way as any other condition of flagrant contradiction, as well as, upstream, silently ready to be flagrant contradiction to the will of good as established as its own core of the ego in general), however, should be that those who speak on behalf of the psyche, to demonstrate to our subject Investiganti that he is mistaken, and implemented, this demonstration, speaking in rebuttal on the same, this antagonistic way to look at things differently, not comparing the merits of the findings, including our subject Investiganti could then apodictically say that the "roots", understood as the existential structures of these supporters of science (or, less demanding, and more appropriately, subjects) of the psyche, do not work: specifically, exceeding squilibratamente, as far as what ordinary is, action to protect biologically critical coverage of the core, and, therefore, they therefore do not see clearly, or maybe even sfocatamente, the mechanism by which, he points out as the most valid for the individual in general So for them too.
Or, conversely, always based on the idea of \u200b\u200bexcess cover for wildlife protection, our subject Investiganti could be argued that these their "roots", they work so well, so that in a passively compliant, that this becomes in fact, a limitation because it allows them to see what, since he sees him there and then, as an option interpreting the human, should still be seen, and that, among other things, it seems wrong to not give, do not give even greater as not right, if this is done to them; SINCE then, speciously reduced to criticize the operator, not to criticize the work. Our subject
Investiganti believes, in short, that acquisitions identifying reality, understood as products of progressive structure of consciousness, must start from a position of equality and confront each other, without ruling that games like the specific structure more or less virtuous quality of who proposes them.
It considers that, in comparison to being on the antagonism be-maturational on the basis of the observations which he proposes, with the assent to it typical of psychology in general, if he will find, then, as human psychology as a discipline proposing a particular paradigm of knowledge, being fundamentally wrong, it's a bad psychology, that is a bad and wrong speech as structures on the psyche of the individual mind, shaping it as his background leading to the finding of progressive self-conscious, which I estimating circondantelo himself and reality.
can not make clear that a true and correct speech on the psyche, a true and fair view "psycho-logy", which can not be a psychology able to understand this identity the deeper the individual inhabitant of the ego in general, an identity for the note for now collectively called as fundamentally antagonistic to being-there.
So, given all this, it is clear that the identitologìa, takes on his shoulders the task of correcting myopic observers of the human psyche.
One wonders, however, at this point, where does the arrogance of science (disciplines) of the psyche (mind), who consider their point of view than on the basis of an alleged reference of a root, even if the arrogance is not the same in substance dialectical able to refute the adversarial model and therefore appears, on the contrary, is below.
As is known, it stems from the so-called "biological paradigm" that is to say, the idea, preconceived, that a normal man, in the sense of not in some perverted way, just as an animal, you are agreeing to strength, not AUTODISC.
This means that it is claimed that the animal can not get to discuss its terms of animal frankly do not see why, if not biased. Having
then, if he did, he necessarily be ill, then if the disease is more sensible, that is more representative of a true identity of the biological norm, the disease is well! We can put
in the mouth of our subject Investiganti this provocation, in order to understand that "disease" and "health", in short, are just words, and which could, with reverse, not to be seen as very "healthy", who binds all his thought to a basic type of injury, "the man on his back to the laws of nature do not touch." In the case of human
so far observed, in fact, we would be overlooked, as noted, a kind uplifting essence, a "quid" conscious life, fundamentally at odds with it, on this side of all the findings structures accommodating precisely aimed at cloud at this essential nuclear energy, this "Quid" vital manifesting as consciousness, this awareness, which, in fact, almost invariably, is lost in the deepest recesses of the ego itself.
But this "not being able to see what happens" not rule out, precisely, the continue to oppose, by that I background, the manner of its existence also involving his natural constitution: however, that I contrapponentesi background, can remain unheard lifetime.
Thus, the "biological paradigm" is not, in fact, ultimately nothing but a blind prejudice.
Underlying this view is typical of the "biological paradigm" apriorism psychologistic founding, there would, however, still the other: and that is, a matter of pure logic seems fine, which states that if the man denies it, with this, he denies himself, and then , this decision to deny his own, which is still part of him.
Now it is clear that if the man is well, and, therefore, he says, what he thinks, what he comes to identify, and so automatically, that's not clear why, if the conclusion of this thought is that man should not exist because its existence is inherently contradictory to his own deepest needs and therefore inadequate, then this should mean, with reverse path, go against everything that, in terms of critical consciousness, has contributed to this conclusion.
A condition can bring a different result or even away from you, without that it does fail in its capacity assumption: indeed, from the point of view therefore, must be taken utmost value and essential, as is the can!
The man can say all that is contrary, implicitly, automatically, does just that, by its very existence, and it may, however, think quietly, at the same time, all that is him outside of the human condition, if there is any reason (and, in this case, the essential as opposed nuclearity as a result, the total natural constitution as agreed).
Then he came out from where the human condition, with this fully assert his human condition, in the assumptions and consequences.
not, in fact, that the consequences of rejection of humanity will act on the conditions of affirmation of humanity, or at least some part of humanity, which led to these consequences: indeed, these conditions were necessary to consequences, therefore, the consequences, not discredit them at all!
man can love from head to foot in the deepest part of himself and as a man of principle but denied as to his general constitution, for example, as in its mode of essence here proposed as the most authentic, considering, however, especially in terms of virtuous also that its very constitution that gives him positive!
For example, the vacuum left by the constitution or even lasciabile eccentric, not necessarily affect the full experiment in the present: and, therefore, this is so fundamentally disavowed, but not the same is not enjoyable!
Thus, the incongruity inadeguante individual with respect to its goal of positioning safe, for which he basically antagonizes, it should not necessarily suffer at all! This leads
Investiganti subject to our understanding of the fact that antagonism is not negativity, that is to say that there is no need to be sad, so psycho-biased humoral, to capture the sense of the inadequacy of the real and its specificity in within it!
That is a further blow to the pretensions of psychologistic conditioning necessary relationship between mental condition of the subject and its identification process.
course, aware of their fundamental inadequacy in relation to acknowledgment of its own nuclear ambitions, may cause suffering, it is clear, but certainly not by force: the mood, or more broadly comfortable with the psychic, does not necessarily have anything to do with this kind of awareness.
So, returning to the absence of contradictory statement of rigettante to see it again from another angle, we say that the individual does not deny that this is his way of being, as it acknowledges that what he has available but the opinion is negative compared to what is missing, his way of being, that is to say that the availability is only a part of itself to the individual, but paradoxically he is also from that which it lacks, namely ' I Notes and conscious of having dell'inavuto ago and heritage of both, positive and negative each other!
This, then, becomes, when the desirability of a court rule, denial-of-way to be the same, as the touchstone is the completeness (substantial), or at least complete enough (of consciousness), which the core of the self, as seen, implicitly requires. The
fundamentally wrong that I recognize, in short, not elide and does not circumvent the right part, at least until he decides to delete it!
Why, instead, want to think that only partially right, I mean even with that, necessarily, wrong "as such"?!
It is not wise, because it means not being able to distinguish. The
me, per se, it is wrong for what they did not, not for what he has!
fact, what he has, is, for him, always right, because if, for example, a tooth hurts, I do not live as a thing which, but one thing has not: that is, the tooth does not it hurts!
Then, we can say that, basically, there is, for him, whatever corresponds to his expectations, lack the contrary.
This speech, which is always.
This also applies to the desires related to pure virtuality, "romantic" as having wings (these belong still in the category of propellant and voltage, defined as, "I" conscious desire or motivation, so as you can see that good can be entirely unjustified, that is devoid of plausibility in terms of reachability of the end), and even for those How High, absurd: that do not have to be considered less legitimate in terms of their expression and representation of human identity: for damage, however, the general sense of limitation with respect to the will, irrespective of the nature of this same will, at the bottom then that is deeper and in the final instance, the analysis of the subject has revealed its Investiganti that human beings always want to something that is not there something "virtual" is that, in reality, his desire may or may not be specific (which then becomes irrelevant, for understanding the dynamics).
Back then, the relationship between self-assertion and autoantagonismo, we can conclude that their condition of men, it is the right word with respect to itself as a possession: you can not do otherwise, it becomes wrong, than what you do not have; artifact as well, is not necessarily against artifact!
Then, this implies that the ego, says his opinion, with which denies the limit given to him by his will that has, or is a condition of completeness or at least of sufficient completeness: and, ultimately, these things become, globally, antagonism to this way of being as a man, without any logic.
That is, does not imply a backward path that destroys the assertion of his trial.
In short, if the individual is discussed, and also even if it is destroyed, this has a value of self-affirmation, in any case.
We believe, for our subject in search of identity, be sufficiently addressed this topic.
Well, if that claim is not just logical, returns to follow that is not right either (since, precisely, refers to quest'appiglio) the idea of \u200b\u200bthem, from biologists to psychologists, who say that the man in health, must necessarily affirm life, specifically the continuation of life: this, then, that there remains an option in the field.
How, then, the allegations of pure abstraction and theory that can be made to this organization of thought proposed here, in this regard, it is necessary to say to our subject Investiganti loud and clear that the theory and abstraction are the necessary criteria elevation to general principles of situations and constant otherwise abandoned to the level of individual specificity, and, therefore, are values, permittenti an overview, not anti-values, are, in fact, the faculties virtuous port access to general categories of a question relating to reality. The
avulsion, however, if anything, is unjustified: it represents a circumvention of these realities concrete, and a loss of contact with it.
But we must be able to keep the two distinct things: thus, in effect, they are!
And that's it, that our subject Investiganti can close this chapter of comparison: whereas the attempts stronger compensation proposed by the human mind, its just you have identified the man in the way of being collectively called antagonism as the debt to the consequences of its highest and global features, namely the will or motivation, and therefore potentially spostantelo incompientelo than required by its nuclear-always been constantly in mind, namely the constant existence in actuality.
So, here it is confirmed, our subject Investiganti, the idea of \u200b\u200bhis antagonism to himself in the real world and bounce around, and, therefore, with what he finds another way to be critical of themselves, the sixth so far, namely that he, and, of course, its like any other along with him, is, in fact, incompensabile: why is not countervailable, that is reversible in assent, that orientation of Ethics derivatogli to everything that has until now regarded as a priority of the common human constitution, especially the fundamental, though almost always hidden and misunderstood (which, apparently, as stated, to the despotism of biological adaptation) autorigetto by ego lowered into the human condition of his being in the world, given his (implicitly unacceptable, because it induces all of the investments linked to the same tensive) to live or even be perceived as failing the state from which the impulse to ambition, or more less underground something.
As I said, then, will now, for our subject Investiganti, time to move on decide how to act or change, if possible and as far as possible the situation which he identified as inadequate by adversity, with the usual inductive process generantelo ego at all, he should begin to wonder what to do about the inadequacy of the general reality (here then the identity of that experience so far) but it is clear, as we suddenly realize, like, this general reality, is altogether out of reach, an aversion to practice, therefore, he must believe that being human, unable to settle its accounts with the Omniverse is forced to fall back on the second of contenders, and that he same: seeing, therefore, to resolve the inconsistency in the creature, this, indeed, to direct its scope of action.
And here, apparently, but only in appearance, contrary to all assumptions, jump off the look that will bind to life.
If, in fact (which seems, at bottom, the easier and faster), he believed that at this point, the right thing to do for the individual in general and therefore also for himself specifically, was that to commit suicide by destroying its will to another (or the permanence of this) autoindebiticizzante total, or even required that, at this point, the right thing to do, always for the individual in general and therefore also for himself, had chosen to surrender to decrease, the other its intention to (or stay of this) autoindebiticizzante, however, generic detection, he would remove the reasons of his own antagonism, which the will (acquisitive and greedy of increase until the implicit instance last possession of the totality) contradicted its purpose, epperciò "irritated" and antagonizzante are based!
The fact is, that if a human being can get to decide such a thing as suicide, this means that, in fact, he has lost, then, the real reason for the antagonism itself, which was ultimately, the will "more" on all fronts, or, however, the permanence of a possibly possessed unfailing rule of good conscience (which, then, went as far as the will to mean "everything" as a form of not lack anything, least precisely unfailingly experienced in consciousness), and its contradiction, or the possibility of it, to some extent should, however, necessarily, to express the real identity of the individual, keep it alive, that will, for others in which it is expressed as a possession, and, so, obviously, losing the ambition to more, or the loss of not just been felt, what in the permanence of existence, which is the address does not pervert the will, he has no reason to be annoyed by anything, and therefore no longer justifiable cause, to perform the act, or at least take a stance so-called denial, that is lived as ascetic as defeatist; this, since, precisely, in such a state of mind at the disinterested now more in the range of life, or to the retention of a sense of optimism, no contradiction to anything , would intervene to upset the "status" of this individual, and to him, therefore, set up the opportunity of an exit (thus how about the ascetic renunciation, he could stand outside of the absent one's own will and acquisitive incrementante or stay of a sense of optimism, has acquired a mental attitude based on which it would no longer have any reason to marry a braking attitude with respect to it will, then protect it from possible pain or resentment feared as a result of contradictions, chess, the will itself).
The fundamental characteristic of the individual will as evidenced by our Investiganti subject, in fact, it is clearly will have (or how to say no loss), that increase (or how much to say no loss), to be there, ie full (until the whole virtualizzante) of that to be there, and not already, to diminish or even destruction of that!
The gap to the virtuality (the fullness, completeness, or virtually full, impossible), which, ultimately, in principle, is, giving reasons for the antagonism, he can not disown the directional line that supports this outcome and it is clear that the identity of the ego essenteci incongruity in the world as it is based so much on the direction line, that outcome!
But then, at this point, our subject in search of identity, you ask, the idea that there can kill you from wanting more (or the confirmation of a more feared than the sense of less) from life, is it not a claim that the conclusions can not go in the direction different from the assumptions, as those who said that no one can deny his being a man from his assertion of man?
And he will be able to say no, because this is the kind of assumption, by its specific nature, namely the application to be increased, which makes an absurd result opposite to it, while the condition created by the mere assertion of human judgments does not in any way the result, thereby enabling any, and then also the opposite all'affermatività the proceedings. So
is consistent deny the man from this denial of human assertion, but it is not the be coherent vanishes from a willingness to increase it, as fundamentally contradicted!
Therefore, the will as the will of life, the individual, whether he knows very well observed, and then observed, can not want that, he kills himself, while his view, as seen, can safely say that the man in Overall not good: Since then, all right saying it's not good, that this does not go well is good, and the wire is consistent.
In the first case, the contradiction is real, in the second, is fictitious.
Having finally understood the inability to value streets contradicting his desire to have more from life (or to be protected from precipitation in less than satisfactory then it lives), as it should, basically contradicted from life itself in its latest instances, then, is binding, in the opinion of our subject Investiganti, the human life in general is the same as the way it is and, consequently, that's another way it turned out to be crucial, of this being understood generically human, that is to say, the seventh, he is bound.
Then, in your view of our subject Investiganti, the man usually can not translate his antagonism to him in a way made against him, he usually has to take this man in his own being against the human condition by placing it in a principle, and then submits it to the only subject for which she can still apply: the subject purely potential, the man who does not yet exist: the unborn.
The only thing that can, and then basically do, is not having children.
In this way, maintaining the ante-generated, the pre-designed (pre-generated, pre-designed, they do not need to adapt to an underlying mechanism, however, their dissenting deeper issues, and then basically indebiticizzanteli, as already happens for essentia), and thereby freeing them from a yoke of fundamental inadequacy avoided, he will also conduct individual in general and especially with regard to personal success, a 'symbolic self-liberation, since, in reverse, will the sense of crowning possible, the purchase of its own being fundamentally unacceptable: showing, thus, that he really understood and respected himself in his own nuclear weapons.
prevented, then the body to act in a reproductive iniquitous, the I nuclear power, which inhabit feels spontaneously but not with this dovendosene considered struggling, it will, as mentioned, in harmony as possible and not contradictory with its urgent needs, carrying out, then, for his total person, a kind of transfiguration subservient to the priorities of himself. And since I
the nuclear human condom this act by certain undue bodily functions is uncertain, as it requires each to his fellow man I like every nuclear power, knowing with what he snebbiare I dall'obnubilazione induced biological adaptation, however, this means for our subject Investiganti, that what the ego of each person is asked to recognize his being fundamentally armonistico, that is precisely the harmony between the applicant to fund itself and the functions of his physical, at least in the terms by which he can control it in a way that makes sense for him to be plausibly seen as a victory.
Here, then, that our subject-type search for identity of man in general, the identity of that man riverberantesi assignable to Everything, in short, has achieved another way of being, of human beings in general , namely, the eighth: he is a human being, ie, harmonious, precisely as I demanding deep harmony.
At this point, our experienced investigator, may be noted that this perspective (which, if taken by everyone, door, of course, the liberation of men from their condition), it is even against the prospect of actual existence of an "afterlife", so dear to transcendence: if there is the 'beyond', in fact, it means that things will be as far as possible, placed there, then perhaps pursuing an instance of the wider cosmic antagonism towards building up equity (the Christian devil, when duly that is beneficial interpreted, could be the symbol).
If, however, the spirit is in itself necessarily assenziente, Well, this lack of spirit is alive, and did not think to himself as a man!
If he pre-exists human incarnation, it means they will be expected to find other ways of evolution: as, precisely, men do not supply it with "wrappers" problems, such that the spirit can hardly to fall back on man!
In fact, if it did not provide alternative evolutionary pathways, the spirit that will not have to take it with himself for not having put a man in a position to know with certainty that his (spiritual) needs urgent, and, if not had in any case could, Worse for him, but he is not obliged to assent to inadequate human being a tool of those who, for him, no more than assumptions!
meantime, therefore, man has every reason to resolve their status of course, that is, the earthly situation, since, precisely, is not at all sure that it was purely as possible, the 'afterlife' to be resolved should not necessarily be able to do without some of the state, the here.
And going back on one front but totally immanent extinction hypothesis (more correctly: sublimation, release, resolution, liberation, emancipation) of the human race is not even opposed worthy idea, the evolution of its species, which will inevitably start from lower species gradually returning to man, or at least to another with similar characteristics will be aware, because, in principle, it would be best to start from these lower species, rather than continue undeterred, without interruption, this line of indebiticità.
With this, we also see, then, that the opposition here to the identified instance of inadequate nuclear preserver of the human being in the world, are, in fact, UNFOUNDED. As of now already
individual essenteci, however, our subject Investiganti has in fact been able to uncover how the need for consistency with the principle of the will incrementante directional (or preservative of a sense of growth) in the range life, the constraints on life itself.
And then there is the individual who now, even symbolically, but for the fact that no more than symbolic, and self-liberation autorisolto identification (and, but then also put into place: of course!) Harmonization condom thing must, for the rest, do, his life change, contingent, everyday?
simple: all he wants to satisfy his desire for growth, period, no other duties other than those he recognizes himself for his own pleasure (or is less labor, overall evaluation: which includes, then, even the possible acceptance of the duties and constraints). Our subject
Investiganti acquires, then, finally (and is the ninth, and final, identification), the data of the human individual as a subject for free.
free, as open as possible (even against a non-reproductive sexuality, of course, since this shows no contradiction with the nuclear I).
He may say now, guiding the conscience as he wishes: just keep in mind that, as residual nature of his research, which has to do children and should not commit suicide.
For the rest, and can do everything the opposite of everything (even going back to pay attention to what is, to him subject specific, peculiar, beyond that is what binds him to his peers) that, since it has since, having to continue to exist, there is virtually forced.
would be the case that he was also aware of a consciousness that is permanent but not always appropriate due to the consciousness of the fact that, despite everything, with his way of being in that particular situation, however, is more or less implicitly trying to give himself the best, indeed if he is giving, that does not mean, however, this as the results he was exhausted, it must always satisfy (if this is indeed possible, would be less antagonistic to the bottom of the motive) and, in fact, he will be perfectly free to take action to change situations.
also be noted that this contingency plan, re-acquires meaning if the concept of absolute scaling of the claims from the self revealing the nature of the nuclear self, he I he individual, he can return to make sense of science (disciplines ) of the psyche, which may adjuvanted in his quest for 'welfare, that is to say maximum fulfillment of the will, motivation, as a subject already essenteci free now.
In this sense, is permitted, subject to our Investiganti, the following reflection: If the sciences (disciplines) of the psyche will lead their ordinary activities of the search for prosperity for individuals as part of the contingency of its already there, a step up, integrating, then, their academic competence with the acquisition of identitologica what really calls for the deepest part of the individual to the individual himself, will arise in terms of being, man, comprehensive tools, side- mind, for the Tracing of his best way, rather than stay of perversion and darkness of awareness as regards applicant to the fundamental of human self-liberation, usually are (probably, in spite of themselves: since, on this, in a state of unconsciousness also essential). If
will rise to this level of truth affrancante the pre-designed, pre-generated, and both the adjuvant already Essentia, lo, these human sciences, will melt, then, in harmony with the philosophy identitologia strict; otherwise, it will continue to dominate: and, to them, remain the subject domain of contingency (though, again, by itself, of great importance).
Anyway, here is, therefore, we can assume that our subject came Investiganti far, has ended its effort: in fact, systematically circumvented, that his "excursion", which concerns only himself, thinking that because, as he held in the form of policy to ' beginning, the general principle that there is less chance of error or distortion of perspective, here is that he has come to establish the identity of the radical (meaning the essence of rules for background) of man (constant, as seen of nine progressive identifications, representing the causal elements of humanity itself, from which all actuality specific as possible): namely, the most authentic way of being, this man (most authentic way of being, which can be defined as total harmonic armonistico as a request that I make for itself).
discipline identitologica meets, therefore, the harmonic and appears as "identitologia armonistica.
With this identity, the ego, then, discovers himself, his authentic self, because it shows strong and lucid enough to know how to awaken and liberate biological narcosis (which, in itself, becomes even narcosis ideological and cultural setting then a real plot attacks on the clarity).
With this, therefore, he Investiganti our subject, throws light on the consistent and consequential due to radical identity, namely the identification of modes of essence of skiing, even on the entire real productive situation: recognition, therefore, the fundamental inadequacy (I provide in building a needs to fund its natural environment can not be met), and induction, then, of a perspective as fundamentally antagonistic to it real totally inadequate as inadequate, with its Tracing of a possible way of liberation from it which is Again, for me, a form of harmonization.
E 'now point out that, from this subject-type place in the investigation reached, although it may have the characteristics of the completion and then the finality is, however, of course, an identity today, that's his way of seeing the present, and that he then can always change; but is, nevertheless, what he has in the now: and, therefore, that should say absolutely, and which should be based on his life.
This poses a question in terms of practice armonistica, namely: to harmonize the body needs liberazionistiche ego-country skiing, yes, but do it gradually and continuously, with contraception bland, or harmonize, rather, one-off , with the intervention of harmonization (recontextualization, definition and refinement) of the reproductive channels (ducts, salpingitis)?
In the first case, to preserve its possible to change your mind in the future, there is a danger of unpredictability and Contextual consciential failure that could lead the individual to that just now, in superconscient identity, it feels like the ultimate fault, the fact that his life would make a real failure, as compared to its deepest urgency in the second case, which maintains the current acquisition is deemed sufficiently permanent or likely to be no longer Reverte, you are exposed to the problematic nature of reversion if one's identity, holds the note sufficiently permanent or likely to be no longer revert instead really knew those considered as intervening extremes for its reversion.
What to do?
to the principle already met, the certainty that precedes the current situation going forward, this priority is the protection of the acquisition, therefore, towards harmonization reproductive surgery channel, is identified as a priority for every human.
All of these observations, we have now, our subject Investiganti grappling with the universalizing perspective: how it behaves, ie, in the world, Protect yourself on the forehead once symbolic of self-liberation, a man who has acquired all this?
Evidently, as he wishes, because, in this social perspective, he is a subject for free, now the subject of which has already essenteci get as much as possible from his life but basically unsatisfactory (identified but not necessary psycho-humoral) against its implicit deepest urgencies.
So, for our subject, a man who has acquired all of this, and that can be called "radically identifying" if he can get out to others with his "Weltanschauung" experience, but can not speak, or rather, may be even more dishonest on key issues, and keep his opinion to himself (although it would be the case that this is not the case: Whereas, the other, a mirror of itself), so finally, with regard to his particular will and specification: and is, therefore, from the standpoint of fundamental and common on the human, free and absolute.
The only thing that radically identifying the individual in general, should really do is continue trying to satisfy the most of this will of its own particular and specific, in the contingency of his state of essenteci in the world, and this may, his choice to be made of both philanthropic that misanthropy.
Therefore, his conduct as the most widely understood in the world, beyond the identity that is gained from communicating or not, he can live the relationship with others as he pleases, and, selfishness and altruism, they will also, at the bottom Two forms of selfishness, that is two ways to satisfy the ego (to which we can talk, to have precision and distinction set of "selfish egoism" and "altruistic egotism") and, he will also use violence the next, if, all things considered, it finds the most convenient, just as, conversely, may behave in a manner ordinarily considerable altruistic to masochism, so autoviolento, preferably explicitly considering whether it will, as usual, that this is basically the most convenient thing for him, that is, more selfishly rewarding.
may, however, also look for relationships and satisfying, without losing sight, with the fundamental superconscience or residual, the hypothetical, the weightlessness, the fortunate outcome of these attempts, disvelanti again, then, the inadequacy of a basic need that one's own ego, wanting to fill, not wanting to have nuclear detectors.
same freedom of behavior, the subject of contingent already essenteci and free will against the other life forms (including the option to harmonize their reproduction).
As for ideas, he may even, on the surface, retrieve a false religious conscience, if he so chooses, to that extent, makes him comfortable: doing, however, careful not to lose a lucid background always recoverable, constituting then, with all acquired in the 'overview' driver radical identity common to all, his luggage superconscient always residual facing a potentially riotous free for consciousness in it waned.
From a socio-political, he can commit to dissemination of harmony, or do not commit themselves, he may propose, that human harmony, and, if able to exploit an authoritarian power, even impose it (as it may, of course, if so, whether or not impose).
However, you may, if the political future of this instance, to get a real rite of harmonization: if the subject harmonized, would acquire the status of "eleuthérion", "one who frees" himself in saved his progeny.
However, as mentioned, the harmony involved in politics will have freedom to leave or to deny freedom to others, and not only on issues inherent harmony, depending on what it considers to be its convenience: there being, a priori, the possibility to determine the appropriate behavior in the relationship between two or more wills (and the will is not only the individual but also a group of people, a political party, institution, etc.), so, by implication, that is to say, he may also support a purely political commitment paid to the quota, ie the progress (at least, those he are likely) of free quota.
The socio-political progress, in fact (such as psychology, and science in general), while not seen as capable of reversing a fundamental antagonism, will find, however, its value can be in the contingency of being in the world of the now already essenteci. His
contribute or not, however, by the individual, free will: respect, however, the preservationists all'imprescindibilità armonistico liberating, aiming to secure a resolution of the problematic background of the human condition at its root, the only level of reality on which, as men, can act in a sufficiently decisive.
Returning to the issue of disclosure armonistica by identifying the subject so thoroughly, in the case of writing as a means of expression, will be good to try to be as exhaustive as possible and standardizing: the ideal, then, is the system capable of reunificare the assembly of this type of knowledge. Write
will, in general radically identifying the individual identity of the whole, should be especially if he believes something to put in play, at least in part, again, that is, in general those specific lines, not yet was expressed.
But it can not write, even if they have actually considered something original to say, and keep his opinion to himself, as usual, at this level, that, with regard to his particular will and specification: and is therefore free.
However, when the subject arrived identity armonistica communication even he fully complete what may be considered his "mission" of a man among men, and crown, with that, his experience of "eleuthérion" of "liberator".
E 'to complete this experience, in fact, that I like Andrea Pasotti, having acquired all this, I wrote (and here, do stringatissima a summary of my work: it can not provide, therefore, a sense merely indicative) because it seems to me, precisely, that in all this that I'm proposing something new, indeed, as a whole, there is, a particular key to an "I" and "together", then even finding its more correct attitude toward the All edificantelo; key to this, that even the best human brains have never been able to bring to the fore: spouse, then, automatic result, more and more or less inadequate.
With this identity, in fact, to cite a few examples drawn from the history of thought, you go over to Schopenhauer, in his state the need to "work" against the will or motivation, which is obviously impossible, and on which he same, then, clearly, has run constantly challenged in life, and his, is, in fact, demanded a gratuity without antagonism, as such, undue (if not absurd).
So if you go over to Schopenhauer, it is clear that it goes even beyond that all thinkers, rather than asceticism, they argued, even the suicide (which, however, Schopenhauer, wrongly denied the claim in the will: whereas, here, it became evident that to be denied just because the opposite!).
Here they say the total opposite, namely that the will, although the problem-Prince that has not fully achieved, however, must be satisfied at most, just to be understood as problem-Prince legitimizing behavior of remedy to it.
And it goes beyond to Nietzsche: that before, longs for the overcoming of the human limitation, and then shows how to live a way that does not substantially free behind the symbolic self-liberation through the preservation of pre-release-generated, pre- -designed (which, however, is, realistically, a necessary condition to achieve real, this excess, and it is, after all, a choice that, knowing how to go to understand the deepest essence of themselves, does not take away that those already there, but, rather, makes it "triumphant" in the extent to which it may be).
those of Nietzsche, So, it's a free no antagonism, as such, undue, masochistic.
As Nietzsche said, that is, of course, for pure hedonism: Aristippus, Epicurus, Sade, Satan himself, etc.. Or, if an end in themselves, nothing but veiled forms of masochism, of autoirriguardo, in affirming otherwise.
It also goes beyond the silly progress to Hegel to Marx, etc.. That deny the centrality of the individual and the predominance of the certainty of the here and now being in the world in a fundamentally modalization invariable in its inadequacy (although the second at least had the merit of indicating the need for an outlet of "praxis," a philosophy in otherwise empty and sterile, as is routinely, but it is obviously still on this side, the identification of a truly radical practice). In addition
also Stirner, that the exact opposite of disindividualizzanti Hegel and Marx, in his defense of 'I' does not show, however, the discrimination, the 'I' must, of necessity, carry out, becoming, as far as possible, as I said, "triumphant", "primarily", the option autoliberatoria symbolically.
On the other hand, the identity I have proposed, are reinvested in fact, the 'I' all its responsibilities to conduct decisive and liberating, without waiting for the general reality, for annihilating self-liberation: as he thought, however, he should do, for example, Von Hartmann.
You go, then, in addition to the existentialists (Kierkegaard, Jaspers, Gabriel Marcel), which, more or less implicitly trusts to the 'afterlife' as a hope, or to those, however, existentialism (Heidegger, Sartre) , which photograph the man as a being fundamentally plagued by limitations, but, then, do not point, they can not indicate any way of final settlement, or at least radical (let's not forget that, against the finality of thought that is proposed here, there is the idea of \u200b\u200bbiological evolution: with a reasonable restatement of man, or something similar, after a "tot" of time). In addition to
even Hindu philosophy, and Eastern Europe in general, which, on the one hand, the idolatrous arbitrarily undermined the will (by itself, basically impossible, as seen) and, second, consider the birth, inauguration of self as a volitional entity and therefore unfair, a calamity needed (this, given the hold, by that culture, to a transcendental idea of \u200b\u200bevolution that hinges on Earth without any argument, at least in the public domain to support this need), and, however, never speaks, openly, as a general rule of abstention procreative: even less, if combined with the hedonism of the already existents as their own end (although it is also freely available with contrasting behavior for ).
addition, the Manichean Gnosticism: that indicated, yes, not procreation, but in favor of an "afterlife", however, quite unnecessary for the rejection of this reality, among other things, exonerated the chief god, instead, in case of transcendence, there may not be a priority of aversion, as evident in the First Cause of the Demiurge himself (plus, if, that is, often, Gnosticism Manichean asceticism and mortification proposing to life, shaping it as the opposite of the ambition to full fruition in the range life, defined as hedonic way, its a proper understanding of the dynamics of strong-willed).
addition, finally, to the same "extinction" (negative expression unacceptable from the point of view armonistica identity: as indicating the loss of something, where, however, is the identification of the maximum gain that man, as a single and as a species, can do in relation to their deepest self-knowledge): a cultural movement that began to dawn today, and that would "take away the middle" man to save the planet Earth, which would, of course, entirely arbitrary (not clear why the man, in fact, would artificially put before the Earth itself!) as it does not is completely arbitrary but rather the contrary, the idea that, man, I do, to resolve, to safeguard itself, concretely and symbolically as a species as now already been born.
And so, with what else within the history of human thought quotable.
why, my, then, as simple in the end, I see, finally, evaluated as a whole, as a new solution (and, I dare say, an existentialism finally rigorous and not frivolous, which, therefore, as such, it leaves unresolved issues), and, so, not only because it vision, expressed in a certain organic unity, but also because it palesante indebiticità three fundamental characteristic of worldviews similar (Cioran, for example): the output is not subjectivism, a certain indulgence for the skepticism and lack of power away from the bias of humoral psycho-depressive.
solution, that of harmonious human, who is affrancamentismo cosmic (the fundamental identity of the real general who was, in fact, was that of a "stepfather object" which, as far as possible, get away) as a straight way of essence of "things" core observed by humans because of its own existence in the world, which, however (-up to the frequency of a depressive bias in worldviews like), has nothing negative, not unhappy, in itself, just anyone, since, according to what we know for sure, that as regards the situation on earth, it is clear that those who are not, can not be disappointed in any way (as opposed to who, however, there is, and that can and should groped a maximum of satisfaction, we understand that this objective, "primarily", do not get child, but, quite the contrary, not daughter, because that, as shown here, it may be revealing that its nuclear essence, wanted for themselves, as well as for each of his fellows, his, the essence of nuclear power).
E 'reasons for this assembly, therefore, that even with a summary of the minimum number of pages, I decided to do something due in part to make the reader aware of this revolutionary who has all the trappings, to be considered a true doctrine of awakening.
0 comments:
Post a Comment