Mill: a describer

John Stuart Mill(1806-1873) an English philosopher and economist man written an essay On liberty to 1859, and  until now nothing that is new; but Milli for this essay is an speculative philosopher, and he known very well ancient philosophy because he, for his father studied ancient greek from third age old, then he could read ancient philosophy and Aristoteles, in conformity with opinion of Hegel he was first speculative phylosopher on history, and we can agree to this opinion. Anyway this essay has some step very important for show a theory, this is that Mill told about that was the English society, on e step says: “There can be no fair discussion of the question of usefulness, when an argument so vital may be employed on one side, but not on the other. And in point of fact, when law or public feeling do not permit the truth of an opinion to be disputed, they are just as little tolerant of a denial of its usefulness. The utmost they allow is an extenuation of its absolute necessity, or of the positive guilt of rejecting it”, to this step he described a reaction, this is: “…when law or public feeling do not permit the truth of an opinion to be disputed, they are just as little tolerant…”, this is society, this is English society, could  react to very little tolerance, and this concept is remarked by words: “or public feeling”, then he has seen the society and liberal, at least for Europen societies, this is freedom for opiions, that nobody has never denied , also during France revolution, when in Assemblée nationale costituante on 9 july 1789, are present also clerical men and aristocratic, set on right side of assembly. But this condition is certainly liberal in confront to absolutism, that never there was in Europe, because both clerical and aristocratic men known that middle class worked richness; then in Great Bretain this middle class was unique that garanted richness, this motive is necessary to justify economical liberalism which Great Britain has had always, and after come to USA, but this essay on the liberty is a portrait of English society, that has some impediment for common opinion, and some act for intolerance, buti t is normal in liberal societies. Then Mill sees his society and his nation, and uses speculative philosophy. Finally On the liberty is English society around the year 1859.

Alessandro Lusana

 

Mill, a social liberal adecquate to our time

For reading of Wealth of nations is very difficult find some liberal theory regard economy, Ithink that we can read and reread Wealth of nations, buti ti is going to find some tenet of liberalism, rather we can find and esteem or scorn mer liberalism as social fact although theorycal alone On the liberty of John Stuart Mill; a book very interest because shows think not certainly of author but, I think, of a nation, this is Great Britain, hence this is speculative philosophy, a questioniis is spontaneous, this is, Why? Because we must cionsider that Mill certainly, seen about his country, and in fact he often said about morality that is a factor for opinion, but he considers morality non certainly power, witch he describes, for speculative filosofy, an influencing motive for an opinion, and he said also that this power can’t be silent every opinions, otherwise is would be tyranny, but this think is own of Great Britain; certainly we can find same tolerance also in other nations, for example, also during monarchy in France, the Revolution was possible because the ideas of revolutionaries could turned, in fact some revolution during 20th century was possible because the army wanted these revolutions. Anyway Mill is very liberal and he could take about English costume, that was very liberal, in fact he said on one step: “Their power was but the nation's own power, concentrated, and in a form convenient for exercise This mode of thought, or rather perhaps of feeling, was common among the last generation of European liberalism”, on this mention we can findmsome word, or verb, which is very interesting, this is “feeling”, this verb shows what we has red before, this is costume, or feeling, necessary to a State. For others step of this book we find similar concepts, as: “A similar tone of sentiment might by this time have been prevalent in our own country, if the circumstances which for a time encouraged it, had continued unaltered.”, and I repeate that is rational and irrational concept, this is feel or “sentiment”, this is will of to follow what is predominant like an opinion or a think, dynamic which Mill didin’ condamns but considers an idea. I repeat that this liberty was present among States of Europe, because every govern knows stops his power and when it must use for a nation.

Alessandro Lusana

 

Botero: Machiavelli poor version

Giovanni Boteron (1544-1617) has been a Italian writer and he writeen The raeason of state,(1589), it is a exlication of cases for survive and existence for states, and explication for enrichment of it; but above all, he consoiders strategy necessary for states, and his building nd after his maintenance, then all strategy both to people and other nations. This is very imortatnt contribuite to olical science, but it is resumed from Machiavelli, that has written De principibus, this is On prince, a treaty about policy science, very imortatnt and very deep for political science, that olitical correct on their time has deprecated, on contrary Machiavelli has descripted all behaviour of politic both on 16th century and now; Botero has resumed same strategy of Machiavelli and he has enrichment this polical teels that he has considered through history; but he is poor version of Machiavelli, in fact that has explained about policy is obviuous and he, above all, catchs historical examples that regard its time were perfect but during 16th and 17th centurys it were past and useless because context has changed and by now history has advanced and these criterions were overcome. This is treaty this is The State rasoni s a very good investigation about history, but without historical references, because he describes case of political and after he gives some example, but it is very moderate attempt to follow Machiavelli, although Botero didn’t say never it.

Alessandro Lusana 

       

                               
         

 

Two Michelangelo and one subject

The two Michelangelo that I consider for this essay are Michelangelo Buonarroti and Michelangelo Merisi called Caravaggio; two very important artist consequent over time, but twice busied for one subject, a pictorial subject, this is Crucifixion of Saint Peter. I consider these pictures no certainly for subject bus because one, this is the first, this is Crucifixion of Buonarroti(Fig.1) was model for second painting in Cerasi chapel(Fig.2). we must consider very attentive influences and model; the first over time 1546-1550 and second between 1600 and 1601, then Caravaggio seen certainly two frescos of Michelangelo Buonarroti and he took some valid advisement, such he has took figure of torturer that is bent under cross, Caravaggio has took this figure from figure that digs field for cross of saint Peter on the fresco of Pauline chapel(Fig.3), Caravaggio has seen this figure and he has modified posture and he has worked more realism(Fig.4), and regard postures he has took posture of Saint Peter of Michelangelo, very similar, head is bent forward and cross is on diagonal position furthermore; the figure of Michelangelo that has grasped a cross arm(Fig.5) on fresco of Michelangelo is same figure of Caravaggio this is figure that  pulls the rope over shoulders(Fig.6). Then Caravaggio has took Michelangelo and he has rendered more realistic a model that has had some notes of realism.

Alessandro Lusana  

Fig.1

Fig.2

Fig.3

Fig.4

Fig.5

Fig.6

         

 

Truth and religion

The personal letters often have some question personal and universal, but almost never are sincere; everybody has written a letter to wife, girlfriend, or boyfriend, we are always very kindle and lovers until three years of marriage; after that we have satisfied our needs, sons and pleasure, every feeling is further memory. But we can find also some exception during time, Medieval age, when sentiment was not present, it was an tool necessary to justify marriage, or matters to poetries, Dante Alighieri is example; then we can consider sentiment and passion alone literary tools. We can read the letters of Heloise to Pieter Abelard(1079-1142), two religious, very cultured, twice known Latin and Greek and they had a son, Astrolabio, and written at 11^th century these letters; these letters have much sentiment and truth regard religion: in 4^th letter Heloise says: “I have lied to you furthers both you and other. You as other seen to me a religion devotion sentiment that was hypocrisy”, truth sentiment that we can find on this letter when Heloise says: “Don’t believe that I not need you and you cures”, this confession is important because shows that feeling of woman and man, to this case, was sincere. Besides he confesses one nature of love which is human both male and female, he says on fifth letter: “The my love, the love which aims to sin is was physical attraction no love. To you I have satisfied  my desires, and I loved about you”.

Alessandro Lusana

 

Fiorentini before and after

I suspect, on contrary, I know that I have bored for Domenico Fiorentini, but he has, involuntary, bored me, and very much, because I find, sometime some fresco and his work, then I hope that I have ended to this fresco, that was commissioned by Battenti Company in church of saint Michael Archangel of Sermoneta(Fig.1), but peculiarity of this painting is one, this is second painting, this is Pity(Fig.2) is following to Cross fixion(Fig.1), then it is a sort of Via Crucis that has two moments alone, but it is sufficient for members of this religious company, this is before pain and after sorrow, because this company ordered that every member to Saint Wednesday they must whip them self; then paint and sorrow as Christ, this is Cross fixion and sorrow of Madonna; all this way is suggested by two fresco that remembered to members religious charges of Company. I identified Fiorentini on this painting owing to felts of sheet of Piety(Fig.2), too cured so much these remember those of Saint John Baptist on the other painting of Fiorentini(Fig.3). The body of Christ is very similar to body of Christ in the Cross fixion in same church, with date 1799(Figs.4-5), same muscles and same density, although body of Christ of Pity is not much looking(Fig.2); same fingers that we find again on the altarpiece dated 1799(Figs.6-8). Then Fiorentini has painted this fresco is same date of this altarpiece, then on 1799 of some years after, whereas on the door of Battenti has worked during his youth. 

Alessandro Lusana    

Fig. 1

Fig.2

Fig.3

Fig.4

Fig.5

Fig.6

Fig.7

Fig.8

 

Mino da Fiesole and his style

I want consider in this essay that one sculpture, certainly less known from public, and today in Saint John of Florentines, Florentine church in Rome; I want consider a sculpture was attributed to young Michael Angel by Roberto Longhi; but this attribution is failed and it is evident, because it was sufficient consider that the style of this master is very near to Mino da Fiesole(Figs.1-5), same marked cut of the eyes(Figs.1,3), same slenderness that we must consider for  this Saint John(Figs.6-7), and more skin, this is smoothness of skin; it is very motive to recognize Mino’s manner; portrait of Rinaldo della Luna(Fig.4) is correspondent to this manner of skin, and the firmness of the hair, that is recurring reason to works of Mino’s; in fact to this sculpture it is present(Fig.1) and this motive is repeated always for sculptures of Mino’s. This sculpture is mentioned this first time at 1493in the church of San Orsola, very near to actual church of Saint John of Florentines.

Alessandro Lusana 

Fig.1

Fig.2

Fig.3

Fig.4

Fig.5

Fig.6

Fig.7

         

 

Other source of Pietro Colaeberti

Around Pietro Colaeberti(Figs.1-2), painter at XV century, we don’t know neither birth date and death date, he has worked in Priverno, Sermoneta and other towns in south Latium(Italy), but it is difficult until now identify source and master; I think that he has studied Giotto in Assisi, and he has studied Pietro da Rimini(Figs.1-4); some characteristic of cloth and architectures are very specular; for this is sufficient a confront between architecture and figures of Pietro da Rimini(Fig.1) and that of Colaeberti(Fig.1), and above all the softness of cloth and folds for consider that a suggest is direct: the cloth seem a direct suggestions. In fact cloth of Christ(Fig.4), are motive very remarkable for Colaeberti, its sufficient folds of cloth of Vergin of Sermoneta(Fig.6) and Majesty of Christ(Fig.5), and all is become clear; this is Colaeberti has seen and studied pictures of Pietro da Rimini; but has left style of Giotto, that Pietro da Rimini  has adopted. Second source for style of Colaeberti is other Pietro, this is Pietro Cavallini (Rome 1240 – 1330), has painted in Rome masterpieces among Universal Giudice(Figs.7-8), that Colaeberti certainly studied, and we can say it because the cloth of aposteles(Fig.8) are specular to cloth of Colaeberti(Fig.6); and the face of Christ on the lunette of Cathedral of Saint Mary of Sermoneta(Fig.9) is very similar to face of Christ of Universal Giudice(Fig.7). Then Colaeberti has studied both picture of Rimini at Middle Age and Roman picture at same period, and from these models has took his models.

Alessandro Lusana 

Fig.1

Fig.2

                                                                         Fig.3

Fig.4

Fig.5

Fig.6

Fig.7

Fig.8

                                                              

     

 

Phenomenology: a meeting between Plato and Aristoteles

I hope very sincerely that somebody has red Phenomenology of Spirit from Hegel; I think that nobody has read this book is very difficult and, sometime, boring, I admit that it is very difficult, but it is Hegel philosophy. But I want write this essay about my opinion on Phenomenology, because I think that this book has in itself Plato and Aristoteles, but why? A paragraph says: “…the first supersensitive word is copy of real word...”; this is Plato because he spoken about Word of ideas and this concept is modern translation of Word of ideas, where everything is present and in fact mankind found again on the word images and other that he has seen in the Ideas word. Hegel continuing to this opinion says also: “…The first word supersensitive, in fact it was perceived word immediately…because copy, it has had his model in this perceived word…”, the word “copy” is same used from Plato, mimesis(μίμέσίς); then it is a Plato’s think that Hegel has translated on Absolut spirit. But Aristoteles, where is? Second philosopher, this is Aristoteles is present for speculative reality, this is ability of mankind to see and consider reality, perception of real word, in fact he says: “the sensible certainty shows itself as acknowledge more rich; “in fact it is impossible that we set an external border, for space and time…”; it is criterion for acknowledge of Aristoteles, this is sensible reality and then reality, through philosophical speculation. Then in the first book of Hegel has addresses both Aristoteles and Plato, and he, after this book continues for Absolut spirit and he, naturally, sees it on God.

Alessandro Lusana   

        
          

 

Forger

Edward was a very clever forger and painter, he falsified everything, sculpture, artisanship and above all pictures; but it is strange, all was legal, because he described his pictures false, rather he written about these works and he was selling it very easily; he was very capable. He organized exposition for his works and other authors, he was the first event organizer, and he was everywhere, every capital in the word has had an exposition for his works. He was very generous for his colleagues he, often, was selling works other painters. He loved very much Caravaggio, Italian painter at 17^th century, he loved this painter, very realistic, for passion; he has falsified every pictures of Caravaggio; he copied all except drawing because these are not, until now. He talked on the street and he looked an exhibition of paintings, he was very much astonish because he didn’t know about this exposition; then he entered and looked his catalogue, this is his paintings and he asked a guy there present, and he was painting: “Excuse me, but these paintings are mine”, the painter turned to Edward and answered: “No, absolutely, this painting his your, and he indicated a picture that was “Martyrdom of Saint Matthew”, and Edward answered: “That is a painting of Caravaggio, no certainly mine”, and painter answered: “You are failing because that is Edward but this painting is mine”, Edward recognized very soon face of Caravaggio, and in fact he asked: “Are you Caravaggio?”, and he answered: “No I am Edward but you are certainly Caravaggio, it is sufficient you look yourself on the mirror”, and he looked himself and seen face of Caravaggio, he laughed and he took one brush; he started a painting but he tough a figure and he painted other, a figure of Caravaggio; he was astonish, and he asked explication: “Why?”, and other painter answered: “You have copied always my paintings, then your personality now is not; you have to develop your personality, on contrary you have developed others and you have lost your soul”. Two costumers entered in gallery and looked the copy that Edward was painting, and man of this couple looked and said: “Perfect copy of Caravaggio”, while his husband looked other painter and his picture and said: “it’s true Edward! very good".

Alessandro Lusana  

                         

 

Eclecticism best method?

This essay looks about philosophical method that I think fit to interpretation everything or at last most of phenomenology, that is around us. I am convinced supporter of eclecticism, this is every method is opportune to interpreter; we can think reality for different philosophical think, we can think to Socrates and his  maieutic method, so that they can find their trust, or skepticism of Carneades or Phyrro; then I judge history of art for single artist, for economical richness and, above all, for costumer. I think that this method is perfect for interpretation of reality, because every phenomenology has explication and we can use every method of philosophy then think and to interpret the reality, it’s cultural or other nature; for example, we can think a behavior of man of our friend to Attualismo, this is philosophical current of Giovanni Gentile, that says: “That I am now I not was a minute ago”, and we must consider also the psychologist science, that is, for me, bet method for interpretation of this sudden change. But we can use also philosophical think. The interpretation of reality we can use the speculative think of Aristoteles or Idealism of Hegel, the Platonism or all together; because the eclecticism takes everything and can explain everything for a philosophical method, economic, cultural and human. We can think everything for every think and we can consider human reality or metaphysical and to use every think that we consider fit to interpretation. Then I think that is useless use a current to think because this think could not give answers, then we can think other current, and this is eclecticism.

Alessandro Lusana  

  

 

Other thinks of law

This essay surely doesn’t and won’t to consider some rule or article of law, but it want consider some step of law with philosophical think; in fact I have took some step of Outlines of philosophy of right, that is one book of Hegel that considers the law, or at last some particular step, with philosophical concept, then the contract is, according to opinion of Hegel, the contract is: “If to them there is need, benevolence and utility, that is hastens them to contract is that they are present, their presence is principal motive, then they must recognize them self on contract. As concept of property, that according opinion of Hegel is a moment when owner is present both human gender and according to opinion of law. These concepts are certainly elementary and obvious but if we consider it philosophical thinks also, these realities of law take other mean”, and around the contract again he says: “I can leave one property as an external thing and I must leave it as a conceptual property…”, and “But at this moment my will is other because it is devoid (of property); then this concept is unity of two will, and twice for the differences must waive of he self; but this identity of twice will is obvious that every will is he self also”, and: “This rapport is mediation of two identical will although different for owner themselves, it means that every one for his will ceases his property, and one become it”. Solution of this concept that is legislative always, certainly, but is also other think for philosophy because: “the mediation of will to cease a property and will to accept it, then of another is final result of two will, because one is present because other is.” I repeat this is obvious but to law is very difficult give this mean to a legislative, this is philosophical mean.

Alessandro Lusana 

  

       

 

 

       

 

Artistic Platonism

The treatise of Federico Zuccari, an Italian painter, that has written the Idea of painters, sculptors and architects and this treatise was edited at 1607, is one example about Catholic Reform but with some think from Platoon; this is evident in some step when author says: “I say that drawing isn’t mater, isn’t substance, but it is form, and idea”, this first step is necessary to understand that Zuccari uses that he has perceived he written about inner driving of angel and he saying about creation of word, he has synthetized steps of Genesis, God has depicted and worked everything, but he has worked other word in head of angel, with everything; this is a typical concept of Platonic philosophy, everything is present in head of human gender, and through time and experience everything resurfaces to head, but just we have in head.  Zuccari said again: “God very accomplished cause so that they were perfect both regard nature and to understand and to work and he worked other word that was thinkable to angels”, this is concept is pure Platonism; in fact in Platonism philosophy this word is material projection from ideas word, but now angels look this word because they can look this word alone. Zuccari is continuing with his Platonism says: “Since we know very much thing although different forms and they are in our head, although if we will know something we must work an image a drawing, necessary for to become it understandable, and we use these drawing”. This concept is philosophical that we can call hyperuranium is told by Platoon in two book, this is Republic and Fedrus; that Zuccari could have known trough nearness to Jesuitical order, then very intellectual men in Catholic order; Zuccari decorated a chapel in the church of Jesuitical order in Rome, and then he could have known Platoon trough some Jesuitical theologian. More he attended also Vatican cathedral for a commission, then he could has been informed regard to Platoon and his philosophical think.

Alessandro Lusana  

                                         

 

Hegel and Heraclitus two absolute spirits

The opposites whose become is explained for their hide harmony; everything changes his nature, then: cold becomes hot and hot things become cold; young becomes old, life died; this contrast is also harmony war is peace too. Other fragment of Heraclitus he tells: “Then ignorant don’t know that every different thing agrees with itself, unhalt becomes sweet halt, hunger makes satiety sweet, furthermore same Hegel said: “Every word of Heraclitus I have took for my logic”. This is origin of harmony for opposites in absolute spirit, that in union of this absolute spirit, that is conceptual derivation form Think of think of Aristoteles, that has collected all and contrary of all, then Hegel got from Aristoteles and Heraclitus and he makes unity between two philosophical different addresses, this is he makes harmony between contraries, then Hegel becomes absolute spirit that has made harmony between contraries.

Alessandro Lusana    

    

 

 

Heritage of human religion

“The Greek religion is to his characters or peculiarities a natural religion, so long as gods are represented for much gods as natural nature and they have one step more than of human gender; then human gender doesn’t need rise for relate to god, rather he feels joint for his own natural. A god doesn’t asks a change of his nature, he doesn’t asks a change of his think and natural tendencies; rather that is natural to human gender is same to a god as right, so is man must make that is accordant to human nature, this mention (E. Zeller, The philosophy of ancient Greek during his historical development)explains what is nature of human religion, and it anticipates the partial humanization of Cristian God, because also God is seized with anger; then men must make that is right, that is natural nature of men and they adhere to will of gods; on contrary in ancient Egypt that rapport to gods was different, were priests and rapport was by this persons, Until now is evident and very known all, but my reflection goes beyond; because rapport to gods was direct, it was natural and then the gods are determined by human gender, at least in ancient Greek, they are human with divine characters, but they are human, that is confirmation of think of Feurbach, the man has created gods, because it is a translation of human characters to divine; on contrary Christianism has alone humanized God and showed more good and indulgent, but it is Greek heritage, this is to make human God but he keeps always his divine nature and he could be also severe, that is Greek heritage, this is very good or severe; then human gender must changes his nature to conformity of orders od God, but Greek religion gods were human just. The Christianism has took some character of Greek religion, this is human nature, but has kept the divine nature typical of Hebrew religion.

Alessandro Lusana    

              

 

 

An actual political man at first century a.Ch.

I consider in this essay is Plutarch, born in Chaeronea at 46 a. Ch. And he died at 127 a.Ch; he has written Parallel lives, live of Greek and Roman, personages of these two cultures that today are known with qualities certainly no common, for example Caesar and Alexander Magnus, Cicero and Demosthenes and other, among this other is also Πολίτικα παραγγελματα, this is Advises to political men is a book with very much advises to political man, Plutarch tells about strategy of politic man, and he considers what are best strategies, and knowledge political man must have about people and enemies and other; he took from his lives and he tells very much episodes about of lives and he justifies his political strategies for these episodes; he speaks about character of people and he explains: “Who has decided to work about policy  must knows perfectly nature of his people this is fellow-citizens , and particular attention to matter that people considers very important”, and other question that Plutarch has given is: “People isn’t controllable every men…it is a miracle if people accepts a leader without annoyed…”, in fact who is leader must be persuasive, in fact he signs: “…political man an necessary intelligence to lead and a persuasive and dialogic capacity to impose orders”, and about discourses and words Plutarch says: “ His discourses must be strong, blunt and genuine, with feels and true purposes…”, but he adds that also humour is necessary, in fact he says: “I am not saying that sometime some quip must be, but it is necessary to answer to critic or offense”. Other question is boredom for same political men: “People is bored for same political want a new man, as spectators welcome very best a new actor…”. Therefore I think that we must consider these strategies necessary to political men and we can consider behaviour of political men determined for these motives, and we can consider other strategy both actual and past for these advises of Plutarch, and we can to note that certainly are changed time and contests but human gender and political strategies are same always.

Alessandro Lusana    

                                                     

 

           

 

 

Inner balance

John was a sociologist and he has studied men and women in the city, this is great city; after a lesson, because he taught in University, he ended lesson and spoken to girl student that asked some explication; he explained some concept expressed during lesson and he invited this girl to drink a tea in fast food in University. So day ended, and John entered home and red some page of journal he lay down on the sofa, and slept. He dreamed that he was in same city where he lived but in this city everything was different; every people greeted him kindly, and much persons asked about his life and his preference, persons that he didn’t know, but they stopped him on the street and asked, he was very astonish, and he entered to University and nobody seen him, nobody spoken to him, nobody recognized him and nobody asked about lessons and other. He was very worried, and he stopped a student that he known and asked: “George, do you want hear my lesson?”, and George answered: “Your lesson? Why? I think that you confuse me for someone else”, and John asked: “Are you George?” and student answered: “Yes, but I don’t know you, sorry”; John was very worry and he has understood that something was different, he has gone to his classroom and he looked every students that he known, and he asked: “do somebody knows me?”, and a student answered: “Yes, all know you but you don’t us because something is changed; very little thing, but your balance, or better your inner balance is changed; you has not had some moment your inner balance; always you have tell about human gender but you have forgotten that you are a man, and you have your inner balance, very weak, because it’s sufficient something changed and you lost reference, security and your assurance; then your certainty is for external habit, and stop”. John looked student and answered: “This is normal”, and student: “Yes, you have taught this concept but you don’t know it, because you have not felt it; then when you lost references, that are normal and conformistic you lost yourself and other, you lost your balance, then you are afraid, then you need of conformistic reference always, because you are weak”. John asked to student: “Who are you?” and student answered: “Your inner balance that you have to consider perfect balance between a stone and a feather, stone is references and feather is our inner balance, very weak and light”.

Alessandro Lusana