The Hegelian contradictions of the mathematics

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel(1770-1831) certainly isn’t never has studied mathematics, he was a philosopher, hence this science was very far from his preference, but we can consider his description of the Subjective and Objective Spirit; the question is automatic, so what? Simple the study of mathematics is a theoretical study, because in the nature the perfect square isn’t or other geometrical form, and it is the first contradiction, because we can take s real and concrete theory, and we apply it to the theory, but it is a contradiction of mathematics, because it is alone our, but I think that we can survive after this contradiction; anyway the principals contradictions is other although similar, what is? Simple it is so: a mathematician explains his matter that is theoretical, and this matter that is always theoretical so is also after the explication, because a perfect square in nature isn’t, I want precise, I have said in nature, and not produced from the man, because a perfect square table is made from the man, but not certainly from the nature, although the material is natural; I want evidence that the contradiction is in this step, this is the mathematics is theoretical and from the theoretical it remains theoretical, because the translation in the reality isn’t, because in the reality isn’t the mathematics, that is a convention, that is necessary as the arithmetic, but the survival of the mathematics is determined from the needs of men, because otherwise it would be disappeared; but for the Subjective and Objective Spirit the mathematics is a contradiction, because this science is theoretical, hence it goes out from brain, this is from the Subjective Spirit, but not can’t be translated to the Objective Spirit, because is alone theoretical, therefore is impossible that it becomes real, because in nature the mathematics not exists, the example of table above is real; the contradiction is in the its theoretical nature that from the Subjective goes back to the Subjective, because in reality isn’t. Whereby the translation of Hegel form the Subjective to Objective in the mathematics can’t be, because from the theory it goes to theory, also if very much have written about the mathematics is untranslatable to reality, in fact Euclid(4^th.3th b.Ch. century has alone written the geometry, and the Egyptian people has alone kept in the theory the geometry, but real, concrete it isn’t; the realization of this matter is alone when the use is necessary, but it remains alone theoretical, and it remains because necessary, although alone theoretical. The Subjective Spirit of Hegel is remains alone in itself, and for this concept we can take Aristotle, this is the think of the think that can think alone itself, because in itself everything contains, that is a translation (evidently during the 4^th century.Ch., in Athens the translation was allowed, but Hegel was not born, then it was possible) of the word of ideas of Plato, that through Aristotle becomes the think of the think; anyway I wanted alone stress a contradiction that I have tied to the philosophy.

Alessandro Lusana       

 

  

 Historical law: Montesquieu

Charles de Secondat baron di Montesquieu(1689-1755), was the author of the book The spirit of the laws, and in this book a universal truth is explained: “The law to general is the human rationality, because it commands every people of the word, and the politic and civil laws are alone the particular cases for the use of this human rationality. They must be so adapt to the people that must follow, and they must be so adapt to every single people that is very uncertain think that they can be also adapt to other nation. It is necessary that they are relative(this is tied) to the nature and to the established govern or it want establish, both that the laws shape the govern, as the politic laws, or that this govern is kept for the civil laws, They must be correspondent  to the physical characteristic of the country, to the clime, cold, warm or temperate, to the quality of ground, to its wideness, and to gender if life of people, granger, hunter or shepherd; they must consider the level of freedom that the constitution allows, to the religion of citizens, and to personality of them, to their richness , to the number, to the trade, to the habit and customs…”; today it is simple obvious, but in year 1748, when the political context was very different this theory, that today are reality, then was a anomalous, because the king may depends from the people, instead the real power depends alone from God, hence the king was the supreme will of the nation, and everything that he makes is right because is God that ordered it; in fact the power of king in France has given form the God and stop, fort this the French Revolution was an important and fundamental chapter for the history of Europe, because has shown that the kings could be decapitate and a State could transformed very radically, because the French Revolution has debunked the power of king, hence the same king, and the power didn’t come from God but alone from the people, and stop; this long step of Montesquieu, explains that although the Spirit of laws has written from an aristocratic, he used the mind and the rationality, and repeat the French Revolution has brought every people and every citizens on the ground, because has demonstrated the power that the people has; and an aristocratic as Montesquieu had understood that the people keeps the power, other is alone suggestion, and he has touch the sensible point, this is the efficiency of the laws, that must be adapt to the people and not alone to the aristocratic or religious classes; we must also consider that the political men it known perfectly, but the kings have had the absolute power, at lat in France, and in fact when the counsellors asked to Louis 14^th who he had delegated for the State questions, they were very amazing when he answered: “L’État, c’est moi”, this is The State are I alone; finally also the France has a political in the govern; but Louis 14^th was alone an exception, because after to govern were alone stupid and nonentity, both in France and in other country of Europe. But anyway Montesquieu was right the law must be adapt also to the economy, for this he consider also the ground, as well as the customs and habit, but the Roman people said: “primum vivere deinde filosofare”; this is the first we must eat and after also think to useless things.

Alessandro Lusana      

               

 Two fundamental factors of history: the objective and subjective spirit

An English historical man Daniel Lord Smail(1961), has written a book about the principal factor of the history, this is the man, but considering the psychology of man that has determined the history, that this book is very important because the psychology has influenced certainly the become of time and his change; but before of Smail in a book of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel(1770-1831) has anticipated this concept in the Encyclopedia of philosophical sciences(1817), because in the third part of this book he has explained the Objective Spirit, but what is it? Simple it is the real manifestation of the human psychology, that he has called Spirit, and that is the principal factor for the history, and that, naturally, he has produced through the philosophical sense, through the names and philosophical concepts, as the Objective Spirit, that are daily for us, if we walk in a city or a small town or a civilized country, we can see the architectures, the progress, heard the citizens, it is the Objective Spirit, but we must leave to word to Hegel: “The objective spirit is the absolute idea, but alone for itself. Because the objective spirit is through on the ground of finiteness, its true rationality keeps in itself the form of external phenomenal…”; so it is a kick to the balls, and in fact it is so, but some explication can aid us; the idea, this is the concept is alone limited to whom thinks it and the finiteness is the external realization of this concept, when the concept become real, from the personal, hence from the Subjective Spirit, hence an personal ideal, that is the personal ideation, limited alone to whom thinks it, and the second part of this think is likewise clear, because: “…its true rationality keeps in itself the form of external phenomenal…”, why the external form if it is alone an idea? Simple because the Objective Spirit that, after the idea, is going to realize to external and through materially, therefore also the idea is a internal through the Subjective Spirit but after it becomes real through the Objective Spirit, that realize it in ground and through the material, but the principal factors that have determined these realizations are the Subjective and the Objective Spirit. These factors are in Hegel the philosophical concepts that are real, and for Smail it is the psychology, and Hegel continuing says: “This objectivity is divided for the anthropologic element of the particular needs, to the external particular…and for the rapport among the single will, that are awareness of themselves because different and particular. This cause is the material external for the existence for the will.”; this is the external reality determined the needs or desire and the different will or desire, above for the needs is the principal cause for the realization of an idea; if we think it we can see the factor of the history, the idea, hence the Subjective Spirit and the Objective Spirit, that are one following other, because Hegel in way less psychologic and more philosophic has explained what is the history and he has explained, I don’t know how much consciously, the principal factors of history, the idea that become reality, this is the Subjective and objective Spirit.

Alessandro Lusana      

  

            

 

 

 The Hegelian description: the Phenomenology of the spirit

During the read of foreword of the Phenomenology of the Spirit, of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel(1770-1831), emerges a consideration that for the read of Hegel is normal or so should be, the spirit that Hegel consider is the brain, and the phenomenology is alone the evolution of the brain, in fact, we must take the words of Hegel; this book is a description certainly difficult of the dynamic od knowledge of man; the passages are very much, and Hegel has produced it for to explain the movement of think for the knowledge, I must add that the passages that Hegel explained he alone has seen them because in reality these not aren’t, anyway he has described his Phenomenology so: “The phenomenology of the Spirit is the is the exposition of this of this become of the science to general side, this of knowledge . The first manifestation of knowledge, the immediate Spirit is the sensible conscience, this that lacks of spirituality…”; without explication these are alone a together of words but without sense; it is alone is the practical and daily of our life; in fact the exercise of knowledge is the sensible, this is the external vision and the Spirit, this is the brain ascertains that something is present, and Hegel rescues us through the following word that is the become, it is the word principal, because Hegel in this become sees the evolution of the science, that we not must consider the official science, but alone for the acceptation of the Latin sense of this substantive, this is the knowledge, because this word can induce to error; we can think that the science is the official science, that is diversification for the matters, medical, mathematic, physical and other, not is so, but the very less common the Latin meaning of the knowledge, and reading again Hegel we read: “The first manifest of the knowledge, the immediate Spirit, is the sensible conscience, this is that lacks of  spirituality: “; we can think that these words are likewise abstract and incomprehensible, but we can translated this concept, Hegel self was criticized because he used words very difficult, in fact this book is very difficult, but alone for the words rather than for the concept, for example that lacks of spirituality is the external object, and the evolution Hegel describes: “For become the authentic knowledge, for the produce the element of the science, that is the pure concept od the science, the immediate know must come a long path.”; it is the definition that Hegel given to the knowledge; the evolution for the different grade of the knowledge of everything is necessary time and analysis; so said is seems that foe the knowledge something must last a century, not absolutely, the grades that Hegel has seen for this evolution has described through the following words: “This become that is going to present  in its content and for the figures that are on the path, it is going to reveal other from a simple start of prescientific conscience to the science…”; it is simply the process that we can ascertain very much times, what is? Simple the summary knowledge of something, that is alone the prescience that is going to bring to the science, and Hegel continues: “…neither it is going to be that enthusiasm that,  as the shoot, start immediately through the absolute knowledge…”; this other capital condemn, verbal condemn, is likewise simple: it is the description of a process that hasn’t a knowledge immediately, but demand time and other inquiry; when we see a painting immediately we can attractive from the beauty but after we want also understand what is painted, and for this is necessary time, and ulterior inquiry; then Hegel, directly 9influenced from the speculative philosophy of Emmanuel Kant(1724-1804), he describes the simple process of the knowledge.

Alessandro Lusana      

 The other absolute spirit

I want write this essay because I want explain my personal concept of the absolute spirit, that in the Phenomenology of Spirit of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel(1770-1831) is specular to the religion, this is when the spirit is peer to the religion and hence it can look itself, it has reached the absolute knowledge, naturally for Hegel this path for this evolution want passages, or better philosophical passages necessary to reach the conscience of itself, that is for the last passage, as the specular religion spirit, as he has said it to the Phenomenology. I want tell about my conception of absolute spirit, that is merely human and much laic, because for me alone the human has this spirit, and the human kind can manifest this spirit, but how? Simple through the history; for Saint Agustin the history is alone the manifestation of God, although I am Catholic, I am more laic than Saint Agustin, because the man kind works the history, and every consequence of this absolute spirit of man is also the principal factor necessary to every event and every change in the history as for everything; the man works the history as he work the build, that he has made, and that he can destroy; the absolute spirit is manifest to every historical event; but the spirit can change radically from a country to other, because the habit and customs are different, certainly, and it is other clear sign of the work of man, because the different morality is result of different conditions: economic, cultural, moral, and social, that the man has found and that he has adapted to his spirit, through the works and transformations of an environment, that he has produced for him, but the decision and the spirit have determined the changes, hence the history is merely built of man; the transformations of the new country, as actual  USA is the determination of a man that following his spirit has started the radical modifications of that country but, although Cristoforo Colombo(1451-1506), has had other think in confront to followed discovery, he has started from Palos, Spain, because he has had the spirit of sea man, as Giovanni Caboto (1445/1450-1498-1501), that moored for first to Canada, and after other Italian, Amerigo Vespucci(1454-1512), that involuntary given the name to new continent, America from Amerigo. The spirit was the principal determination for these changes that are started from the absolute spirit of man, that can change something in conformity of the spirit both his and of time; he can create or destroyed, but it can occurs on the ground of the time, of habit, of morality, that are other builds of the spirit, that is different because the spirit that is built during the centuries, that we call traditions, is the constant determination of manifestation of our spirit, that is manifest for every day and in every environment, because also for the daily occasions we manifest our spirit, today we are angry and after we are calm, but our spirit is judge of every occasion, and the reaction is determined from the spirit.

Alessandro Lusana   

  

 The Hegelian catalog

I must admit that the Science of logic of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel(1770-1831), is a interesting catalog of information regard the philosophical evolution of the think of author, because if we consider that the Phenomenology of the spirit is edited in 1807 and the Science of logic in 1812-1816, we can, or better, we must think that one of fundamental character of Hegelian philosophy isn’t, this the idealism, that through The science of logic among 1812 and 1816, hence the this book is written after, and it is evident but less evident is the absolute absence of idealism, because in the following step: “The logic can be divided among the general logic, of to be and the logic of to think, in the logic objective and subjective”, so explained it is a capital condemn, because it is incomprehensible, but Hegel aids us and he explains: “In conformity of content the objective logic is correspondent for something to that for Emmanuel Kant(1724-1804) is the transcendental logic(this is the metaphysical logic). He differentiates it from that he calls general logic, that he calls logic without a doubt, because he considers the concepts that consider to objects, hence he not abstract from the content of the objective knowledge, because it contents the rules of the pure think of a object and together is the origin of our knowledge because it not to be attributed to the objects. The principal think of Kant is the to demand the categories to the auto conscience as subjective I.”; it is a very, hence we can understand that the kicks are two and not alone one, because it is more incomprehensible than the concept above, but it is very simple, actually elementary; he has simple says, after that he has took the concepts of Kant, and for it he explains what is his concept, the question is, what is this concept? Simple the first step that Hegel used the subjective and the objective logic, is simply the owner think and the evident reality, for example: I can look a painting and I can say and cry that here is a painting, other visitor can look me and confirm it, after that he has called the police, and it is the objective logic, because what is visible for everybody is the objective logic, but the subjective logic instead is the contrary; because I can judge this painting as a painting of a painter very well, instead the second visitor can judge it as a painting of other painter, it is the subjective logic. The text became more clear for the following words: “The principal think of Kant is the to demand the categories to the auto conscience as subjective I”; it is the important step that deny, although partially, the Kant’s idealism and the idealism whole, because the judge of Hegel that want that Kant demands the categories of the auto conscience is the confutation of idealism, it is valid both for Hegel and for Kant; the concept is very simple; it is the normal process of knowledge that every day we have, this is the know or recognize something, and that we add to our knowledge but in conformity of categories that we have, every object we can recognize because we has a category that can recognize it, but what is the category? Simple if somebody must read a text written for the ancient Greek, but he doesn’t know the ancient Greek he can’t read it he hasn’t the category of ancient Greek, this is he hasn’t the right and sufficient information about the ancient Greek, it is the category; and the auto conscience that Kant demanded is the category, this is the information, necessary to recognize something, that is real, hence objective, therefore very long from the idealism.

Alessandro Lusana     

 

 

 The Hegelian Science of logic: some note

The Science of logic is a difficult book of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831), that is avoid as the plague, because objectively it must be trained to the think of Hegel, but the introduction at last is very much clear, because some step explains what is the rational, or logic, argument of this book: “If we take the logic as the science of think generally, then we can think that this think is the nude form  of a knowledge, that the logic is abstract from every essence, and the second element of every knowledge, this is the matter, that must be given…”; but we must disaccord to Hegel because he continued: “…we can suppose that the logic from it this matter would be totally independent, it can indicate alone the rules of knowledge, because it is the essential of truth, the content would be out…”; these words are very difficult because haven’t sense, but in conformity to the Hegelian think, we can discord from the master, that is Hegel, at last for me, because the logic in this consideration is alone the tool necessary to understand something, but the matter is the object of study ,a the logic is alone the instrument necessary to inquiry the truth, in fact I have stressed the conditional mood, would be, because this common matter that Hegel melts to logic, is a consideration that for to him is necessary to explain, is following pages the logic, or the science of logic, because he has unified the logic think to the matter, alone so is possible reached the true knowledge, and the affirmation: “…because it is the essential of truth, the content would be out”; Hegel has took the logic as the consubstantial to the matter; but I repeat it is necessary for the justify the inherence of the logic to matter so that he can explain that the knowledge is directly tied to the matter, in fact he following said: “The first is already is wrong to say that the logic  abstract from the content and that it learn alone the rules for of think, without go to the thought…”; these words merit the capital pain because who read it the first ask is: “What cuck is the meaning?”, this question is logic and rational, in fact these are alone useless words and stop; but among a blasphemy and other, we can also think that what I have said above, this is the matter tied to the matter, is the essential reference for to understand the Science of logic, the logic hence is melted to the matter, and alone so we can knowledge the matter and other. Naturally we can laugh about this fusion between the matter and think, because it is the abstraction absolutely; but repeat we must also consider that the think of Hegel is in the time of absolutely idealism, inasmuch every matter, also the common matter was worth of ideal; but who is condemned from some professor of philosophy or for homicide, to read the Aesthetic of Hegel(I have read it three times, and for me it is very fashioning, and nothing court had condemned me) who has read this book knows that that Hegel consider the matter, therefore earth, as the negative in confront to the ideal, when the art is thought and worked from the artist, the ideal is disappeared because it is common and not ideal; but the πάντα ρει od Heraclitus(b.Ch. 550-480) is present, and evidently he has changed idea. Anyway we can think that the idealism of 19^th century may was passing, and we must also consider that, evidently, the wit, or emphasis, of Romanticism has left the space to the pragmatic reality, that Hegel has left and has retook, because in this book is the predominance of think, hence of the Romantic and ideal wit, but melted also the very much thick presence of matter, whereby of the reality, that apart from the idealism; then it is a book where Hegel is in half between idealism and the matter.

Alessandro Lusana 

    

 

 

 First the peace in empire and after other: Constantine and the Arianism

The Christianity has had very controversies, the last through Martin Luther(1483-1546), for mere politic motives, as the Catholic Church has defended its position for likewise politic interest, also because the north Europe was by now Protestant, the England was Protestant, and the ecclesiastic power was halved, hence the power that again hold have to jealously kept; these are alone controversies and in modern age, this is during the 16^th century and in Europe, but also in ancient time, in fact the first, or alleged so, Christian imperator proved his political nature, because he was a politic for the controversy between the Arian(a. Ch.256-336), a theologian man that thought that Christ was alone a subaltern to God and not certainly consubstantial to God; hence Christ has a human nature and a human biography; this polemic discussion between the bishop Alexander, bishop of Alexandria, Egypt, and his presbyter Arian, in the 4^th century a.Ch., that to start was a lone a theological controversy and a simple discussion between two theological men, but after it became a problem, that it was condemned in the Nicaea council(a.Ch.325); but why this importance so great that Constantine have to intervened? Simple because he wanted that this controversy not compromised the peace in empire, and some step of his letters, regard this controversy, are very important because proof the political sensibility of Constantine for a question that was alone theological but it could determine the political confusion, and riots in Empire; the letters are copy from Eusebius from Cesarea(a.Ch.265-339), the first letter says: “I call for witness, how I can, God that is aid for my efforts and the conservator of everymen…My design then was, first, to bring the diverse judgments formed by all nations respecting the Deity to a condition, as it were, of settled uniformity; and, secondly, to restore to health the system of the world, then suffering under the malignant power of a grievous distemper. Keeping these objects in view, I sought to accomplish the one by the secret eye of thought, while the other I tried to rectify by the power of military authority. For I was aware that, if I should succeed in establishing, according to my hopes, a common harmony of sentiment among all the servants of God, the general course of affairs would also experience a change correspondent to the pious desires of them all.”, and the following step of this letter is more important, above all for the last lines: “I understand, then, that the origin of the present controversy is this. When you, Alexander, demanded of the presbyters what opinion they severally maintained respecting a certain passage in the Divine law, 1 or rather, I should say, that you asked them something connected with an unprofitable question, then you, Arius, inconsiderately insisted on 2 what ought never to have been conceived at all, or if conceived, should have been buried in profound silence. Hence it was that a dissension arose between you, fellowship was withdrawn, 3 and the holy people, rent into diverse parties, no longer preserved the unity of the one body. Now, therefore, do ye both exhibit an equal degree of forbearance, 4 and receive the advice which your fellow-servant righteously gives. What then is this advice? It was wrong in the first instance to propose such questions as these, or to reply to them when propounded. For those points of discussion which are enjoined by the authority of no law, but rather suggested by the contentious spirit which is fostered by misused leisure, even though they may be intended merely as an intellectual exercise, ought certainly to be confined to the region of our own thoughts, and not hastily produced in the popular assemblies, nor unadvisedly entrusted to the general ear. For how very few are there able either accurately to comprehend, or adequately to explain subjects so sublime and abstruse in their nature? Or, granting that one were fully competent for this, how many people will he convince? Or, who, again, in dealing with questions of such subtle nicety as these, can secure himself against a dangerous declension from the truth? It is incumbent therefore on us in these cases to be sparing of our words, lest, in case we ourselves are unable, through the feebleness of our natural faculties, to give a clear explanation of the subject before us, or, on the other hand, in case the slowness of our hearers' understandings disables them from arriving at an accurate apprehension of what we say, from one or other of these causes the people be reduced to the alternative either of blasphemy. Let therefore both the unguarded question and the inconsiderate answer receive your mutual forgiveness. 1 For the cause of your difference has not been any of the leading doctrines or precepts of the Divine law, nor has any new heresy respecting the worship of God arisen among you. You are in truth of one and the same judgment: 2 you may therefore well join in communion and followship.”; this controversy certainly interested very slow Constantine that was pagan and so he has died, but for to him the importance was for the peace in empire, and the example, that can show to us what would be the effects for a religious controversy, is the European war of thirteen years that seen the war of Catholic States against the Protestant States, that lasted 30 years; hence Constantine known perfectly that a very irrelevant discussion could determine very division in empire, and for to him the peace was the principal matter.

Alessandro Lusana  

 

Ephemeral republics: Cispadane and Roman Republic 1797-1799-1849

It is strange but for the dogged reader as me, in fact for me it is normal, but a rational think should consider what are the causes that have determined the failure, but the historical men hide their ignorance, or lacking of passion, behind the lacking of documents, it is absolutely false because the documents are but they are of different nature, from the archives, from the letters, form the discourses that are copied and other; the last source is the hypothesis, that can be used. Anyway for this other sources, certainly short, but important that has said that the Italian economy through these republics, at last in north Italy this is the Cispadane republic, where the economy was developed but not certainly in Rome, the economy known the liberal trade, that there was already, but alone underground; and the reforms that the Napoleonic French has brought were important for an economy: the abolition of guilds, the rights of fiefs and other specific reforms that has given possibility to economy for to develop; the question from a reader is: “Why the economy? What it so what?”, the interest for the revolution in history apart from the economy, that is instead the principal factor, as has occurred for the French Revolution, because although after the publicity has hold some theory that was absolutely false, as the search of political freedom and other cuck up of this gender, but we can understand it because it is alone the publicity, the true motives for the Revolution were alone economic, in fact some historical man has described it so: “During the end of 18^th century, the French crown after the defeat in the war of seven years, and for years of misrule, was in very economic difficult…Anne Robert Jacques Turgot(1727-1781) minister of finance in France, has ordered that every expense was warrant for the minister, and he has abolished the much useless offices, and he asked to the king the abolition of much pensions…”; these words are necessaries for to understand the economy of France in the end of 18^th century, and why the reforms in Italian economy, for the republics were necessary; the reforms occurred alone because the France was again in serious economic conditions, hence was necessary that Napoleon could take from everywhere the money, and the economic reforms guaranteed the gain through the taxes, that in fact were very great; same motive that occurred for the Roman republic the expropriation of proprieties od the religious institutions and the abolition 0f feudal rights, and the taxation was finally proportionated to the capital of everybody, but also here the taxation was enormous; and the taxes are the sign for to understand that the freedom of Napoleonic army was alone an ideal motive for to improve the French wealth; hence when the Napoleon was defeated, also the republics are disappeared.

Alessandro Lusana  

         

 

 

 Repetita juvant: the economic causes of French Revolution

In this essay nothing of new, because these motives or causes are known certainly, but the Latin words of title are the conform that of these thesis are known, but very much times are ignored; hence I want alone confirm how much is said, but the repeated things aid, in conformity to translation from the Latin language, this is the “repetita juvant”; the causes was prevalently economic, some historical man has written: “During the end of 18th century, the French crown after the defeat in the war of seven years, and for years of misrule, was in very economic difficult…Anne Robert Jacques Turgot(1727-1781) minister of finance in France, has ordered that every spending was warrant for the minister, and he has abolished the much useless offices, and he asked to the king the abolition of much pensions…”; in fact every expense have to approved from the minister; Turgot has also reformed the Ferme Générale, and private society founded in 1687, and it has had the duty of to collect the taxes, but the major important  reform was the liberalization of internal trade of wheat, and he managed reduced the deficit of the French State. But the dullness of nobles classes and the deficit very great didn’t allowed to application of the major reform that Turgot had thought, this is a unique tax on the immobile; for this tax naturally the nobles class refused immediately, and a crisis of agricultural nature in year 1774 and 1775 burst riot in Dijon, called after the revolts of meals; but Turgot abolished also the guilt and of the corvées, this is the free work of the granger for his lord, but in years 1776 the opposition of nobility won on the reforms, and Turgot have to resigned, and worse thing, his reforms were withdrawn. Same political address has had Jacques Necker(1732-1804), that has reduced the expense of the pensions and of same court. Naturally the noble class was hostile to these reforms and tried of remove it, and he published a count that he had given to the king, in year 1781, and he stressed the very serious condition of French economy and the liable Charles-Alexandre de Calonne(1704-1802), he proposed a subvention on the lands without distinction of class and for the gain; for the discussion about these reforms in22th February 1787, the king has met the Assembly of Notables, composed from the nobles, prelates, dukes and other nobles; but these reforms every reforms were refused, and the third state, this is the middle class, protested very much, but they were excluded from this assembly. These are alone some causes of the Revolution, but these are the important note necessary to understand that a nation or State are very complex and the competence must be awarded and not excluded; but today we think it because we know and recognize better the qualities of somebody, but Jean Paul Marat(1743-1793), the chief of Jacobins from 1793, would say: “It is very easy to say these concepts 237 years after the Revolution, but when these reforms had presented to an idiotic that was also king, the nobles class could make everything, because he was an idiot, and so he is was until the decollation”. And we could alone gove to him right, now and always.

Alessandro Lusana        

 

 

 

 

 

 A handbook of semiotic: Aristotle’s Hermeneutics

The works of Aristotle(b.Ch. 384-322) are very loved or hated, but for the Ερμηνευτικη I think that is an exception, because it is a examination of linguistic nature, that is very easy and also scant, he says: “The first we must consider what is the name  and what is the verb, hence what is the negation, what is the affirmation, and the enunciation and the discourse”; it is very elementary description that we can understand very easily, because in conformity to the Aristotelian code, he has always write and expressed easy concepts that are daily, and this book isn’t an exception, in fact he follows: “The sounds of voice  are symbols of affirmations that are in soul, and the written signs are of the sounds that are in the voice”; and he continues through some example that are very easy and elementary: “The false and the true regard the junction and the separation. The names and the verbs resemble to a think but without junction and separation, for example the words “man” and “white”, when isn’t added something. In facts it isn’t neither false or other…”; certainly Aristotle didn’t want offense the intelligence of his readers, although we can ask to us: “Why this book he has written?”; we must also consider that the readers in today aren’t the readers of the 4^th century before Christ; hence he has simplified very much, because then these concepts can be also difficult. But if we think well about this book, Aristotle has anticipated Charles Sanders Peirce(1839-1914), that is the founder of semiotic; because Aristotle has given a code necessary to the interpretation, that is the first exercise of semiotic, because if somebody read, following of Aristotle, the word man and white, the interpretation of these words is nothing, because for the meaning is necessary some other word that aren’t in Aristotelian example, inasmuch they haven’t meaning; therefore the interpretation there isn’t, in conformity of the example; in fact here the interpretation is impossible, because the words are very alone two, and the semiotic instead can give an interpretation, alone when the words are much and there is a discourse. Aristotle uses a word that isn’t in common languages, because the word “capricervo” is an imaginary animal, that is a mixed between a goat and deer, and he said: “…in fact the capricervo means something, but it isn’t the false or true, if not they add something”. I have already written about the Aristotelian semiotic(Aristotelian semiotic and the Origin of semiotics) and now a confirm it, form the book about the Categories to it, is a semiotic example; and he continues: “The name is a voice that can means in conformity to use, and independently from the time, and of this word nothing is able to means if it is take alone. In fact in Callippo horse hasn’t meaning if we take it alone, instead the words beauty horse has meaning”; it is the easy example of Aristotelian semiotic, that is a handbook for the understanding the semiotic. Aristotle has given to us a code that after is became the semiotic matter, and he has given very easy examples, so that it was understanding to everybody. Anyway the principal concept that I want give to this book is the genesis of semiotic, that during the centuries nobody has considered for this new consideration of language. May then very scant has understood the valor of this book, and today the semiotic valor is certainly unknown, but it is a handbook of semiotic, if somebody want know the semiotic must read this book, because it is the fundamental method for to know the method of linguistic semiotic, because for the semiotic  more bread in meaning is Charles Sanders Peirce(1839-1914)-       

Alessandro Lusana  

 

 

 

   

    

 

 

 

 The constitutional theatre 1797

I want stress the importance alone formal of an episode that in occurred in Italy during the year 1797, the Cispadane Republic, this is an absolutely false Republic, that has followed during that year in north Italy, that enclosed the region of Emilia Romagna and some cities of this region, and two cities of Tuscany; this essay want consider alone the constitution that has ascertained the constitution, and above all consider the fiction of the policy, that has, through Napoleon(1769-1821), has given the image of liberty when the power was always in his hands. The first sign of this lacking of liberty is in the write of this constitution, why? Simple because the Cispadane Republic has had a constitution that has equal to the French constitution. The first article of this constitution is very meaningful for this opinion, in fact the French constitution of 1791, says: “The sake of every politic association is the khe conservation of natural right. These rights are the liberty, the propriety, the sureness and the resistance to oppression”; certainly important declaration but that is almost specular to the first article of Cispadane republic that says: “The rights of man, that lives in the society, are the liberty, the equality, the sureness, the propriety”. A copy of the French constitution, as above said, but we must also consider that in Italy, the word constitution of rights were concept absolutely strange to the common people, and after this constitution lasted strange; but the stratagem is to give the image of the respect of rights and of the freedoms; but the copy continues: “The French constitution says: “The liberty is in the to make everything that isn’t harmful to other…”; the constitution of Cispadane republic says: “The liberty is in the free action that isn’t harmful to other rights…”; regard to the freedom about the think and expression is in this step of French republic: “The free communication of the thinks and of the opinions is one of man more important; every citizen can hence specks, write, print freely…”; very modern principle, that is specular almost to the Cispadane republic: “Nobody can’t be for his freedom about the think, write, and publish also through the print his thinks, except the cases forgotten from the laws…”; the article 12^th has modified but is the same concept  of French constitution: “The equality is in this, that the law is same for everybody both when it protects and punish…”; the difference is in the 17^th article that is alone a formal distinction, because the concept is equal: “The propriety is a holy and inviolable right, nobody can be deprived, except when the public necessity demands it…”, and the Cispadane constitution says: “The propriety is the right of to joy, and to manage owner goods…”. I wanted represent that these concept are absolutely new for that time, but it were already both in France and in Italy, but the innovative change is that they aren’t alone in the customs, but also in the supreme law, this is the constitution, that the Cispadane republic has borrow from the French constitution, I repeat, it was also necessary because the rights in Italy didn’t know, because the rights were alone tied to the habits. We must also consider that the power was always French, and form their hands never was given to the Italian. A historical gift of this republic has been the Italian flag, that is created on the French model, alone the firts color, red instead blue.  

Alessandro Lusana

 

 

 

 The other conformity

Usually we are habit to think to conformity as a rule not official as the laws that regulate the external life of us, motives are different, the job above all, the savage of our own, the dread of not gain and therefore lost something. But we never think that this conformity is very much, and we can know alone our daily and sure; because other forms of conformity are in the word and in the our vital space; in a city, for example, as New York the communities are very much, and every community has its conformity, this is the morality, that stemmed from its culture, its habit, its economy, but it is other conformity; a conformity that for us is natural, because the habit, daily habit, is for us normal; therefore we not want remove it because for us it is normal, and it is the conformity and sureness, hence we need of this conformity, as we need of logic that is other conformity, because think that 2 and 2 is the sum of five it is absolutely absurd, and doubt of an precise entity as the mathematic is crazy, instead it is perfectly logic; because the sum is demonstrated alone from our calculus, but in reality nothing can demonstrated it, inasmuch this sum is conformity, because the sum must be precise in conformity to the calculus, but why it must be so? Simple because if this sum was 5 or 7 or 9, the economic system of the word would be harmed from this opinion, and our sureness would be removed, hence our conformity, that for this is the sureness, there isn’t, and the economy as the other calculus would be harmed, the economy above all, hence 2 more 2 must be 4 and stop. But although we can’t think it, it is the conformity, a conformity that we have in the brain, that is also our sureness, for this we have get used to have fictions sureness, theoretical sureness, but our weakness is so radical whereby we have need of these sureness, always and everywhere; it is sufficient also think or remember a difficult context, this is an episode that has given to us awe, the awe is disappeared, when we have seen something that was familiar to us, hence our soul is calmed; it is the conformity because we have calmed our soul when we have seen something that was consistent to our habits, for this we have projected to these object the our rescue, and we have assimilated the thing to the our salvation, also if these object can’t save us but the presence is important, because it can calms our wit; it is the conformity, because that object is conformity to our life, hence it is nearest to us, and it is also consistent to our wit, and to be consistent is the first rule for our sureness and for conformity; hence I repeat 2 more 2 must be 4, because it is the sureness that the rationality gives to us.

Alessandro Lusana                    

 The conformity of the logic

When we think logically, we have sureness that this think is perfect, because everything has followed the rationality, therefore it is, for us, a sureness, but although we never think, it is also conformity, because the logic is conformity, why? Simple because something must be so, otherwise it isn’t illogic, hence mistake; but we not think that this rationality is right for us in our country, but for citizen of other country, it could be very odd; for example, for a Afghan the freedom that in our country have the women is anomalous, because for our logic it is normal but for the Afghan it isn’t, because we have a habit and we have developed a logic, that is consistent in the freedom for the women, but he has get used to other conformity, and the women hasn’t the freedom, but that is for us underdeveloped for them it is normal, because we have other logic and other conformity. But our think about the perfection of our think is conformity, because we have got custom to think in this way and we not work to other way, because the logic, this is our logic, hence our conformity, want it, this is the logic behavior, that is conformity; because we are following the method of our logic that is inherent to our customs , inasmuch to our conformity, or rather to the rules that our society has ordered, and that we follow mechanically; it is the same phenomenal of religion; because the religion is conformity to a belief and the faithful for to be faithful must follow these rules, that give also the identity, a religious identity, that is always an identity, and that must follow a logic that is inherent to the religion, or rather to that religion, for this it is the conformity because believe must follow determined rules, that are inherent to the belief, that gives the identity and the determined logic, that is conformity, because otherwise the faithful would be heretic or member of other religion, so a Protestant can’t follow the mess because his belief hasn’t the mess; the confession is merely Catholic but also Anglican, but not Lutheran; it is allows an identity and also a conformity, but they can also confess their sins directly to God, as the Protestant, or also to a priest; and it is the paradigm of necessity of a religion of faithful, because the Anglican has determined the three different ways, therefore the Anglican are “polyconformity”, because it enables different method of a sacrament; thence the different ways the first want meet the exigence of faithful, and hence enables the different conformity, that are necessary for the meet the favor of God; we can also consider that the Anglican is the less conformist, because it allows a choose for this sacrament of confession, but we must also consider, that the Anglican confession is similarly conformist although enables different ways for the confession, because the rules for the this sacrament are three but every rule are ascertained, for this the faithful must follow one of these rules, and it is the conformity, for to be Anglican as he not follow the mess for to be Protestant, as the orthodoxy has similar but also different way for the celebration of the mess; it give the identity and different conformity, inherent to their logic.

Alessandro Lusana

       

 I am it: the need of identification

This essay is very wicked because it describes the wit or will of identification of somebody, that during the childhood is normal, but worrying is when it is in adult age; because it is the sign of low personality subject to various influences, that can be positive or negative, and can undermine the develop of personality; in fact during the childhood we are subject to veracious influence above all from our family we can take different influences, both positive and negative, but we have influenced because we haven’t a personality, because our personality is absent, hence we are as air that takes every form of container, or water that has the form of container, we are as the clay, that can be formed from the sculptor how he want, and he can it because the clay is very soft, and our personality is similar the softness is equal, and the influence is the sculptor that shapes us. Who needs of this influence? Simple who hasn’t a personality or has a weak personality, hence he searches sureness for some influence; but it is sign of insurance, because the absence of personality is evident for the direct or indirect influence of somebody or something, and the influence is the involvement can works alone on the weak personality, that are searching a personality, because the to shape their personality is tardy, but although tardy it is going to form it, fortunately because who hasn’t personality never is involved for every influence, positive or negative, I want consider a sentence of a scientist woman Margherita Hack(1922-2013) that said: “That for identification of good and wicked not must be a religion, because if you not know twice you lack of personality”; and it is the dynamic of who hasn’t a personality, because he is subject to every influence, certainly he identify the good and the wicked, but the dominance of his absence of personality overcomes everything, because he want alone a personality this is he want say: “I am it!”, and for him it is the important to be something, not for to be different but alone for to be something, also equal to other; for example: a soldier is equal to other, but his personality is different, he obey as others and he makes that other makes but he is different, very different from others, because his personality is different, but the personality isn’t importance for the army, I have explain this example for to say that also the developed personality can be subject to a major influence, same the priests and the popes, that can have their personality, but they must obey to superior orders, hence they are equal to others but their personality is very different. The need of identification is necessary to the weak personalities, because they need of something that can identify them, but not for to be different but alone for can say to themselves I am it, it is important, to be something.

Alessandro Lusana             

 Auditory semiotic

We never has taught a question the is absolutely marginal, but that can assume some importance in the studio of semiotic; a category of semiotic that is auditory, that isn’t never considered but that is the integral part of semiotic; when we hearing a CD, musical CD, we can author , classic  or not because we have read on the packet, but if we are in competition and the question is : “Who is the author of this music?”, we can manage of choose the author for the style of the music; and it is the auditory semiotic, as a discourse or a voice that we are hearing, we can choose who is the author that has pronounced the discourse from the style and the voice, and it is the auditory semiotic, because we can recognize the author from the words that are expressed, hence from the sound of voice, ton and the words, but above for the sound; hence it is the auditory semiotic. The written we can  identify the author through the style, but the written is mute, same difficult for the auditory semiotic, that using  the categories of Peirce, this is the Firstness , this is the essence, or better the style, that is a peculiarity of human gender, of artists particularly; inasmuch the auditory semiotic, is a category that can be considered, because it is brings directly to the author, that we haven’t know before. A language is other motive for to identify somebody if don’t know somebody, hence if he is Dutch we may identify him for the language, or netter some compatriot we can identify his origin for the language, or better his town from determined expression or inflexion, that he is from the north, south or other; it is the auditory semiotic; a discourse is the auditory semiotic because the Firstness is the meaning of this discourse, therefore from the decode the sound, we can consider the essence, hence we can think that the object of our interest is changed, because from the sound we now consider the essence, but the essence of sound is the style, because the composer lavish his style in the music, and in his composition; but the change is present because from the sound we now consider now the meaning, thence the style for this  we can we can consider the author of discourse, also without know who pronounce it; in this case the different object of interest is evident, but the method is similar, because we are hearing always and the object is same , the discourse, therefore the auditory semiotic, that consider the meaning of a discourse that is the style; in classical concert the words aren’t , but the style is evident  for the ears, in fact we must hear alone , it is the style of somebody, in this case alone auditory but the style is always present, whereby the auditory semiotic is our.

Alessandro Lusana   

      

 Infantile conformity

The conformity is the true infantile form of expression of human gender, why? Simple, because if we remind when the elementary schools, the masters usually during the visits in some town, were usual order to us the order and the keep the line, because the responsibility was their; but this think is similar to the conformity, because the people that follows the fashion or habit, because everybody makes it, is infantilism; the will of emulation of the men is infantilism, the child will be equal to other always, hence to be equal is the infantilism of man, that until the infantile age is natural, but after it is the sign of infantilism and lack of personality; it is the principal problem, the lack of personality, that is comparable to the water, every form of container is the form of water, a bottle gives the form to water, and the mode or custom gives the form to men, why? Simple because the following are lacking of personality, therefore they haven’t a capacity of imposition to themselves, and it is the lacking of think and interior strong; we can consider that also the soldiers are always equal, whereby also they are lacking of personality, instead not, why? Simple: because they are dress equal and they make the same thing, but the difference is in the duty that they have; because the obey and the make the same things is their duty; they have a precise duty, and from it they can’t leave something, because they are soldiers, and the monks or religious that can’t leave something from his believe, and the soldier has the same interior rigor, or at last they should have it. The conformity is also infantilism because after that the man has followed a custom, and the people follows other for to be fashionable everybody follows that custom, because everybody makes it;  this is lacking of personality, that gives the sureness because it is equal to other, hence it is following the people, that is an element of sureness; the genius is born when he makes something that is different; Galileo Galilei(1564-1642) has used the magnifying lens in other way and he has found the satellites of Jove, and the surface of moon isn’t smooth and other; he has followed his method; and it is the problem, this is to find a method that is our, because we can find it, why? Because everyman has his personality, and we can tie our method to it, because we must find a method that is fit to our personality, and this search, allows the our growth, because we can know better ourselves, because we refuse and accept something, therefore we must analyze ourselves, and so we can know ourselves, through this chooses, and we can begin to build our personality, through the knowledge of ourselves, and we can begin to remove the idea that is dominant, this is the following other; but we must also consider that it isn’t sufficient, because we must refuse the mute orders, this is the conformity, and search our taste and our preference, our way.

Alessandro Lusana               

 

 The ancestor of Cathars

The first need is identify the Cathars, the heretical movement between 12th and 14th century in Europe, that has distinguished two principles the good and the bad, this is the material and the spiritual, and furthermore they refused the Catholic Church and its Sacraments, and they, the unique Sacrament was the baptism that they called the “consolamentum”, this is the imposition of the hands that was the baptism; they diffused in south France, in north Italy and in Byzantine empire; the refusal of Sacraments and of the Church has, certainly, determined the persecution from the Catholic Church, more than the refusal of richness, because centuries after the Donatist the Franciscan orders refused the richness, and the Franciscan order are again the ecclesiastic order; but the Cathars were the example that not obeyed to the Church, hence they were dangerous; this refusal of money and of the richness is comparable to the Dolcinian, that were above all violent against the rich members of Church, instead the Cathars and Donatist aren’t it; but I want identify the rigor of this sect that during the 4^th century in north Africa has had great success, the Donatist believed that the Sacraments that had from the “lapsi”, from the Latin “lapsus” this is the decayed, this is the religious that has denied the Christian faith for to save their life; and the common interest is present, because during 4^th century was the life, but now was the sacraments, inasmuch the motive for existence of the Church, same thing that centuries after will make Martin Luther(1483-1546), that deleted the sacraments and the miss; and the Donatist held that the Church is composed alone from the saints, this is alone who has given the heroic example of faith can be member of the Church; it is the same rigor and severity of Cathars, and their refusal of money, but they have had also some habit that we can mistake to the original Catholic Church, but it isn’t because the similar way for the baptism, this is the immersion in the water, but it wasn’t a motive for the polemic; in fact the Saint Optatus of Milevi(4^th century a.Ch.), the major adversary to the Donatist was perfectly in agreement to the Donatist, and in fact he was agreement for the maintaining of faith, but the repetition of this Sacrament was the motive for the polemic, and Optatus has mentioned the Paul Apostle that has said: “…there is one alone Lord, one alone faith and one alone baptism…”; hence the secondo baptism is absolutely useless and heretic; but the with or opinion of Donatists was similar to Cathars for their severity, and they were Manichaen, from Mani(a.Ch. 216-277), the dualism that in Donatist was toward the baptism, instead for the Cathars was the material and immaterial, but the difference is alone for this, that is substantial, but in different times, when these are other questions, but the same rigor of Cathars.

Alessandro Lusana