Other fiction: Roman republic in 1849

We must consider that certainly the policy, or better, the politic men has thousand ways for to lie, and the Italian and the politic men of Roman republic in 1849, when pope Pius 9^th gone away from Rome, and the laic power took the govern; we must also consider that the papacy not managed never the laic power, because the heritage of Senate, ancient Roman Senate was again present, and the laic has had the power on the Rome, anyway nobody has considered it, because in historiography again is present this opinion; but it isn’t scant important, because I want consider alone the hypocrisy of the politic men that has wanted the Roman republic, and the documents, fortunately, not lack, hence the first is the following: “A great act is made. Met the National Assembly of your represent, and recognized the of the people, the unique form of govern that to us was opportune was that has given glory to our fathers…”; this discourse if somebody has pronounced to a Roman public certainly, one has heard and thousand has slept, because the Roman people was almost completely illiterate, and nothing was important as the feed, hence the emphatic words have been very useless; but it is the policy, inasmuch the solemn words followed: “So has decided the Assembly, and the Roman Republic has created from the Capitol. Every citizen that isn’t enemy of the nation, he must give a immediately adhesion to this govern…”; and the nature of political sake emerges immediately, why? Simple because the adhesion to the govern is a defense of the new power, an armed defense, because of this the new republic needed, above all the army and men that could fight, and the cock up continues: “(the govern) is born from the free vote and universal of represent of the nation, it will follow the way of order and justice…”; it is seems a comic recital, because the votes of this declaration were of represent and not of the common people, and the adjective for the vote “universal”, we should ask to the orator if he know the meaning of word universal, because this assembly may, and repeat may, has composed from the seventh persons, that has decided for everybody, hence where is the democracy? The name of this assembly are mentioned: “C. E. MUZZARELLI , C. ARMELLINI, F. GALEOTTI, L. MARIANI, P. STERBINI, P. CAMPELLO, F. CERROTI, in Rome 9th February 1849”; seventh person that has decided for some thousand has had the laic power that is equaled alone for the Gengis Khan(died in 1227); compliment because the people is very participant to the new govern. But the fear of the old govern is manifest in this order: “…Every coats of arms of failed pontifical govern must be removed from the public and private locals among three days…”; it would be very useless if there isn’t the fear that the confront from the new and ancient govern induce the people to consider that the old govern was certainly better; beyond this mechanic consideration we must also consider that this govern was born weak and died weak, and its weakness is already evident.

Alessandro Lusana    

 

  

 

 

 

 

  

 

 Kantian contradiction

The read of Prologomena for every future metaphysic, a book that Immanuel Kant(1724-1804) written for to explain his The critic of the pure intelligence, because much critics were come to him for the difficult of this book, he has explain the concepts, and he has explained interesting concepts, as the synthetic and analytics judges: for Kant an analytic proportion, or judge, is a judge that not demands the direct experience for to ascertain the truth, for example, I take the Kantian example: the bodies are wide, this proportion is already verifiable without the experience because the bodies are wide and we it know perfectly, because in the concept of body is implicit the dimension of wideness; the single is a man that isn’t married, in the concept of single is implicit that he is unmarried; but instead the proportion or judge synthetic, that in conformity to the think of Kant is the judge add other information that isn’t in predicate, this is: the body is heavy, it add other information, regard the heaviness; hence the se two judges has a rationality certainly, but also a contradiction, that we are going see after, because the last judge is likewise important: the gold is a metal of yellow color; Kant judges this judge is otherwise contradictory than above, because he says: “Every le analytic proportions are the judge “a priori”, although their concepts are empiric, as this judge: “The gold is a metal of yellow color”, because for to know that the gold is yellow I not need of other experience, but I have need alone of my concept of gold, that has itself the affirmation that is a metal and of yellow color…”; and other part of this concept is further contradictory: “…these elements entered for the build the my concept and I have to alone to break up, without turn my eyes to other town, but alone to my concept”; these proportions are a contradiction and neither hide, but evident, because Kant considers alone the abstract concept, the a priori, a Latin proportion that indicates something that is before of direct experience; it is the contradiction of Kant, how we can verify it? Simple, following the daily life; we can aske to a baby of 4 year of what color has the gold, he can’t answer that the gold has the yellow color, because he doesn’t know what is the gold, because if he know it, he isn’t a baby but a robber disguised of baby; but a true baby can’t answer, because he doesn’t what is the gold and the yellow color; hence this information is directly from the experience that we have made during our growth, and the same for the two first judge, the body we know that is wide because we have seen, for this our image of the body, that is a concept, that we have took from the reality, that we have seen; inasmuch nothing is a priori, but except the imaginary think, the experience is necessary to know the real condition and also for the read and contradict Immanuel Kant.

Alessandro Lusana   

             

 

The egocentrism of the property

In this essay I want alone consider that is manifest to everybody, the egocentrism of proprerty, what is it? We must follow Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel(1770-1831), and his theory of the Objective Spirit, this is the clear manifestation in the State and in reality, pragmatic reality of something, everything; this concept that we can find in The encyclopedia of the philosophical sciences is a representation alone philosophical that has took directly from the Phenomenology of the Spirit and the same concepts he has expressed in this book. Hence nothing that we haven’t read, but we can develop it through the addition of other concepts, and I have the egocentrism of property, that is a clear manifestation of the Objective Spirit, and that is an external translation of owner personality, hence it is the egocentrism, in fact who has much want always to show it, proprieties, titles, qualities; it is alone a form of egocentrism that becomes Objective Spirit because everything that somebody has is external, therefore Objective, this is visible, and it is the sign of personality that from Subjective becomes Objective, always following Hegel we can consider also that from external we can suggest that it become again Subjective, how? Simple through the psychology, because an egocentric is also pathetic, then a psychology is necessary, considering that the egocentrism is the sign of weak; it isn’t important, because I want consider the property as an emanation of owner personality, that has very much motives for the pride and also psychological motives for to documents, for the semiotic science, the psychology of the who has this boast, because he manifests his weak through these manifestations. The property is alone an Objective Spirit, through owner tastes; the choice of a cloth, and furnishing is alone the material of Objective Spirit, that has origin form the Subjective Spirit, whereby it is a form of egocentrism, that has owner character, hence it is the manifestation of owner characteristic, that can be also the boast for determined forms or for the price, that is always a boast; the car is clear manifestation of projection of the Objective Spirit, because it manifest the richness of somebody, inasmuch is concrete realization of a Spirit, that manifests also his weakness, but the pleasure of manifestation of owner richness is important, it is a compensative dynamic. In a daily manifestation of a behavior we can use the Hegelian philosophy, the psychology and also the semiotic, why? Simple because these are signs that from the philosophy come to the semiotic, that is other form of philosophy, because considers every sign, as the Aristotle consider, in his syllogism, the valor of words. The knowledge is also the motive for to boast, and to know is important for to think and not certainly for to boast, Socrates has boasted of he not to know, and we can think that it was a manifestation of humility, but as well as humility that was false, and as well as the method that Socrates has used always for his teaching, although he never has called so, it was a boast, why? Simple because he was original and hence also different from others, therefore he could boast, it is for the psychology, for the philosophy and for the semiotic a manifestation of egocentrism, that Socrates has manifested didn’t have something; he had nothing, that is other boast; inasmuch we are very poor in confront to Socrates, because he is again remembered and he had not something, instead us are going to forgotten very soon.

Alessandro Lusana                                      

 

 The survival of the philosophy

The philosophy is a matter that can be difficult always because very much less common, because certainly we must not pass the days to think to Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel(1770-1831), Aristotle (b.Ch.384-322), Plato(b.Ch. 427-347) and other, because we have things more interesting that the philosophical speculation, or exam; but why the philosophy exist? Because it continues to survive? The philosophy isn’t necessary to the life or it is necessary? It is seems strange but the philosophy is necessary to the life, because it is the think, and the resolution of some problem can comes to us also through the philosophy, why? Simple, we must ask to us what is the philosophy? It is the think, that has other sakes from the daily life, but the suggestions of the philosophy can come to us through a read of a book or, as in ancient Greek, through the hearing of some philosopher, a lesson of philosophy for a professor can aid us to consider some solution, and to understand that the philosophy is clear and daily, how? Simple because the philosophy is the think, normal and daily think, that has took and solemnized from the important names, but it is the normal think, hence if we go to supermarket and something costs very much we renounce, and it is the ataraxia of Epicurus(b.Ch.341-271), that has said that the useless things can be avoided, we aren’t Epicurean, but we are following the suggestion of Epicurus, the reader now is thinking or saying, it is the normal and daily saving, yes, certainly, but it is the philosophical system of Epicurus, certainly he would be more loved if he has also said how we can win a lottery, but it is the fate and not philosophy; Aristotle is more practice because he describes the reality, and he can said to us something, through the description of human gender, a step that I love very much, in Nicomachean ethic, a step that said that the friendship is born alone among the equal persons, and is we consider attentively this step we can ascertain that is the reality, and not it so because has said from Aristotle but because it is the reality, that already in time of Aristotle was so. The semiotic analysis of Aristotle of words, in the On the interpretation and from the Categories is other think that we can read every day in philosophy of Aristotle and in daily reality. Emmanuel Kant(1724-1804) is acme of the description, because he has took alone the reality, the daily reality, and it is alone a description absolutely useless, because he hasn’t overcame the description; the democracy, although he wasn’t democratic, is Socrates(b.Ch.469-399), that said always: “Know your self”(Γνωθι σαυτόν), democratic because Socrates has asked to his “pupils” that they learn before the rational think, and after they could think what they wanted, and it is the freedom of opinion, hence the democracy. The philosophers that I have mentioned here has thought before us that is evident, but they have thought it before because they are born before and stop.

Alessandro Lusana   

 

 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