The evolution of Heraclitus: Charles Peirce

Through the word synechism, very low m can understand what is from ancient Greek, somebody can misunderstand and thinks to a recipe of a foreign dish, but it is alone a philosophical think, that the author, this is Charles Sanders Peirce(1839-1914), explained in one his essay: “The word synechism is the English form of the Greek, from συνεκισμός from συνεκης continuous. For two centuries we have been affixing -is and -ism to words, in order to note sects which exalt the importance of those elements which the stem-words signify. Thus, materialism is the doctrine that matter is everything, idealism the doctrine that ideas are everything, dualism the philosophy which splits everything in two. In like manner, I have proposed to make synechism mean the tendency to regard everything as continuous. For many years I have been endeavoring to develop this idea, and have, of late, given some of my results in the Monist. carry the doctrine so far as to maintain that continuity governs the whole domain of experience in every element of it. Accordingly, every proposition, except so far as it relates to an unattainable limit of experience (which I call the Absolute), is to be taken with an indefinite qualification; for a proposition which has no relation whatever to experience is devoid of all meaning.3 I propose here, without going into the extremely difficult question of the evidences of this doctrine, to give a specimen of the manner in which it can be applied to religious questions. I cannot here treat in fall of the method of its application. It readily yields corollaries which appear at first highly enigmatic; but their meaning is cleared up by a more thoroughgoing application of the principle. This principle is, of course, itself to be understood in a synechistic sense; and, so understood, it in no wise contradicts itself. Consequently, it must lead to definite results, if the deductions are accurately performed.” Important note that is explicative for this concept is the following; it is true, the three dimension of space are generally with synechism Pierce find other dimension that are right, because the space is various but it is the speculative philosophy; the analysis that Pierce made regard this step is upshot of a think that he called: “…is a purely scientific philosophy…”. The conception of Pierce regard the space that is continuous is an evolution of Heraclitus, but with other sense, what? In geometrical words we can imagine that Heraclitus, with his πάντα ρει this is everything passes as the water of a river, he has imagined a line long, but alone straight, instead Pierce has imagined the extension of space everywhere, in fact he has spoken about the metempsychosis, that is transmutation of soul from a body to other after the death, and the deny that is in following words, above all, about the angles is an evolution of Heraclitus, because everything passes, but the direction can be other and not alone straight: “Thoroughgoing synechism will not permit us to say that the sum of the angles of a triangle exactly equals two right angles, but only that it equals that quantity plus or minus some quantity which is excessively small for all the triangles we can measure. We must not accept the proposition that space has three dimensions as strictly accurate; but can only say that any movements of bodies out of the three dimensions are at most exceedingly minute.” For the metempsychosis Pierce said, without mention of this religion: “But, further, synechism recognizes that the carnal consciousness is but a small part of the man. There is, in the second place, the social consciousness, by which a man's spirit is embodied in others, and which continues to live and breathe and have its being very much longer than superficial observers think. Nor is this, by any means, all. A man is capable of a spiritual consciousness, which constitutes him one of the eternal verities, which is embodied in the universe as a whole. This as an archetypal idea can never fail; and in the world to come is destined to a special spiritual embodiment.”, and he added, regard the general conception of synechysm: “I have said enough, I think, to show that, though synechism is not religion, but, on the contrary, is a purely scientific philosophy, yet: should it become

generally accepted, as I confidently anticipate, it may play a part in the onement of religion and science.”

Alessandro Lusana

 

 

 A Medieval copy of Aristotle: Ockham

The Semiotic studies the significance of words and their use, hence their mean, an example: an offence to somebody on the street is an offence to somebody that we can know or not, the same offence in theatre is laughable, because the context is different, whereby it isn’t an offence but a cute of script; thereby the words have more means in the different context, it is simply obvious, but I must say it because the code of Semiotic isn’t much know, this is it isn’t obvious; I am considering the code of Semiotic, that alone during the 19^th century has been codified, but the matter, or conceptual matter, necessary to successive formulation is explained involuntary from Aristotle. The semiotic sense that in Nominalism of Ockham we can find in the following step: “I say that spoken words are signs subordinated to concepts or intentions of the soul not because in the strict sense of signify they always signify the concepts of the soul primarily and properly. The points is rather that spoken words are used to signify the very things that are signified something a spoken word signify the something signified by a particular concept of the mind. If that the concept were to change its signification, by that fact alone it would happen that the spoken word would change its signification, even in the absence of any new linguistic convention”. May William dreaded that he didn’t be quite clear, hence has added also this step, mentioning the father of semiotic, this is Aristotle: “This is all that Aristotle means when he says that spoken words are signs of the impression of the soul and Boethius  means the same  thing when he says that spoken words signify concepts. In general, whenever writers say that all spoken words secondarily signify the thing impression of the soul primarily signify. Nonetheless, it is true that some spoken words primarily designate impressions of the soul as will be shown later.”, An error is present in this description of Ockham because he thought that De interpretatione of Boethius was a independent book of same philosopher, instead it was a translation from Περί έρμηνείας of Aristotle, that Ockham could not read because he didn’t know the ancient Greek; therefore he has took from same author, this is Aristotle, an interpretation, he could not know it, but he has given to us an important datum, what is? Simple that Aristotle is philosophic father of semiotic instead that Charles Sanders Peirce(1839-1914) and Ferdinand de Saussure(1857-1913), they have given more precise indication regard the codes and method, for interpretation and use the semiotic, but they have rightly given the methodologic codes, but the first use, although isn’t official, is from Aristotle from the Analytic and form the Περί έρμηνείας; there is the first conceptual definition and use, although, I repeat, involuntary of semiotic. This hypothesis is confirmed from the steps that Ockham has took and he has almost copied: “Now, there are certain difference among these three kinds of terms. For one thing the concept or impression of the soul signifies naturally; whereas the spoken or written term signifies only conventionally. This difference given rise to a further difference. We can decide to alter the signification of a spoken or written term, but no decision or agreement on the part of anyone can have the effect of altering the signification of a conceptual term.”. The Semiotic studies the significance of words and their use.

Alessandro Lusana     

               

 

Scholastic semiotic: William Ockham

A philosopher of Scholastic is a philosophical address that, during Middle age 13^th and 14^th centuries, was the principal school for philosophers that from convent schools was extended to Universities, as for examples that of Paris, Oxford, Bologna, Napoli and other; a exponent of this address was William from Ochkam(1280-1349), British Franciscan that taught in Oxford, and in a his book he explains the nominalism; but we can think this philosopher as semiotic post Aristotle(384-322), because for me Aristotle is the first semiotic in the philosophy; the semiotics, that has had his independence as single matter alone in 19^th century, but that has its origin in Aristotle, that William from Ockham has read through a translated book that he mentions, as the Analytics, this is the syllogism, may from the De interpretatione of Boethius(480-526 b.Ch), that has descripted the Analytics of Aristotle, anyway William gives some relevant motive for this analysis semiotic alone: “All those who treat of logic try to show that arguments are composed of proposition of terms. Thus a term is simply a component part of a proposition. When he defines the notion of a term in the first book of the Prior Analytics, Aristotle says, “I call that a term into which a proposition is resolved(for example the predicate or that of which it is predicated) when it is asserted or denied that something is or is not the case.” Although every term is(or could be) a part of a proposition, not all terms are the same kind. Thus, to gain a full understanding of a nature of terms one must know some of the divisions that are drawn among them. As Boethius points out in Commentary on the book of De Interpretatione, discourse is of three types, the written, the spoken, and the conceptual(this last existing inly in the mind). In the same way there are three sorts of terms, written, spoken, and conceptual”. It is alone a speculative, hence Aristotelian, description of logic organization of concept that after we organize rationally, or at last we try, but it is alone semiotics, in Medieval time, that took from other authors this is Aristotle and Boethius, that are before of Scholastic but Ockham is in the Scholastic and interesting is the follow that indirectly Aristotle has in the Middle age, that is a datum by now certain, because Aristotle is every present until the philosophy of 19^th century; therefore in Middle age, also in Pagan authors as Saint Thomas from Aquino(1225-1274), in the Summa theological; whereby Aristotle is a presence always present, at last in intellectual traits, but to semiotic level, except Boethius, he is absent; the merit of Ockham is that he took the basilar concepts od Nominalism, but after he developed this concept through the semiotics, that is the first clear example of semiotics, and I say the first because Aristotle has had the sake of explication of logic search, thereby the syllogism is a tool or method alone, that Aristotle has explained, but his principal duty was the explication of search not certainly the semiotics, Ockham instead uses the semiotics, and for him the valor is alone the words, hence the semiotics.

Alessandro Lusana    

            

 

 

 

    

 Platonic essence

The Platonic essence I mean that the real essence of everything, that Plato(427-347) seen in essence; this is in  the nature of everything, I take typical example that Plato used, this is the essence of a horse is “cavallinite”, the nature of the horse, that for Plato is the correspondent ideas in the word of ideas, he thinks that it is the nature of the horse, and Antisthenes(436-366 b.Ch), cynic philosopher, that answered to Plato: “Dear Plato I see the horse but not essence of horse”, because for Antisthenes alone that is visible exists, other is alone the fantasies. It is certain but we can think that Plato with essence of horse or everything meant the essence but both that of word of ideas and that real, because the translation of in the real word become a concept material; hence the essence is real and no certainly abstract or alone ideal, as the real is everything that is in the word of ideas. I want alone add this my opinion to common concept of Plato as an idealist philosopher, this is that thinks the real word as a translation of ideal word, it is the mean that I think for idealist, and no in Hegelian sense; for me Plato think the translation od ideal word in the real word, but this translation, becoming real, must become also concrete; therefore also the cavallinite is real, and it is the real essence, and we can think it so, the concrete essence, this is the together of characteristic of everything, that in human gender are much, for example a stone is different, from other, for his nature although both were stones, for the man is same but our characteristic is in the character, in our wit, in our brain, that is the source of our wit; the difference is in it, this is in our nature, that is formed from the education, from the social context where we are born, and other; it is our essence, and I think that Plato has considered the nature of man and of everything but thinking to real essence, this is the translation in the concrete word, that is the real representation, although imperfect, but speculative of the ideas word; hence also the essence is an translation and also it becomes real; thereupon when Antisthenes critics Plato, saying that he doesn’t see the essence, for Plato the essence is evident; because in a man or horse the essence is evident in the external characteristic, that is the form animal or human, but after the formal shape the essence is internal, and Plato considers it as the nature of word of ideas, this is the true nature of everything, that is hide until it is expressed evidently, that is the nature of something, whereby neither Antisthenes neither other can see it, because Plato has considered alone the interior part of everything.

Alessandro Lusana       

         

 The nascent States

The birth of States in USA is summary descripted from Philip Mazzei (1730-1816) he begun with the Connecticut, he says, but I want also stress that the merchant of colonies was well present, and it is motive of the end of “revolution”, because the England needed alone the harbors: “A colony of Connecticut have to his origin to Massachusetts for the same motives of Rhode Island and his birth is same of epoch . During the year 1636 a great number of persons, disliked above all for religion, they quit, with their ministers Newtown, Dorchester,Watertown and Rocksbury, and they come and stopped on the bank of river Connecticuct, where they founded the cities of Hartford , Watersfîeld, Windfor, Springfield , and Ceux, and they were met out of borderline of Massachussets and they will meet in Hartford, and they agree about the way for the govern, and they will voted the judges. The year after some emigrant from England made the same thing in New Haven, that they founded on the bank opposite of Long Island. The two small colonies of Hartford de New Heaven continued to be governed separately, until they were reunited with the name of colonies of Connecticut, fo0r the document of Charles 2th in 23th April 1662. Around the foundation of New Hampshire. Among the big names of taxes on the merchant of captain Mason had reached among the different times from the assembly of Plymouth, and that are the source of eternal process, he has reached one in year 1629, and that he given to whole state of New Hampshire, and today is valid, and a part of near colonies near. An other name both his and that of Ferdinand Gorges agreed for a part of country given before. The 19^th August 1635 Charles given a paper to mason for gratification for the same country enclosed of 1627, and more to him he given the right of govern and bestow the honors…”. About de foundation of Maryland. The Lord Baltimore Se Guillaume Penn, founders of colony of Maryland and Pennsylvania were the first that reached the papers that the king of England given. Among who is passed from England to colonies for the religion cause, the knight George Calvert and the secretary of State, after Lord Baltimore. During the end of reign of James 1th he come to Virginia with somebody of different sects, that have had the same motive for exile. They being the zealous Catholic, but they were bad received for the adherence to Anglican religion, hence he turned to England, for asked to Charles 1th a paper through he can extent the Virginia state beyond the Potomac river, borderline that the residents haven’t crossed…this paper is dated 1632…The residents of Virginia protested again the dissolution of their territory, but they could not to avoid it. Lord Baltimore called his country Maryland to honor of Mary, marriage of Charles 1th, and he called to govern Léonard Calvert, his brother, Jeremy  Hawley and Thomas Cornwallis…During the civil war in England(1642-1649), Oliver Cromwell(1599-1658) got away to Lord Baltimore of his jurisdiction, and after Charles 2th given back it…”, and after with successor of Charles 2th got away again this power alone for religious motives, this power he took again during the reign of William 3th d’Orange(1650-1702), but a limit there was, this is that he must be the represent of a Protestant govern”. The important question is that the States by now freely nascent, and the real court of England was very tolerant toward the religion, and with William d’Orange it is more evident, because the politic sake overcomes that religious, and the symbolic act is a side of submission to king of England: “The kings wanted set new clauses on the papers that attests to their favor the right of reign and domain. For the example that to de Baltimore confirmed the oblige that every year have to give two arrows of Indian to the castle of Windsor”, it is could seem a cock up because a country that have had the fire weapons why needs of Indian arrows? Simple, absolutely nothing, but the homage was important because it attested the predominance of royal power also in the new word, it was alone a formal gift, that given to d’Orange the possibility of substitute de Baltimore with other if this homage there wasn’t, but evidently the motives for substitution of de Baltimore would have been other if he has been a very bad governor, but he was a very good governor, hence the formal homage was necessary to ascertain his fidelity to laic crow and no to religion. Mazzei as enlightenment took a principle of solidarity between the States, that then aren’t so, but he has stressed this moment: “The people made quick progresses in Maryland for some good motives. The Virgine given the food to emigrants until they took alone the necessary. The borderline toward the Indians were very narrow, and to residents in Maryland it wasn’t difficult kept the peace to them”. The history of States would be long and boring, also because without interest, but I want evidence that the England was interested alone the power of commerce. And after the “revolution” unique interest of England was alone it.

 Alessandro Lusana

 

 The birth of a nation

The title is equivalent of a movie of 1915, but this essay isn’t a parody or an reclaim to the movie, but a historical truth, because the following document is the birth of a nation, of USA nation, because from the last words of: “…our fathers fought, bled and died, and to hand them down entire to future generations.”, these last words, “future generations”, is the more meaningful, because the delegates, this is the names of represents of different states, that we can call provinces because this is the name used, have already decided the revolution, without an official declaration of war, but in the think the revolution and independence was a reality, hence the revolution or independence was present and consolidated, anyway the document says: “The represents were present in session of assembly and their name was Delegates, as says a session of Congress of September 1774, when: “The Delegates from the Province of Massachusetts-Bay, agreeable to a request…WHEREAS the Power but not the justice, the vengeance but not the Wisdom oi. Great- Britain, which of old persecuted, scourged, and exiled our fugitive Parents from their native shores, now pursues us their guiltless children with unrelenting severity: And whereas this, then savage and uncultivated desert, was purchased by the toil and treasure, or acquired by the blood and valor of those our venerable Progenitors ; to us they bequeathed the dear bought Inheritance, to our care and protection they consigned it, and the most sacred Obligations are upon| us to transmit the glorious purchase, unsettered by power, undogged with shackles, to our innocent and beloved of spring. On the Fortitude, on the wisdom and on the Exertions of this important Day, is suspended the Fate of this new world, and of unborn millions. If boundless extent of Continent, swarming with millions, will tamely submit to live, move and have their being at the arbitrary Will of a licentious Minister, they basely yield to voluntary Slavery, and future Generations shall load their .Memories with incessant Execrations.—On the other Hand, if we arrest the Hand which would ransack our Pockets, if we disarm the parricide which points the dagger to our bosoms, if we nobly defeat that fatal Edict which proclaims a power to frame Laws for us in all Cafes whatsoever, thereby entailing the endless and numberless curses of Slavery upon us, our heirs and their heirs so ever ; if we successfully resist that unparalleled usurpation of unconstitutional power whereby our Capital is robbed of the means of life ; whereby the streets of Boston are thronged with military- executioners ; whereby our coasts are lined and harbors crouded with ships of war; whereby the charter of the colony, that sacred Barrier again the encroachments of tyranny, is mutilated and in effect annihilated ; whereby a murderous Law is framed to shelter villains from the hands of justice; whereby the unalienable and inestimable inheritance, which we derived from Nature, the constitution of Britain, and the privileges warranted to us in the Charter of the Province, is totally wrecked, annulled, and vacated, posterity will acknowledge that Virtue which preserved them free and happy ; and while we enjoy the Rewards and blessings of the faithful, the torrent of panegyrists will roll our reputations to that latest Period, when the streams of time shall be absorbed in the abyss of Eternity. Therefore we have resolved, and do resolve, That whereas his majesty George the Third is the rightful successor to the throne of Great-Britain, and justly entitled to the Allegiance of the British realm, and agreeable to compact, of the English colonies in America—therefore, we the Heirs and successors of the first planters of this colony do cheerfully acknowledge the said George the third to be our rightful Sovereign, and that said covenant is the tenure and claim on which are founded our allegiance and submission. That it is an indispensable duty which we owe to God, our country, ourselves and posterity, by all lawful ways and means in our power to maintain, defend and preserve those civil and religious rights and liberties, for which many of our fathers fought, bled and died, and to hand them down entire to future generations.”.

Alessandro Lusana

 

Spelunca: the wickedness of Christianism

A step of Eneides a book of Virgil(70-19 b. Ch.), a national, or better an imperial poem written in the Rome for the August celebration, this the imperator August celebration, through the mythical origin of imperial family, directly from Aeneas to Cesar, Virgil tells of a cavern that Aeneas uses for to arrive to Hade, this is the reign of died, and the katabasis of title is, translated from ancient Greek κατάβασις, as the descent to somewhere, Virgil says: “Spelunca alta fuit”, and these words, that translated are “the profound cavern”, and that a anonymous commentator of Divine comedy of Dante Alighieri(1265-1321) took and he explained: “…and for this cavern says Aeneas and the Sybil they are descended to hell”; the origin of descend of Dante, by now is identified as from this poem, this is the Eneides, in fact was Virgil that in Hell and Purgatory accomplishes Dante, but I want identify the different think that characterized the rapport of the death of Pagan and Christian word, because Dante described the punishments that the damned endure for eternity, and the condition of Hade where that was inaccessible to life, and the souls have to pass beyond the rivers Styx and Acheron, the god that governed the Hade was the homonym god, that wasn’t bad, right and stern but not bad, Hade was also brother of Zeus and Poseidon, and after the victory on the titanic fight to him was destined the Hade, the figure of Charon the ferryman of Hade is same in Comedy, as the grassland of Asphodels where was souls that during their life aren’t neither bad and good, that Dante has used for the place in before Hell where are souls that the souls with same characteristic, and the difference is for the Champs Elise, a land where were the right souls of heroes and right men; this difference evidences more than other the difference, because the Christianism has divided three reigns for the grade of sins, instead in Pagan culture the sin wasn’t, in fact the unique sin was the cowardice, that in Hade was punished in a word obscure and dingy, instead the heroes are in the lighted land and in beatitude, but it is other substantial difference between Pagan and Christian believe, because in the Hade weren’t the punishments, because the concept of sin wasn’t, that after the Christianism has took, and condemned, for example the homosexuality, in fact Dante condemns Brunetto Latini(1220-1294) in hell because he is homosexual; as the condemn of Paul and Francesca, two brothers in law that have felt a sentiment that is beyond the simple affect, hence Dante set them among the luxurious sinner. It is a short portrait of the stiffness of Christianism, that Dante has took and translated in Divine comedy, but it is also a mirror of morality and customs that, during the centuries, have solidified, and these literary document are the major proof of think around the moral daily, and some exception is also in Middle age because the usury wasn’t condemned so sternly, because the morality, for the quantity, didn’t condemned it, and neither Dante, whose the father used this technic.

Alessandro Lusana