The philosophical pantheism: Schelling

In the chapter of Philosophy of art, where Schelling(1775-1854) he tells about general part of the philosophy of art, beyond the Platonism that very followed during the 18^th century in Germany, because also Kant(1722-1804) was a follower of Plato, but for Schelling i9n this chapter is also and very important consideration, this is the Luther(1483-1546) influence, above all about the consubstantiation, the pantheism of Luther is a reality, as Schelling followed the same concept but for the art, he says: “To build the art means determine its position in the universe. The determination of this position is the unique explication of art, the text says: “…we can follow everywhere, but alone for these positions that our object has ordered”; it is the other hide influence of Luther; because the prescription that the object has given are the rule of Protestantism ; in fact the following text says: “The absolute , this is God, whose we can say that the being, this is the reality follows immediately, this is for the mere law of identity, of ideas, or as God is immediately affirmation of herself”, and the pantheism ins present in the following lines: “If the being doesn’t  follow from the ideas of God, this is if his ideas not was itself that of absolute, this is the infinity reality, thence he would be determined by something that isn’t this ideas…”; it is Luther in version artistic, because  God is the principal factor of art, as the factor or cause of word is God and the following lines is more explicative: “ About dependent or conditioned something we can say that the being follows from concept;; for example the man has determined from  something that isn’t his ideas…”; it is influence of Luther, because God is universal and he has created the man, inasmuch he is a determination of God, as the art a determination of God that is to everything. The absoluteness of God is in the following lines: “God as infinitive affirmation of herself that includes herself as infinitively  affirmation, as infinitively affirmed, and as indifference for both, but isn’t something of these three”; these lines seem a war declaration to intellect, because seem very difficult, but they are very easy; the explication is the following: God is everything in the reality but nothing that we can call God, whereby the concept of relativism isn’t to God because he is everything but also nothing, because everything is created by God, but isn’t identifiable to something, because everything is relative to other and God is absolute, an example: a computer has determined from the worker that has built it, but the job of worker is determined from the matter the composes the computer, this tis the plastic, that is determined from oil, that is determined from the extraction; hence before that we can use the computer other workers and material are involved; it is because everything is relative; God is cause of everything but he isn’t everything, because the worker that has made the computer isn’t a computer, same for worker of oil, hence they are relative to the computer, because without computers the oil would be useful  fro other, the plastic same; God is beginning and end of everything; it is the strong influence of Protestantism, that Schelling has took from his family, he was son of a Protestant minister.

Alessandro Lusana  

        

 The motive of conquest: Napoleon

The motive of conquest of Napoleon, beyond the mere political lies, that today are truly false, other motive certainly more important then freedom is present  to the Revolution brook out for an economic crisis that has determined the Revolution, it is enough think that the paper money, printed from 1789 in France, already in 1793 it has had lost the valor and the inflation, and the inflation had overcome the valor of good took as guarantee, this is the covered bond; the France State guaranteed the pa%per money trough the ecclesiastical goods called, assigned,, but a growing inflation says that the economy has difficult and the France regard the tax of king Louis 16^th on the middle and popular classes were exorbitant, instead the aristocracy and the clergy were exempt; the principal tax of Louis 16^th  were the taille, a tax on the proprieties and income that have to be paid from member that aren’t aristocratic, the capitation, a tax that everybody have to be paid, often the clergy and the aristocratic class were exempted, the twentieh a tax of 5% on the income and on the real estate and commercial goods,  born as extraordinary tax became  stable, a duty on the sale, whose the price was different among the regions, and duties on the wine and foods, other duties on the goods; hence very much taxes on the producer class in France; in fact  some of principal tax of ancient regime have abolished , as the taille, the tithe and other duties;  but a question is important , why above all the taxes? Simple because  these were the motives of complaint, but in France; when Napoleon conquered the Italy, although the north Italy alone, the taxes grown, and much the taxes on the real estate, tax on the flour,  were grown the tax on the real estate and above all land register fro the proprieties, he has gown these taxes that the Revolution has deleted ; but why this growth of taxes? In opinion of historical men  it was necessary to finances the wars; but it is very incredible, because Napoleon in 1799 was one member  of triumvirate after that he had took Italy, hence he took above all the money of Italy, that he certainly given also the army but above all to France fro this he was the first consul and after the imperator, because the money of the France came and this gain has guaranteed by Napoleon; and this fiscal oppression has determined the break out the revolts, as in 1797 in Verona, in 1799 in Arezzo, in Lugo, small town in north Italy in year 1796, and finally in 1799, a revolt that deleted the Partenopean republic;  we can think that  these revolts have determined from lies regard the civil rights that have been betrayed, but it was absolutely erred, because the principal motive were the taxes that have to finance the France and the future election to imperator of Napoleon. But the richer country than other, this is the England, napoleon didn’t attack , why? Simple because the richness of England and its army were very impressive, hence the England could react very violently  and destroyed the France and Napoleon; it is enough to think that in France and Italy the 60% has employed for the agriculture, hence the poverty was dominant, for this the revolt.

Alessandro Lusana   

 

 For the France and for Napoleon; the battle of Nile

The battle of Nile fought the 1th  and 2th August 1798 near Abukir, Egypt, has determined the reaction of Napoleon(1769-1821) that for avoid the exclusion fro the French policy, he after the defeat after this battle, he gone back to France and he took the absolutely power, but the principal motive for this  radical change, was this battle and defeat. The England fleet was leaded from Oration nelson(1758-1805), that has short experience to naval battles, but he was “a natural born predator”; , in opinion of Lord St. Vincent, chief of the fleet of his majesty; this choose seems also absolutely right, since nelson has won; but this choose was determined  alone from the fair of the mentioned chiefs; because napoleon has won in Italy and he was taking the successes in much battles; hence a battle against Napoleon could determine the exclusion of these chiefs from the England policy, therefore an unknown chief as nelson was perfect, because the other chiefs would keep their positions; and the proof of this  mistrust is for the number of ships given to nelson, that were less than of Napoleon; inasmuch the chiefs previewed  a defeat. After the Napoleon’s defeat, every allies but will or not to be, when the new, this is the defeat of France, they tried other coalition against Napoleon; furthermore in France there were the conspiracy theorist that wanted the exclusion of Napoleon, in fact he embarked  and gone back to France. It is normal because when you have defeated, automatically you are the failed. Bu8t evidently Napoleon has understood that his period has ended; hence he managed a coup d’Etat, that has excluded the Directoire, this is the principal institution for the laws; a first triumvirate  was composed from Napoleon, Pierre Ducos(1747-1816) and Emmanuelle Sieyès(1748-1836), the members were three but the power has had alone Napoleon, and after the same was nominated consul for the life in 1802; the ideas of Sieyès were very determining for the develop of autocracy; because after some year of contrast  in the Directoire, swinging between the return to monarchy and the Jacobin extremism, but also the financial crisis: the paper money by now was very low, and the bankrupt was a reality, the inflation was very high, and the popular and the middle classes have has lost the possibility; the Revolution is going to be end, because the people would make other revolution, but against that of in 1789, fro the return to monarchy; in fact the Directoire has lied more  to the military power, and certainly it was a valid aid to Napoleon, and it explains to use the coup d’Etat, because after the defeat of Nile or Abukir, Napoleon would be excluded from every effective power; whereby the triumvirate was, fro the economic context , the minor harm. The economic and political frame has certainly aided Napoleon, but he has made very much.

Alessandro Lusana    

 

 Human empire

In this essay I want tell episodes of napoleon and his family that shows the human side of napoleon and his brothers an sisters: the first is one of last sister of Napoleon, Mary Paula, called Paolina(1780-1825), that to hers husband Charles Leclerc(1772-1802), she said, when he reproached hers lovers and behaviors very free, she answered: “Satisfy yourself because you have married the sister of Bonaparte”; it is the egocentrism typical of persons that has got up from the lower level, this is an answer of somebody that before was nothing and suddenly is somebody. The attributed lovers of Paolina could be true or not but my interest is one, this is the weakness  of Paolina that was very weak and she wanted the affect of everybody for a compensation of affect. After the defeat of Abukir the 1th  August 1798, the French armies was defeated from Oratio Nelson(1758-1805), Paolina that  then  was in Paris, she evidently previewed the end of hers brother, she bought  a villa in rue de la Ville l’Eveque and other in campaign; it is the evident sign of a weak of woman that wanted remove the evil thinks. Other evident sign is the parties in Paris that she wanted for to equal hers sister in law, Josepha, that was the true protagonist of society Paris life; it is also the clear manifestation of inferiority of Paolina in confront of hers sister law; she in Paris hasn’t been it;  and she tried emulate Josepha, but it is the will of who has  strong complex of inferiority, and the furthermore proof is that she attended a French course of language, evidently she, differently, from hers brother, Napoleon, that attended the military school in Paris, didn’t le French language, and evidently also his husband recognized the limits of Paolina because he advised to her of attend a course of good behavior; if she was sure of hers politeness  she had refused it, instead she accepted, and the words of hers teach , Madam Campan, are explicative, as exaggerated: “Hers progresses  are amazing because she didn’t neither read nor write”, she wanted hint to true lack  of politeness of Paolina. But together to Paolina also hers brother, Napoleon, was very similar, because he asked to Panoria Comnène, this is the lady Permon, of marry but she stressed the different age; Panoria was contemporary of mother of Napoleon, but evidently he wanted get up on the social level. But also other brothers of Napoleon, because they bought in Paris  the palaces: Joseph to Mortefontaine, Lucien  to Plessis-Charmant, then very exclusive areas ; therefore the complex of inferiority was very deep rooted. The reaction of Napoleon toward his brother law, Leclerc, is very disgusting, because he has excluded Leclerc from every benefit  after that napoleon has took the absolutely power; it is the true fear of Napoleon. But the envy is typical  of human gender  and to women it is more than the men; hence during  a party alone a woman, Madame de Contades, was the unique that has noted a physical defect of Paolina, regard hers ears; she has noted this defect because she was suddenly ignored when Paolina entered in the room; it is the revenge of a woman. I wanted show the human defects of napoleon and others, that although got up socially they were always human gender.

Alessandro Lusana

 The scientific travel; Cyrano de Bergerac

Savinien Cyrano de Bergerac(1619-1655), a French author certainly less known that has written also The other wo0rd of States and empire of moon, that is a fantastic romance, or very strange romance this is a history of a travel on the moon the fantasy is very life, because this romance has dated 1657. For to arrive on the moon the protagonist ties around his body the smalls bottle of dew and so he fly on the moon. The sources of this romance are may the book of de la casas, that shown the violence  on the American native, published on 1552; it is possible because  this step seems very near to the experience of the protagonist when he approaches to a hut and: “and I have  arrived very near when I seen surrounded me by group of wild men. Naturally today we know around the moon, more than Cyrano, although we haven’t touched its superficies, but they then known nothing, hence the wild men that disappear in a near forest is a translation of a earth landscape on the moon; but the return to reality of history is very immediate, because the traveler to some soldiers, that he met asked, he asks where is he, and they answered in the New French, this this Canada. The influence of Galileo Galilei(1564-1642) is evident in this step: “And the arguments that you have  for to hold, this is that the sun is immobile, since we see it move?” And the answer if for a scientific treatise: “Lord these are the motives. The first it is the common sense that leads us to believe that the sun is in the center of universe…”and this last noun is important because Galileo has denied that the sun was in center of universe; and Cyrano continues: “I say that earth need of light of sun, of warm it turn around the sun for to have energy necessary…”; it is Galileo, and the travel of Cyrano to high is alone the ironical fantasy for not the Canada, but for everybody that think something instead they haven’t nothing new about the new speculative science, Cyrano not travels in Canada, but, for metaphorical transfer, in an Europe again tied to the old theories, that emerges from this step: “You are constrict to take explication that are some intellige3nce that moves and lead your spheres”; it is Aristotle and his theory of the movement of universe: “ I say that we must find  on the earth the motive of this movement”; the past theories are overcome. The example of Galileo is in this step: “But if I am going to meet you to France, I will observe to you through my spyglass…”; Galileo was the first that  used the tool for to study the science, this is the telescope, that Cyrano calls spyglass, we must consider that the telescope the telescope of Galileo was in 1609, hence very rough , but it was already a reality to 1652. Cyrano must save also the Christian religion therefore he lands on the heaven, after eaten the apple, of Biblical memory; it is necessary he has satisfied both  the scientific side and also the religious side. The cunning of Cyrano is evident the description of heaven that has took from the reality and from the fantasy, because in the Bible isn’t a description of heaven.

Alessandro Lusana   

 Real Shakespeare

I want consider The happy wives of Windsor, a comedy of Shakespeare, between years 1599-1601, I want consider the true side of this comedy and stress that Shakespeare not has been alone tragic or comedy but also truly; and in fact in the first scene the dialogue between two personages shows the reality reaction about a contrary decision: “Not, Ugo, you aren’t going to convince me; bring this question to High court…”, this negation is very frequent and we can ascertain among much episodes.; naturally in the London as in Italy and in Europe the use of Latin language was almost mandatory, also if it was alone the very approximate, therefore: “And “rotolorum”, also the mister priest and gentleman born…”, naturally can’t lack an error of logic error: “Every successors before to him have made it, and his forefather what they can make that are going to come before”; the successor can’t be before to him and the forefather can’t come after to him. From serious questions after occurs some female note: “I thought to Anny Page, the daughter of master George Page a virginity much pleasant”, it is the reality od male sex, that from the serious questions come to light arguments. As otherwise true is the aske of other personage: “Miss Anny Page? Brunette and she has a voice of little woman.”; it is the normal explication that everybody ask when he has difficult to understand the figure odf somebody. But the beauty is important but also the money is grated, inasmuch: “You can’t desire of better on the word, and more 700 sterling of gold and silver, that has left his gran father…”; also the man, after the body, think to money. A personage, Evans says same thing in a alone cue: “I will to you may a lie? I despise the lying, as I despise whom says the false, as I despise who doesn’t say the true”; evidently it is a cue of spirit of Shakespeare, against the German people, because Evans is German. The normal good politeness, that is alone a formal act, here Shakespeare seems plays: “No, I must thank you my lord, and I make it with the my heart, if you believe it or not.”; evidently Shakespeare was got habit to these formal homage, that are usually hypocrites. Other reaction that can consider also today: “Attentive, friend, what you are going to make, and to be to me polite…”; it is the behavior that we use to unknown. The good polite is due, as the hypocrisy: “Lady Ford, the happy meeting, sincerely! Do you enable it?”; the usual interpretation that are necessary for not to seem impolite. A note of custom is important for this exam, because it is very anomalous but normal for those time ea personage want marry a girl, the Anny above mentioned and Evans asks: “Do you are going to love from the girl?”; it is today is a question very strange for us but then it was normal, because the love was after the marry; the sentiments then aren’t absolutely; therefore it is other note od reality of Shakespeare.

Alessandro Lusana

 

 Mediocritas

The first opinion that I have around the mediocre is opinion of Aristotle, that has expressed in the Ethic Nicomacheus , this is the μέσος, this the middle measure this is the balance, interior balance that Aristotle sees as the better wit; in Latin language it is the “mediocritas”, this is something that is in half, for example in a Ode of Horace(b.Ch 65-8), a Latin poet that in a his Ode(10) has he says: “Auream quisquis mediocritatem diligit”, this is: “Everybody loves the mediocrity; it is because  the possibility of solve the problems or other, trough  the right measure; the principal philosophical  note that we must read to understand the concept of mediocritas  in ancient age, is a letter of Seneca(b.Ch 50-40 a.Ch.) to Lucius , his friend, he says: “Who is wise is also moderate; who is moderate is also constant , who is constant is imperturbable ; who is imperturbable  is without sadness ; who is without sadness  is happy; inasmuch the wise is happy”, the last step is an exercise of syllogisms  from Aristotle, mechanical certainly but then enough; in the same letter Seneca, about the peripatetic  school  says: “…they respond in this way, this is of interpreter who is imperturbable, and constant and without sadness so if we call him imperturbable, who is upset rarely and moderately, not isn’t upset ever.” This is the explicit manifest of mediocritas, because Seneca understand that the wit is mobile and hence the man, also wise man has the mobility of wit, whereby the imperturbability is impossible, in fact: “…the human nature denies it, this is that  5the wit of somebody is immune by the sadness; the wise isn’t overcame from the dolor, but he is touched”; it is the directly take again the speculative address of Aristotle but also it anable the identification to the middle; because Seneca sees the speculative description of peripatetic, and describes the moderate reaction of man, that is the medioctitas, in fact in other step: “Trough  we don’t eliminate the passions but we moderate it. During the Middle age the mediocrity has the same meaning; the medieval culture is stemmed directly from the classical culture, in fact Saint Thomas from Aquino(1225-1274), the mediocrity has same valor  of Seneca, the middle way, this the equilibrium that Seneca has expressed because he has took again from peripatetic school; in fact the temperance is the first quality for Saint Thomas. During the Renaissance we can read the Rime of Michelangelo Buonarroti(1475-1564), he used these words for a comparison between the pen and the sculpture: “So as both in pen and ink is the high and the low and the mediocre style, we can think that  during the Renaissance this word has had negative meaning, but it has kept the same valor of ancient meaning, in fact Michelangelo says: “…high and the low and the mediocre” this the third way, neither high nor low, but the middle; hence the same meaning of ancient time.

Alessandro Lusana