Hegelian dialogue

George was in a room and it was dim light but he could see and distinguished objects, a table to center of room and two chairs, very comfort, George sometime raised and walked for room where was a library with also his book, it was a philosophical library, with much books shared for author, therefore Aristotle, Platoon, Epicures and Saint Thomas, Beda the Venerable and much other; George, in conformity with his instinct, took a book and opened it for to read, it was Ethic of Aristotle, which he read in ancient Greek language, and while he was reading a woman back to him set on chair, and: “When you have ended that book we can start our dialogue”, George didn’t turns to woman but answered: “I know you perfectly, and I know whom you are, the philosophy, and you would must know to wait”, and Philosophy: “I can’t wait you or other, because I was present always, everybody cans read me and know me, it is sufficient open a book and to read” and George: “A book of philosophy”, and Philosophy: “Not absolutely! An any book, also of math or poetry, art and other”, and George: “Why?” and Philosophy: “Because to any book is think, and think is knowledge, because by think and imagination births knowledge, because it is motive for to try out, and for this practical movement we can know what is result, and so we can see if this think is right or not, and therefore to have knowledge”, and George: “It is simply evident, but if you have alone this think very deep, I think that I will can’t hair you, because you are very philosophical”, and Philosophy: “Put away your irony, because it is obvious; I know perfectly that this is process of knowledge, but I want say that every men has is think, but any think is personal, and never a think is equal with other, although they are same idea, but nothing is equal with other, never; in fact your think is different by others who are very Hegelian, you are Hegel but your followers are Hegelian but with some small difference, very small difference, but it is present always, and these differences are present also to same philosopher, to same person, who today has one think and tomorrow other, that we call to change idea, it is verification that our think is mistaken, and therefore we change idea, but this verification is from experience, therefore Aristotelian code is right”, and George: “ And you have invited me for this great truth? I have written Science of logic with Syllogism of Aristotle and I have said that he has built the speculative philosophy at same book”, and Philosophy: “Yes, I know it, but I want know better because you have subdivided periods of aesthetic for three moments very precise, and with three concepts: symbolic, classic and romantic”, and George and also venial period, and Philosophy: “Venial? It isn’t!” and George: “In fact it isn’t, in book, but I have find now, because I want be payed”, and Philosophy: Not you want a kick to bottom, now, I permit you to live, do you understand?”, and George: “What? You permit me to live? I am philosopher and I can’t use vulgar expression, but now I make an exception, and therefore, listen me very well: “What do you are saying cook?” and Philosophy: “You are right, you are a philosopher, and therefore you live because I exist, you have your task because I are present, and you live and you are known because I am present; you have used me for to think and to write your think, therefore you live because I exist, and you can teach philosophy because you have think, and the think is philosophy, it is alone search of knowledge and philosophy gives concept, this is synthetizes that is philosophical, therefore all is think, practical action and theoretical think are results of think, which is philosophy and therefore is sub divisible to theoretical, practical, speculative, moral, aesthetical  and other, this is diversity of opinion of men, which we have above all said”, and George: “Men are first factor for think and my aesthetical philosophy is sub devised for three moments because time is different, symbolic art is alone an impression of art, and summary object that hasn’t nothing can’t be appreciated, it is primitive spirit of men, shapeless spirit of men that is correspondent to form shapeless, this is man that is primitive hasn’t spirit, and that he has shapeless, hasn’t definition, hasn’t form, but is present in his primordial form as think which is again shapeless”, and Philosophy: “Yes, I am agree, and it is means that in classical art this concept is ended, and…”, and George was interrupting hers: “Yes, but alone for form, the form of Greek sculptures is perfect, it is admirable, but it is start and end in her form, it is spiritless, emotionless; her task is to be beauty; much women are very beautiful, but they are spiritless, emotionless because are empty in spirit, haven’t emotion and feel, but are very beautiful, but alone beautiful, therefore are classical beauty, empty and beautiful. With romantic art the spirit is protagonist, now is predominant spirit, beauty and emotion that are in synergy, fused one is present because other is present”, and Philosophy: “Some example”, and George: “Look and fell difference between the painting of Friedrich and Discobolus beautiful but spiritless while the lands of Friedrich are all spirit, emotions and style, in Discolobus are alone material and form to Friedrich are alone spirit, this you must consider, material and immaterial, spirit and marble, are two motives for two art worked, one is material and other is spirit; so I have devised my conception of art, and I have though what is art for two motive, synergic but for me ben distinct, I have though this concept during my life this is at 19^th century, but it is a concept always valid, for all time and period; and this is philosophy, therefore art lives for philosophy, because she gives motive for to live, but it is think in material, therefore visible, but is think, therefore philosophy”, then George raised and gone away.

Alessandro Lusana