Other thinks of law

This essay surely doesn’t and won’t to consider some rule or article of law, but it want consider some step of law with philosophical think; in fact I have took some step of Outlines of philosophy of right, that is one book of Hegel that considers the law, or at last some particular step, with philosophical concept, then the contract is, according to opinion of Hegel, the contract is: “If to them there is need, benevolence and utility, that is hastens them to contract is that they are present, their presence is principal motive, then they must recognize them self on contract. As concept of property, that according opinion of Hegel is a moment when owner is present both human gender and according to opinion of law. These concepts are certainly elementary and obvious but if we consider it philosophical thinks also, these realities of law take other mean”, and around the contract again he says: “I can leave one property as an external thing and I must leave it as a conceptual property…”, and “But at this moment my will is other because it is devoid (of property); then this concept is unity of two will, and twice for the differences must waive of he self; but this identity of twice will is obvious that every will is he self also”, and: “This rapport is mediation of two identical will although different for owner themselves, it means that every one for his will ceases his property, and one become it”. Solution of this concept that is legislative always, certainly, but is also other think for philosophy because: “the mediation of will to cease a property and will to accept it, then of another is final result of two will, because one is present because other is.” I repeat this is obvious but to law is very difficult give this mean to a legislative, this is philosophical mean.

Alessandro Lusana 

  

       

 

 

       

 

Artistic Platonism

The treatise of Federico Zuccari, an Italian painter, that has written the Idea of painters, sculptors and architects and this treatise was edited at 1607, is one example about Catholic Reform but with some think from Platoon; this is evident in some step when author says: “I say that drawing isn’t mater, isn’t substance, but it is form, and idea”, this first step is necessary to understand that Zuccari uses that he has perceived he written about inner driving of angel and he saying about creation of word, he has synthetized steps of Genesis, God has depicted and worked everything, but he has worked other word in head of angel, with everything; this is a typical concept of Platonic philosophy, everything is present in head of human gender, and through time and experience everything resurfaces to head, but just we have in head.  Zuccari said again: “God very accomplished cause so that they were perfect both regard nature and to understand and to work and he worked other word that was thinkable to angels”, this is concept is pure Platonism; in fact in Platonism philosophy this word is material projection from ideas word, but now angels look this word because they can look this word alone. Zuccari is continuing with his Platonism says: “Since we know very much thing although different forms and they are in our head, although if we will know something we must work an image a drawing, necessary for to become it understandable, and we use these drawing”. This concept is philosophical that we can call hyperuranium is told by Platoon in two book, this is Republic and Fedrus; that Zuccari could have known trough nearness to Jesuitical order, then very intellectual men in Catholic order; Zuccari decorated a chapel in the church of Jesuitical order in Rome, and then he could have known Platoon trough some Jesuitical theologian. More he attended also Vatican cathedral for a commission, then he could has been informed regard to Platoon and his philosophical think.

Alessandro Lusana  

                                         

 

Hegel and Heraclitus two absolute spirits

The opposites whose become is explained for their hide harmony; everything changes his nature, therofore: cold becomes hot and hot things become cold; young becomes old, life died; this contrast is also harmony war is peace too. Other fragment of Heraclitus he tells: “Then ignorant don’t know that every different thing agrees with itself, unhalt becomes sweet halt, hunger makes satiety sweet, furthermore same Hegel said: “Every word of Heraclitus I have took for my logic”. This is origin of harmony for opposites in absolute spirit, that in union of this absolute spirit, that is conceptual derivation form Think of think of Aristoteles, that has collected all and contrary of all, therefore Hegel got from Aristoteles and Heraclitus and he makes unity between two philosophical different addresses, this is he makes harmony between contraries, then Hegel becomes absolute spirit that has made harmony between contraries.

Alessandro Lusana    

    

 

 

Heritage of human religion

“The Greek religion is to his characters or peculiarities a natural religion, so long as gods are represented for much gods as natural nature and they have one step more than of human gender; then human gender doesn’t need rise for relate to god, rather he feels joint for his own natural. A god doesn’t asks a change of his nature, he doesn’t asks a change of his think and natural tendencies; rather that is natural to human gender is same to a god as right, so is man must make that is accordant to human nature, this mention (E. Zeller, The philosophy of ancient Greek during his historical development)explains what is nature of human religion, and it anticipates the partial humanization of Cristian God, because also God is seized with anger; then men must make that is right, that is natural nature of men and they adhere to will of gods; on contrary in ancient Egypt that rapport to gods was different, were priests and rapport was by this persons, Until now is evident and very known all, but my reflection goes beyond; because rapport to gods was direct, it was natural and then the gods are determined by human gender, at least in ancient Greek, they are human with divine characters, but they are human, that is confirmation of think of Feurbach, the man has created gods, because it is a translation of human characters to divine; on contrary Christianism has alone humanized God and showed more good and indulgent, but it is Greek heritage, this is to make human God but he keeps always his divine nature and he could be also severe, that is Greek heritage, this is very good or severe; then human gender must changes his nature to conformity of orders od God, but Greek religion gods were human just. The Christianism has took some character of Greek religion, this is human nature, but has kept the divine nature typical of Hebrew religion.

Alessandro Lusana    

              

 

 

An actual political man at first century a.Ch.

I consider in this essay is Plutarch, born in Chaeronea at 46 a. Ch. And he died at 127 a.Ch; he has written Parallel lives, live of Greek and Roman, personages of these two cultures that today are known with qualities certainly no common, for example Caesar and Alexander Magnus, Cicero and Demosthenes and other, among this other is also Πολίτικα παραγγελματα, this is Advises to political men is a book with very much advises to political man, Plutarch tells about strategy of politic man, and he considers what are best strategies, and knowledge political man must have about people and enemies and other; he took from his lives and he tells very much episodes about of lives and he justifies his political strategies for these episodes; he speaks about character of people and he explains: “Who has decided to work about policy  must knows perfectly nature of his people this is fellow-citizens , and particular attention to matter that people considers very important”, and other question that Plutarch has given is: “People isn’t controllable every men…it is a miracle if people accepts a leader without annoyed…”, in fact who is leader must be persuasive, in fact he signs: “…political man an necessary intelligence to lead and a persuasive and dialogic capacity to impose orders”, and about discourses and words Plutarch says: “ His discourses must be strong, blunt and genuine, with feels and true purposes…”, but he adds that also humour is necessary, in fact he says: “I am not saying that sometime some quip must be, but it is necessary to answer to critic or offense”. Other question is boredom for same political men: “People is bored for same political want a new man, as spectators welcome very best a new actor…”. Therefore I think that we must consider these strategies necessary to political men and we can consider behaviour of political men determined for these motives, and we can consider other strategy both actual and past for these advises of Plutarch, and we can to note that certainly are changed time and contests but human gender and political strategies are same always.

Alessandro Lusana    

                                                     

 

           

 

 

Inner balance

John was a sociologist and he has studied men and women in the city, this is great city; after a lesson, because he taught in University, he ended lesson and spoken to girl student that asked some explication; he explained some concept expressed during lesson and he invited this girl to drink a tea in fast food in University. So day ended, and John entered home and red some page of journal he lay down on the sofa, and slept. He dreamed that he was in same city where he lived but in this city everything was different; every people greeted him kindly, and much persons asked about his life and his preference, persons that he didn’t know, but they stopped him on the street and asked, he was very astonish, and he entered to University and nobody seen him, nobody spoken to him, nobody recognized him and nobody asked about lessons and other. He was very worried, and he stopped a student that he known and asked: “George, do you want hear my lesson?”, and George answered: “Your lesson? Why? I think that you confuse me for someone else”, and John asked: “Are you George?” and student answered: “Yes, but I don’t know you, sorry”; John was very worry and he has understood that something was different, he has gone to his classroom and he looked every students that he known, and he asked: “do somebody knows me?”, and a student answered: “Yes, all know you but you don’t us because something is changed; very little thing, but your balance, or better your inner balance is changed; you has not had some moment your inner balance; always you have tell about human gender but you have forgotten that you are a man, and you have your inner balance, very weak, because it’s sufficient something changed and you lost reference, security and your assurance; then your certainty is for external habit, and stop”. John looked student and answered: “This is normal”, and student: “Yes, you have taught this concept but you don’t know it, because you have not felt it; then when you lost references, that are normal and conformistic you lost yourself and other, you lost your balance, then you are afraid, then you need of conformistic reference always, because you are weak”. John asked to student: “Who are you?” and student answered: “Your inner balance that you have to consider perfect balance between a stone and a feather, stone is references and feather is our inner balance, very weak and light”.

Alessandro Lusana

                                   

 

Where is my time?

Charles was a knight at 1260 he was usual to awake early and get his sword and make exercise during all day, he exercise bother on horse and feet, he was very robust and courage and reckless. He got up on horse and begun the ride. After one mile he seen skyscrapers and cars; he was very astonished, and he seen around and he didn’t understand what he was looking, and he was more astonished because people was looking him and he asked because this interest, he got off the horse and asked a man that was looking at it with fear because he thought that he was publicity alone, but Charles spoken strange words, and he asked: “Who is lord of this feud? Answer plebeian”, but poor man was scared, and Charles drew his sword and menaced man, and again asked: “Who is lord of this feud?”, man didn’t answered with wide eyes, and a voice answered: “I am lord that you are searching”, Charles turned immediately and he looked a lord with armature and long sword, and Charles asked: “Who are you?”, and warrior answered: “Who you are searching, but I no want fight I want that you go on that street, because it isn’t your time”. Charles gone to border of city and he turned back on his horse and he saw no one, but and great dazzling light took him and he was in other space and time, he saw warriors with short sword and beards, they were concentrated in front for others soldiers that were very strange for clothing, they were, may, oriental; improvise Charles felt a hand on the shoulder and he turned back and he saw a man with beard and hair very long and he said: “From 13^th century to 384 before Christ you have run very much”, and Charles didn’t know where and whom see. Because he asked immediately: “Where am I?” and his guide answered in Jerusalem at 1099, Christian army has conquered the city and they have took holy sepulcher, then now Jarusalem is Christian”; Charles saw very much warriors and celebrations for this conquest; he turned back and he saw the sea and he wanted take a dip; and he dived and when he resurfaced he saw around and he seen a great square and a man fixed on door of church two posters with written much rules that Charles red and he asked to a monk: “What is it?” and monk answered: “It’s disaster but God want it I have written it”, and Charles asked: “What time is it?” and other man next him answered: “We are at 1517, and you are out your time, it is better if you look back”, and Charles made it and he saw again his castle and he ridden on the horse and entered to his castle and he got off the horse and entered to lunchroom, where were very much knocking and they were seated around table, one of them asked: “Charles we are waiting young from very much time, where was you?”, and Charles answered: “Around time”. and he looked faces of  his guests, and he recognized the monk, the guide and everybody worriers and he asked: “Are we met?”, and guide answered: “May, but at other time”, and Charles asked to everybody, while he looking them: “Where is my time?” and citizen that he met during his swim in Jerusalem answered: “same our ask”, and he continued: “don’t worry somebody is going to write this history, and somebody, may, is going read it, but these are problems that don’t concern us” and he by contacting the author: “You write and don’t disturb!”

Alessandro Lusana