One noticeable characteristics of various kinds of "new normal" measures implemented in developed Western democracies in response to COVID19 is that they seem to be the more harsher and radical the more the country in question is developed. One could say that, in contrast to more autocratic polities, Western democracies begin to display an eerie signs of openly totalitarian policing of their citizenry. In this podcast we'll try to analyze how underlying metaphysics of individualistic freedom could just be the cause of that and how we could end up with the seeming paradox: totally collectivized politics based on totally individualized principles.
"Prevalently destructive with periods of tedium". That's the the standard forecast of Kali Tribune's Nihilism, Genocide and Bad Language Forecast Authority. Yet, if we observe the mania of erasing the past by means of sledge hammer in USA and UK, that is: of erasing every possible moral wart from the face of the past, we have to speculate on possibility of radical nihilism change in future; the one nominally coming from the political right. To this effect we employ the most radical modern idea of affirming the past to an extent that absolutely no conceivable cruelty is to be rejected but embraced as one's own most intimate possession. To this effect we employ the most radical modern idea of affirming the past to an extent that absolutely no conceivable cruelty is to be rejected but embraced as one's own most intimate possession. We are talking about the idea of the eternal recurrence of the same as envisioned by Friedrich Nietzsche; in some sense the polar, yet strangely congenial, opposite of the principle that's driving the destructive movements from the radical left. If anyone is posing a question how radical could be reaction from the Right to the amok of the Left in the USA and Western Europe, in this podcast we provide you, via Nietzsche, with an image of The Radical.
In the first part of the series of essays Mihai provides us with a unique approach to a unique pathway to knowledge - symbolism. While the use of symbol as such is not unknown to our day and age, Kali Tribune's Ministry of Metaphysical Discernment, Semiology and Apophatic Affairs will aptly demonstrate just what level of difference there is between what modernity and Tradition understand as symbol.
In this episode of our going series "Basic Notions of Metaphysics" we inspect the classical definition of truth and its implications which reveal, as usual, the proverbial "more than meets the eye" dimension of something seemingly quite pedestrian.
So let us take a look back into our Medieval and classical past and explicate what is implicit in the notion of the truth as transcendental.
We start our Back Roads to Philosophy series with the first episode on Kant's Kritik der Reinen Vernunft. At this point we provide general introduction to the intention around which this exemplar of modern metaphysics has been formed. We stick to selected passages from the "Preface" and "Preface to Second Edition" as well as the "Introduction to First Edition", and we lay out why Kant's motivation is fundamentally to make an attempt at the new beginning in metaphysics; we explain the significance of some of the metaphors he is prone to use and give definitions of some of the basic terms. Finally, we talk about the structure of the Kritik and why and how, for Kant, it reflects the intrinsic structure of the very human faculty it is intended to analyze - pure mind itself.
Hereby we present new series of videos/webinars in history of philosophy. As we explain at length in introductory video, this will be as much as possible impartial exposition of passages from important philosophers, with minimum criticism, starting from modern age and then moving towards the past - hence "back road"; in the upcoming episodes we'll deal with Immanuel Kant's Kritik der Reinen Vernunft, a premier work of modern metaphysics. In introduction we give preliminary explanation why our way backwards in philosophy starts with him.
It is often said that dignity of person is in itself the greatest moral "given"; that person is "a purpose unto itself" (Kant); that it is inviolable "given" of humanity. And so on and so forth, from the popular moralizing to the real basis of legislature, this perpetually used, yet rarely pondered upon notion strikes us as something that should be the most comprehensible and closest thing to our minds, but, on closer inspection, it is hard to be sure where it really stems from and how we came to understand it as a self evident "given". In this two parts essay we'll inquire about the origin of this "given" in the singular event in history when, quite literary, the "given" was handed to us, while employing help of our regular assortment of traditional authorities. In the first part we treat metaphysics that can prepare the mind for the approach to the heart of the matter, beyond the subject/object split, but that can nevertheless take us only one part of the way. Also we juxtapose the traditional understanding of the relationship of intellect and being against Immanuel Kant's idea of "transcendental philosophy", which could be understood as an epitome of all attacks on metaphysics, by metaphysics, in modernity.
More or less every thinking man has at one point in his life uttered or at least heard the phrase "X is a-historical" or "Y is not in continuity with history". Admittedly, this doesn't apply to thinking middle aged children one must often deal with in the public sphere of our day, but the question still stands: what exactly do we mean when we claim that something is historically shallow?